Leaderboard

Or it could be a non-violent way of expressing great frustration.

I draw the line where someone feels threatened or where physical assault occurs. If someone rips apart a Quran at a meeting, that is violent but not threatening. Ripping up a Quran on a Muslim family's front walk would be violent and harassing, and possibly threatening. I don't agree with Altai that the act of ripping up a Quran should result in jail. I believe I understand what H.E. is trying to say: Altai's cultural norms are different than ours and we are only too happy to criticize and condemn her just as we (or some of us, anyway) do Muslims generally. At the same time, we ignore our own culture's acts of violence and inhumanity because we so firmly believe we are in the right. The innocent victims of our violence are not comforted because we aren't Daesh; they are just as injured or dead as they would be if Daesh were their attacker. But most people in the West ignore or are unaware of the actual extent of our collateral damage, partly because our kills don"t get the exposure Daesh kills get; our governments certainly aren't forthcoming about this issue and the media reports on it are often ignored, downplayed or disputed. It helps that we are so certain of our moral high ground that we simply discount the reality of the horror our military interventions impose on the people in the countries we are "helping". And I'm not pointing fingers either; I do exactly the same thing. In my heart I know Daesh is evil but its only in my head that I understand that the States and Canada and all our allies together have killed as many or perhaps more innocent people than has Daesh. I don't believe that either Altai or H.E. think tearing up a Quran is as bad as killing 100 people. But I haven't read every post on this thread so if they said that somewhere please do quote it for me, if you want.

If Stephen Harper ever tried this, the Nazi references would be loud and plentiful. JT is the worst.

Keep in mind that Chong's policies involve more than just carbon taxes. He wants to offset it by (for example) reductions in income taxes. The end result is that the average Canadian will end up with about the same level of taxation. However, those who choose to use more fossil fuels (e.g. by driving a hummer to work every day) will end up paying more, and those that use less fossil fuels (e.g. by driving a civic) will pay less. From a purely libertarian/economic point of view, that's actually the fairest thing to do. If you accept the science (which is neither conservative nor liberal, but, well, science), global warming will have an effect that will impact people in different ways. Either way, the government (and ultimately the taxpayer) will end up paying for it somehow, whether its immediately (carbon taxes, cap and trade, subsidized green energy) or in the future (higher food prices, loss of property in coastal areas through rising sea levels). The idea that people's contribution to the solution to the problem should be proportional to how much they caused the problem in the first place actually seems like a pretty good idea to me. Leitch is too close to being a Donald Trump-lite for my liking.

I don't cheer on and support my country or any other country that tramples on other people's human rights for the sake of "economic and political interest".

ISIS came to be only after U.S.' decision to go into Iraq. When you bully, attack, kill and shit on people, you will receive resistance and a feeling of vengeance. Sometimes these feelings can turn into an ugly response, like the crazy man who drove his car into the people in London. People like yourself, who support these American adventures around the world, should accept these attacks and should take responsibility for them. Why? Because you support fueling the animosity.

Yes. Agreed. Others have rewritten or reinterpreted their books to align with the new world. Muslims haven't yet.

The Liberals are proposing, once again, through unilateral changes to the rules of parliament, to give the government new and draconion power to limit debate and push through legislation. It would let liberal ministers adjourn the house for any reason, and let the government prorogue parliament for any reason. I guess this is by way of illustrating that wonderful respect for parliament Trudeau talked so eloquently about prior to the election. I don't believe I've seen Coyne quite so sarcastic in quite some time. The latest chance to refresh our acquaintance with how deeply cynical the Trudeau people are — not have become: are — is the clutch of grubby expedients the government is now trying to stuff down the opposition’s throats, in the name, prettily, of “parliamentary reform.” Scholars of the Trudeau style will recognize the expression “reform,” like “merit-based appointments” and “evidence-based policy,” as a tell that some kind of humbug is afoot, and this is no exception: this is no more aimed at genuine reform of parliament than the Harper government’s Fair Elections Act was aimed at making elections fair. http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/andrew-coyne-renewed-attempt-to-rewrite-house-rules-shows-liberals-are-not-to-be-trusted

Such a scurrilous attack on a young person who shows way more common sense than the lot of you combined. All the western folk, the land of the great debaters, the grand philosophers, who are too petrified to address anything that doesn't fit their narrow minded conservative, Islamaphobic mindset.

