Leaderboard

Known as 'Weasel Words'...take a peek. https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-kit-carl-sagan/ From Carl's "Demon Haunted World"...great book.

You have an interesting view of Canada, one that I personally do not share. I would be interested to hear what you consider to be Canada's active genocide. Who is the target of this genocide and where is it happening? As for the illegal invasions you mentioned, what exactly are they and can you provide judgements, international condemnations clarifying the illegality of Canada's actions?

You know absolutely nothing about the man, his profession, his study, his religion, his anything. Talk about jumping to crazy conclusions. Who is the loony?

Hitler was a conservative too. Very very conservative, like Paul Ryan, Jesse Helms, Billy Graham the war criminal, Nixon and Kissinger, Reagan the butcher of Nicaragua. Nice company. A typical cowardly conservative meme. Professor Leroy Hulsey isn't on the fringes; he says, categorically, that there is zero chance that the NIST report on WTC7 is true. As a discerning conservative, you would have to understand the implications of that. Is the cognitive dissonance once again roiling your brain?

Of course Jews are not a race. Many Jews are not even semites. Many Jews are descendants of Khazars who converted to Judaism in the 8th century. They have no connection to Palestine. I wonder if the Jewish boy who sent in the bomb threats is actually mentally ill? Or was he doing this to create sympathy for Jews? We will see how this will unfold.

2. Bombing Cambodia: “[Nixon] wants a massive bombing campaign in Cambodia. He doesn't want to hear anything about it. It's an order, to be done. Anything that flies or anything that moves.” (link) ========================= This has a typo in it. Nixon actually said, Anything that flies ON anything that moves. meaning, Anything we, the USA has that flies [and can bomb] on anything on the ground in Cambodia that moves. And here we have Kissinger describing a war crime, targeting civilians, directed to do so by the prez of the USA.

Oh ffs...here we go again. Go away why don't you?

I am not being mislead ....are you saying Turkish military have not engaged ISIS or other muslim in this conflict, I have video of turkish tanks being blown up by isis fighters....Ohh i get it ISIS is not muslim according to you.....well they say they are.... right now there is 136 conflicts around the world right now, the US is involved in some of them.....not just in the middle east....last time i checked your country has suffered from a coup, plus their has been terrorist attacks by the kurds.....or is this all false news as well..... A muslim union will not happen, to much in fighting among'st themselves......Turkey is better off with NATO....you guys can not help your own countries let alone band together and help each other......that being said i wish you would band together and start to control the fringe or extremist muslims.

Complete nonsense of course.... al-Qaeda attacks were very much heard of prior to 9/11/2001: 1992 - Yemen Hotel bombings 1993 - WTC truck bomb (New York) 1998 - U.S. embassy bombings (Kenya, Tanzania) 2000 - U.S. warship bombing(s)

Lucky for those women in Norway that they are not living in some muslim sharia law country or they would probably be beheaded or stoned to death for doing such a thing. Islam must make sure that women are taught to know their place in life. What a backwards archaic 10th century religion.

Yes you did....it links to a huge web site with hundreds of topics none of which are related to the topic at a hand.....thanks though....

This is one of the sickest & most twisted threads I've ever seen on MLW. Betsy, you're trying to cherrypick and interpret Bible quotes to reaffirm your fear and distrust of Muslims and to give religious self-affirmation of your political stance of not wanting to bring Muslims refugees into Canada. Not only that, you're labeling your interpretations as "the truth". Do you really think Jesus, if he were alive today, would support turning away other humans fleeing war and death just because they don't believe he's the son of god? Jesus hung out with the biggest outcasts of his era: prostitutes (eww sinners!), lepers, and other sick & disfigured people. You really think his reaction to innocent people being slaughtered by war would be to turn them away? Given the story of the Bible, do you really think Jesus would have cared even if these people wanted to murder him? From Matthew 5: "And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?" Betsy you're just creating more lines in the sand. The same things that divided Catholics and Protestants, Shia and Sunni...you want to divide Christians and everyone else. Well if your interpretation of 2 John is right we must ban atheists and Jews and Hindus from Canada because they also don't believe Jesus is the son of God. Muslims believe in the same god you do, but only follow a different prophet. Funny thing is you don't distrust Muslims, only the caricature of Muslims that's been drawn for you in the media, because you only hear news stories of the thousands that are trying to kill us. How many of the 1.6 billion other Muslims that aren't trying to kill us have you actually had a conversation with? You hardly know ANYTHING about Muslims or Islam. Your entire attitude about this tells me you read the Bible but somehow you don't even understand (or choose to ignore) what Jesus was all about. READ BETWEEN THE LINES! I was raised Christian, in a Christian church, in Christian schools....this nonsense isn't what I was taught.