Such objects become the focus of partisan rage in place of the human beings that hold them dear. Burning humans in effigy is a popular demonstration activity around the world. Banning such actions is not compatible with liberal (small L) concepts such as freedom of speech/expression. I do not rip or burn Qu'rans...I recycle them as they are only books.

I understand your point. I've just been wondering how wanting book-ripper-uppers jailed and kept under surveilance and giving books the same rights as human beings would impact other things. For instance, the Hebdo cartoon was viewed as an act of violence towards Muslims and so the killings for drawing it have been justified. Where do you draw the line? Or are you agreeing with Altai and Hot Enough that ripping up a Quran is the same as murdering?

This expands on that idea. Trudeau - and I said this before he got elected - showed all the signs of a man who was uninterested in other people's opinions if they disagreed with his. He does not like disagreement or dissent. Not on any issue he considers to be important, anyway.

It's still a violent action. A non-violent way of expressing great frustration would be to say "I'm very frustrated". Breaking things, wrecking things and throwing things are still violent, even if they aren't directed at a person. Just ask anyone who lives with a person who uses those tactics during an argument.

Yes its on topic, we are relating the 9/11 event and God's existence with this topic. All the subjects has ties with Islam. All of them are covering the same territory. This is what you told me in another topic of me, which was savagely derailed under your supervision.

Or more likely great contempt.

Why do you keep asking people questions about something specific, then when they answer your specific question, you name-call and accuse them of ignoring some other issue that was not even being talked about? You are making no sense, and are completely all over the map. I'll ask the same as Betsy asked you, Are you okay? Because you don't seem to be okay.....

Hi granpa, its on topic, so I was talking about what "hot enough" says. Ripping a book is just a repressed state of an urge for violence. Do you remember the soldiers making "infidel" tattoos on their bodies before they are being a part of the crime their govt commits ?

Wonderful! Start your thread! No, I believe it was YOU who wanted to discuss syntax issues. Again, are you on crack? Or just so blindly in love with Islam and so filled with hatred for the West that you can't discuss anything properly?

Yes, this is what I am trying to tell. These people ripping a book as a first step and then they are bombing schools full of civilians and kids as second step or they are simply applauding crimes committed by their govt.

They can't help it....Donald Trump is just the latest American bogeyman to help define such political things in Canada. Democracy is only working when the outcome favours the alt-left in Canada.

A certain members status update made me think of this song.

Jihad in an Arabic word. Obviously you won't find it in books written in Hebrew and translated in English. But the essence of "fighting in the name of God" is the same. What reason has God to kill every living being in a certain city or tribe? When barbarians from Mongolia used to conquer their enemy cities, they would create mountain of human skulls and enslave the women for trade, in the name of blue skies and unseen Gods. Muhammad killed a whole Jewish tribe in the name of God's word when the tribe violated a peace treaty. Crusaders claimed their wars were inspired by the word of God. It seems like rulers have been using God's name to empower themselves for centuries now.

Of course, how could he give the country away now? He's already given it to Putin. Can't give it away twice now, can he. It will suck billions of dollars out of the US economy... money that could be spent on (for example) high-tech research and development, or schools, or roads and similar infrastructure; all things which will actually benefit Americans.Or he could give everyone tax rebates, and have people spend the money that way. And then there are the other issues: - The wall will cause environmental problems, as a wall will sub-divide many animal species and possibly leading to extinction. Do you think baby Jebus likes it when animals go extinct? - In order to build his wall, Trump will likely need to expropriate (i.e. take away from people involuntarily) people's property. Do you think Baby Jebus likes it when people's stuff is taken away from them? No, it won't. As has been pointed out before... Proportionally, illegal immigrants are involved in fewer crimes (theft, murder, etc.) than natural born Americans. And even then, most illegal immigrants do not cross the US/Mexico boarder by land anyways. You know, I noticed a pattern here: I have pointed out many serious moral failings with Trump. Yet time and time again you seem to ignore those failings. just so you can go back and repeat stuff that's already been debunked. These moral failings are why many people look down with revulsion at Christians. Supposedly, Baby Jebus preached messages of tolerance, of helping your fellow man. The bible has messages about not lying. You have this large group of evangelical Christians, who claim to believe in Jebus. Yet those same people who claimed to believe in Jebus: - Voted for a man who, prior to the election exhibited some very non-Christian behavior (racism, adultery) - During the election, made statements and made promises that were very non-Christian (racist, such as bringing back "stop and frisk") and lied on a regular basis (i.e. "I will bring back manufacturing jobs"), far in excess of his political opponents - Following the election, continued to lie (e.g. Obama's wiretapping). So much for the commandment about "bearing false witness" - Has tried to enact policies that are very non-christian (such as cutting foreign aid, and trying to stop refugees. So much for helping your fellow man.) All so that he could supposedly appoint a Supreme court judge who would curtail abortion, although as I pointed out, overall Trump's policies may actually cause more abortions in the long term. I think its pretty fair to say, christian=raging hypocrite, is it not?

How is it going to be more expensive to operate a business under Chong's proposal? He will not tax trade-dependent industries or the oil and gas industry. He plans to cut taxes by $18 billion while phasing in the carbon tax over a decade. Nobody else is proposing to cut taxes that fast. Currently, we have a hidden carbon tax; they're called green subsidies and regulations and for some reason the Conservative Party has supported them and increased them. Let's gut all these regulations/subsidies and shrink the size of government.

Why shouldn't Conservatives support Chong's version of a carbon tax? Just because some people feel climate change is a hoax? Chong also has support from undecided voters, the people who actually decide the elections.

Trudeau had the same position as Chong and he won 40 seats in Quebec.

Logic based on the same information will never change, it was the same in the past and it will be the same in the future.

EH? Who's denying you to speak your mind? To give an opinion? Actually, you're the one who seems to want to deny me to give my opinion about your stupid opinion! You've made more than just an opinion when you stated that a Christian can wear anything provided it isn't "faulty propaganda." Heck, when it comes to spirituality or belief in God......how can you even judge what's faulty or not? That's simple logic, no? Lack of logic? Uhhhh.......that's funny. Here's ANOTHER logic for you: Once you say something in a forum - it can be responded to. Once challenged, you'll end up owning it! Your lesson in forum discussion: Don't say anything stupid in a forum if you don't want to wear it around your neck!

Who said I support ISIS? I said you are as bad as an ISIS supporter. Because both you and the ISIS supporter are okay with death and destruction. Just because I disagree with many of U.S. and friends' foreign policies, it doesn't mean that I support the latest bogeyman, ISIS. That's an extremely shallow way to think.

Wrong. I don't have to leave my country in order to speak against some of its policies. If I don't agree with some of the policies, I speak out against it, I vote against it and I put my money against it. You are complicit for the millions of deaths in the Middle East and the blowback for U.S. and the West's foreign policies because you happily support these policies.