Canada doesn't have freedom of expression. See section 1 of the charter and all of our 'hate speech' laws.

My courses in Human Resources did not cover anything 9/11 that I recall......I don't think it was done out of "fear" though..... I wanted to pass the courses, and using Wiki was an automatic fail, so yes, I didn't use Wiki. No one did. I know it may be a stretch for you, but not everything in the world is tied to 9/11.

Actually, I don't "clearly know what you do" about your cause. Does it involve more than just Internet arguments with random strangers that mostly involve name-calling and insults?

My causes are mainly women's issues. I have volunteered, fund-raised and donated clothing, housewares and money to shelters in whichever city I'm living in. I also am into animal rescues. I've had 3 rescue dogs, my kids rescue animals and I volunteer to work with various animal rescue societies. I have attended marches for various other causes and signed petitions and informed myself of many issues. I also consider myself an Ambassador for flamenco. We each do what we can to make the world a better place. What do you do for your 9/11 cause?

You mean, kind of like troothers, who continually harp on 9/11 being an inside job?

I wasn't telling you that you HAVE TO read it. It's just difficult to discuss a book's points (not all of which I agreed with) with someone who hasn't read it and would refuse to read anything critical of Islam. You never heard of Bruce Bawer and have never read anything of his, but you're already highly critical of him and have already branded him a racist Islamophobe. I'm always surprised when people use Wiki as a source here. When I was in college we were not allowed to use Wiki as a source on anything. Edit: Since you haven't read the book, it's mainly about which immigration policies have worked and which ones haven't and the why's and why not's of policies in many countries of Europe and in the US. How countries need to be aware of traditions and cultural ideas that would be in direct conflict with laws and regulations already in place. How these need to be changed to both accommodate acceptable traditions and yet not place it's own citizens or the immigrants themselves in danger or having 2 sets of laws - one for native born Europeans and another for immigrants. That was why I read the book. Not because it is critical of Islam.

My apologies. Let's just chalk it up to my poor grasp of the English language.

I don't know....maybe read it and see what you think?