"DNA Links Prove Jews Are a 'Race,' Says Genetics Expert" " Ostrer, who is also director of genetic and genomic testing at Montefiore Medical Center, goes further, maintaining that Jews are a homogeneous group with all the scientific trappings of what we used to call a “race.” "Jews were considered by gentiles (and usually referred to themselves) as a “race.” read more: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/news/dna-links-prove-jews-are-a-race-says-genetics-expert-1.428664 You are ignorant on how jews define themselves. Race is a concept, jews are a race of people according to the experts and common usage. If race don't exist, good luck convincing people Hitler is racist, if race doesn't exist how can you be racist? And if Jews are not a race, how can Hitler be racist to a group who isn't even a race? None of those groups are considered as Africans. And if your entire claim is that Jews deserve a homeland for being discriminated in Europe, and they should have their own schools, it is silly to deny that to every other aggrieved minority group from race or religious reasons. Heck the mormons made their own state for discriminatory avoidance reasons and have their own schools. And THEY ARE WHITES! The term black is hostile, its like calling a jew a vermin or untermenschen. Most jews think of themselves as a race, most whites did too, and the research from the jew newspaper proved it above. This is not true, because no one ever describes Hebrews as a race but describes jews as a race. Arabic is sometimes counted as a broadly speaking racial group. Not according to the information I've seen it said arabs are taught in arabic, jews in hebrew. I highly doubt in the segregated settlements, kids are learning Hebrew in the west bank where there is israeli occupation. Most Israelis do not speak Arabic, what a croc, knowing 5 words doesn't mean you speak arabic. What about the elementary and highschool in israel with rigid segregationa nd apartheid. I did not invent the term Israeli apaartheid. I don't think jews define themselves as a race, jewish experts say so, your beef is with jews, I am only repeating what the jewish media is reporting. No, Arabs do not go to the same school as israelis. " In October 2010 Richard A. Falk reported to the General Assembly Third Committee "It is the opinion of the current Special Rapporteur that the nature of the occupation as of 2010 substantiates earlier allegations of colonialism and apartheid in evidence and law to a greater extent than was the case even three years ago. The entrenching of colonialist and apartheid features of the Israeli occupation has been a cumulative process. The longer it continues, the more difficult it is to overcome and the more serious is the abridgement of fundamental Palestinian rights." The double standard is all yours because you enjoy liberation while constructing apartheid against palestinians and attacking african canadians. On what logic does it make sense to force students into conflict, and if it is beneficially to force children into conflict, why not remove the state of israel and make the jews live under muslims sharia law and european government again, since if there is conflict it is good for them? You see this is the real double standard, you want gays, aboriginals, african canadians, and other ethnic and religious minorities (including catholics and other white groups) to be forced into conflict while shelter jews in Israel from conflict. If that ain't a double standard... That certainly seems highly beneficial for jews I suppose so I can see why you support. You'd have all the races and religions but jews in conflicting killing and beating each other to death while jews are nicely separated with their own things. Except of course if you are a jew, then you shouldn't fight intolerance in an Islamic or European state, you should just run away and set up your own country and invade palestine, syria, egypt, iraq, and jordan. So if running from conflict isn't the answer, you agree with muslims that the state of israel should be removed and the jews can return to their respective european, latin, muslim and african and asian homelands? After all, those israeli jews, should return to russia, germany, france, afghanistan, argentina and fight discrimination, you can't deal with your problems by running. Hey, everyone is paying for bigotry, this is Canada, we pay for the sharia schools, the racist harper government, the racist on welfare, why should racist get more schools, the Italian nazi immigrants got catholic schools. The german nazi immigrants got the publicly funded german school board, why should any other person be locked out on the grounds of alleged racism? I did, I provided you peer reviewed research from a jew researcher. So then African Canadians should have their own separate country by your logic. Except most jews in israel practice no religion at all, and perceive themself a s a race. When they say the state of israel is a jewish state, they aren't talking about the jew religion but the jewish race! If jews have the right to a state, so do original canadians, and at the very least a right to schools and self determination. O and jewish heritage of what? But canadaian tax payer dollars go to israel. we had bigotry and intolerance before we even had schools. Africans are the real jews.

If you mean living in a "Western" nation that pursues economic and political interests around the world just as many critics like you do, then I most certainly "support" past, present, and future policies. The difference is that I will not pretend to be sanctimonious while doing so.

Not sure where you're getting your quote from, but I can't find it anywhere. The Defense Minister is already on record saying that this was not about regime change. Also, Secretary of State, Albright said this: Clinton administration officials said the aim of the mission was to "degrade" Iraq's ability to manufacture and use weapons of mass destruction, not to eliminate it. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was asked about the distinction while the operation was going on: "I don't think we're pretending that we can get everything, so this is – I think – we are being very honest about what our ability is. We are lessening, degrading his ability to use this. The weapons of mass destruction are the threat of the future. I think the president explained very clearly to the American people that this is the threat of the 21st century. […] [W]hat it means is that we know we can't get everything, but degrading is the right word." What U.S. did in Iraq gave no indication that they wanted 'regime change' or to remove Saddam. They just wanted to weaken Saddam and his military. This is exactly what their actions showed.