Can Arabs invade Israeli land and set up Arabic colonies in Israel under Israeli law? If no, then there is a double standard. You just keep burying yourself deeper and deeper. The facts jews get to fast track return to Israel over non--ews is by definition race based discrimination. Because "athiest jews" can still get fast tracked returned back to Israel but non-jews cannot! Thus there is a preference for a Jew regardless of religion but rather race based. "The Rabbinate prohibits marriage in Israel of halakhic Jews (i.e. people born to a Jewish mother or Jewish by conversion), whether they are Orthodox Jews or not, to partners who are non-Jewish or who are of Jewish descent that runs through the paternal line (i.e. not Jewish according to halakha), unless they undergo a formal conversion to Judaism. As a result, in the state of Israel, people of differing religious traditions cannot legally marry someone in another religion and multi-faith couples must leave the country to get married. " wiki Israel is a racial state because it is defined as a jew state and jews are a race. A non-jew cannot even marry to a jew in israel and they pull books on interracial relations from israeli school. " Knesset renewed a contentious law that prevents Palestinians who marry Israelis from both receiving Israeli citizenship and from living within the Jewish State. " http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/191711/knesset-extends-law-forbidding-palestinians-married-to-israelis-from-living-in-jewish-state " “If getting married halachically was made into a criminal act in any other country, we would fight it as anti-Semitism. But here in Israel, where absolute power has absolutely corrupted, hundreds — perhaps thousands — of young couples are forced to break the law in order to practice Judaism,” said Itim’s Farber. " http://www.timesofisrael.com/in-ottoman-holdover-israel-doubles-down-on-marriage-restrictions/ "Arabs banned in 4 Israeli cities from working in schools" Are jews banned from working in Israeli schools? I don't even believe that you have been to Israel, because most Israelis I know readily admit that Israeli is an apartheid state. "It's Time to Admit It. Israeli Policy Is What It Is: Apartheid" read more: http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-special-place-in-hell/1.671538 https://bangordailynews.com/2015/10/18/news/world-news/arabs-banned-in-4-israeli-cities-from-working-in-schools/?ref=comments "Apartheid means Likud lawmaker and former Shin Bet chief Avi Dichter calling Sunday for separate, segregated roads and highways for Israelis and Palestinians in the West Bank. Apartheid means hundreds of attacks by settlers targeting Palestinian property, livelihoods, and lives, without convictions, charges, or even suspects. Apartheid means uncounted Palestinians jailed without trial, shot dead without trial, shot dead in the back while fleeing and without just cause. Apartheid means Israeli officials using the army, police, military courts, and draconian administrative detentions, not only to head off terrorism, but to curtail nearly every avenue of non-violent protest available to Palestinians." read more: http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-special-place-in-hell/1.671538 You must think the entire world is blind to not see obvious Israeli apartheid. It has already happened. So why didn't the jews all just move to Canada, since it never had discrimination, why steal land from palestinian arabs? I never claimed jews shouldn't have a state, I did claim you were a hypocrite for trying to say jews should have a state but others shouldn't have a school. You then turned around and claimed racism wasn't a problem in Canada, which undermines your entire logic for jews having a state. If there is no racism in Canada ,as you claim thn why do jews need a state, you cannot have it both ways. Either racism is a serious problem enough to justify what you previously called segregation, or it isn't. If it isn't, then jew don't deserve a state. Rich coming from you. The guy who wants forced integration so that he can play them off each other to make money. Israel is an apartheid state.

I don't think this has anything to do with the subject, not what Billy Graham might have said or not. Also the OP has nothing to do with the war in Afghanistan or elsewhere. The topic is to do with the interpretation of the bible.

OK...so why would it stop now ? Nothing special about Islam or Muslims in that regard. Welcome to the club.

I've read a lot about immigration in European countries compared to immigration into the US. My personal opinion is that America respects immigrants more in regard to viewing them as potential assets, Europe has experienced more problems with immigration because it tends to view immigrants in a condescending type of way - more as charity cases, needy, often leading a lot of them to become nothing more than wards of the state. While immigrants are encouraged to keep certain aspects of their culture once in the US, they are also expected to integrate and to get a job. Not so much in most European countries. Most European countries have laws that actually prevent this. For example, Sweden has a minimum age for marrying of 18, but for immigrants there is no minimum. In Germany, a German who marries and wants to bring their new spouse in from outside the EU has years of legal hoops to jump through, but an immigrant is not required to do so, since it is assumed the marriage is arranged and the parties will likely have never even met. Europe has been overly-accomodating and reluctant to address certain reprehensible traditions and religious/cultural differences and so has created extreme problems for itself, that the US has not experienced (at least not nearly to the same extent.) In many parts of Europe, when an ethnic European beats his wife, the police know how to handle it. When it's an immigrant beating his wife, it's seen as a cultural thing that the police have no right to intrude on. I could go on and on.....but if you just think about how these and other policies prevent immigrants from integrating (not to mention how they fail women), you'll see what I'm getting at. It's difficult, as a North American women, to watch immigrant women be treated so poorly due to culture and also see that our own governments provide them no help simply because they are immigrants. And to hear people like you demand that they keep these aspects of their culture or ignore them, I feel you do immigrants a great disservice. I view it more as a clash of cultures than a "Red Scare". And I'm sorry if you think it makes me a bad person....but as a woman, I would take living in Western society over living in a Muslim society - any day. Is our way perfect? No, but I do think it is better.

4 million murdered Muslims since 1990 against the tiny number of westerners clearly points up the myriad lies. The USA used as their justification for these murders - the lies of 911, the lies of Afghanistan, the lies of Iraq.

Might I point out that that is expressly against the central tenets of western society. And, I might also point out that this is about the lies that has seen 4 million Muslims murdered, not from the west's desires to advance anyone - anyone who believes that is or has ever been the motive of the USA is completely deluding themselves. But having said that, I welcome any constructive discussion that might help to end this madness, this new Red Scare.