With respect to the topic of why Michael Chong sucks, here are some reasons: 1. He has said that the Charter enshrines Canadian values. Given the preamble of the charter, the implication of this is that 'recognition of the supremacy of god' is a Canadian value thus atheists are unCanadian. 2. He is completely against any reform to our health care system and has gone as far as to say that support of our health care system is a Canadian value. Newsflash: According to the World Health Organization Healthcare rankings, Canada is ranked 30th, the USA is ranked 39th, and France is ranked 1st. Moving from our entirely public system (well technically we have 13 systems) to a mixed system like France, Australia, Japan, Germany and all the other countries that exceed us in the rankings makes a lot of sense. 3. He is against the abolition of supply management. Yes he supports the completely immoral cartel on eggs/milk/poultry that harms the poorest in society by doubling the price of these goods, and has zero economic justification. You might think that this is a small issue, but I think it is a strong indicator of how an individual will approach problems. Is Michael Chong willing to stand against the status quo and powerful lobby groups to stand up for the wellbeing of society as a whole? The answer is clearly no. Australia got rid of their supply management, and they are better off as a result. Why can't we do the same?

Haha... Btw, the website that you quoted from belongs to Ahmeddiya community. In most of the Muslim world, they are considered infidels. They are thrown in jails for blasphemy, they aren't allowed to read Quran or greet using Islamic words. A lot of them ran away from their countries to take refuge in the West. Canada has a healthy population of these people.

Betsy, a quiz: which holy book do these quotes come from? The military conquest of the land of Canaan by the Hebrews in about 1200 B.C.E. is often characterized as "genocide" and has all but become emblematic of biblical violence and intolerance. God told Moses: I don't want to score any cheap points against a religion or book here. But being students of history, we should be honest with ourselves. And the truth is all Abrahamic faiths were quite violent.

Yours is even stranger. It illustrates your deep desire to avoid addressing such complex issues. In our grand system of justice, a person is considered not guilty until such time as it is determined beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed said crime. What does our great news media call the suspect? Could you put your name on the list of never to be called for jury duty people?

I spoke my opinion, which I'm sure you would not seek to deny me or anyone. I'm not at all sure what would lead you to think that my opinion has any effect on the school officials who made that decision. Your lack of logic astounds, Betsy.

If the survey taken that says Chong and O'Leary are 1 & 2 among all Canadians, that suggests to me that any other candidate would be the loser in 2019. If the survey I linked is accurate, it shows that more than half of Canadians think climate change is important and Chong does address that - does any other Candidate? If not, then right there you've lost a significant portion of the voting public.

Don't get the whole "Well, if we can't fix it right now let's not do anything at all". And at least he's addressing the issue, rather than ignoring it. Not sure what 'boring speaker' has to do with it, or being 'bland' for that matter. Lots of criticism directed toward JT because he's neither boring nor bland. I think nonentity is a bit inaccurate for someone who's managed to be reelected five times. Although possibly no-one has ever run against him in his riding; is that the case?

You are not being truthful when you advance your frequent misunderstandings of the written word. That was illustrated in spades in the 911 thread.

No one appointed me. I wish you had the ability to actually discern what a person writes. You and Rue sure do love to read things into writing that is not there.

Here we go again. Read what I wrote, Betsy, not what you want to see.

Telling the truth about the war crimes and terrorism of the US in many places would see a body right dead right fast. Some folks just hold on to their "religion" harder than others. Are you not aware of the tens of millions who were slaughtered just because they held a belief that the citizens of a country should rule their country, not the USA?

You say it's not canned then you can it once more. As has been pointed out, terrorist responses are responses to terrorism/war crimes/crimes against humanity/the theft of trillions in wealth/the rapes/the torture chambers, all of which has been going on for a good long time, long before the people of the Middle East ever thought of retaliating. And again, the retaliation for these century plus long evils has been so scattered, so infrequent considering the potential that it could very likely be another Operation Gladio. Remember, science says, clearly, that the seminal event for all this is a fraud.

What copy of the bible did you copy and paste?

We pretend we care more about genocides except out own.

Sane people do.

Ahaha, interesting to see you call someone else on it, but when I call you out on it, all I get is more of the same. Well you get what you give.