You illustrate, constantly, that you are in no position to determine that. What little you posted had nothing to do with science; it never does. You are woefully ignorant of the science issues surrounding 911, as are all your little cohorts. conservatives???

How many of your nutty responses can we expect from a guy who constantly whines about people being off topic just to divert attention away from issues you are too frightened to address. conservatives ??

Hiii "Let me describe briefly what happened. There were 114,000 separate aerial sorties in 42 days. That’s one every 30 seconds. 88,000 tons of bombs were dropped. Only 7% of the bombs that fell upon Iraq were guided. 93% were free falling bombs that hit where chance, necessity and no free will took them. There were 38 aircraft lost by the United States in this slaughter. That number is less than the number of accidental losses in war games where no live ammunition is even used. No enemy aircraft rose to meet them, we know that, and no enemy anti-aircraft could reach them. And those who were there at the time know that. The United States claims to have lost 148 people. It concedes that the majority were from accident and friendly fire. There was not a single US tank penetrated by an Iraqi missile. There was not a single B52 downed by enemy fire. We had planes fly from Berksdale, Louisiana without ever touching the ground and return to Berksdale, Louisiana, having killed thousands of people on the ground they never saw. And one of those facts of the enemy of truth was television telling us about the surgical strikes and nobody gets hurt: we just turn the lights out. We used fuel air explosives, and it incinerates people and it crushes people, and we used it against civilians and military personnel. We had missiles fired from submarines in the Eastern Mediterranean for sport – just to see how they worked. We had Tomahawk cruise missiles by the hundred, launched from the Persian Gulf. A couple of thousand miles from the places that they hit – totally out of range. We put a couple of old fashioned battle ships up there and dumped 2.1 million pounds of hot metal on Southern Iraq, around Basra, killing people with impunity. You remember General Kelly announced before the beginning of the so called ground war….. but there was no ground war, name one battle, there wasn’t a battle: there was a slaughter. General Kelly said, when the troops finally moved forward, "They’re not many of them left alive to fight." And finally we learn that bulldozers and tanks with ploughs on the front, came in and buried thousands – dead, wounded and living. The Geneva Convention – written in the blood of the millions and millions of people who died in World War II – and the chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff of the United States army, when asked how many casualties he thought we had inflicted on Iraqi military and civilians said: "Frankly, that’s not a figure I’m very much interested in." [1] Forty eight hours after the cease fire, on the direct order of General Schwarzkopf as we know, major assaults occurred that took thousands of more lives. We killed at least 125,000 soldiers. WE HAVE KILLED TO DATE MORE THAN 130.000 CIVILIANS, WE KILLED AS MANY AS WE DARED." http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~gw/churchscript.htm

Another of your famous leaps of logic, Argus. How many more are there? You don't like the murderous conservative Kissinger. How about the murderous conservative Nixon? Reagan? Ford? Bush? Bush? Eisenhower?

You, as usual, do not know what you are talking about, Argus. Befuddled by a lifetime of conservative brainwashing.

Although all US war crimes and terrorist acts of of great importance, let's just start with the 4 million murdered Muslims since 1990, described by the US Physicians for Social Responsibility. If this doesn't put an end to all the silly suggestions that we poor westerners are living in such dangerous times, threatened as we are by the Muslim hordes, I don't know what will. Red Scare - it's deja vu all over again.

You posted this as a response to my response to drummindiver. Did you not notice how he failed to address any of the sources I had quoted - all he did was make a silly assertion that had no basis in fact.

Uh...Hitler lead the National SOCIALIST party, and was anything BUT a "conservative". He belongs with the rest of the Heros of the Left - Mao, Stalin, etc. Look, the US is far from perfect, but without them, the counterpoint to communism (a GENUINE threat to democracy) would not have existed post WWII. I agree, Islam itself is not the problem (any more than the US itself is a "problem") but the radical elements within. Problem is: Islam seems to have no mechanism and no desire to reign in their extremists, whereas the West eventually can and will deal with these things out in the open. - just as we are free to do right here and right now. Care to share which caliphate welcomes such discussion?

Are you Muslim haters so blind, so jaundiced that you can see the sources - the Physicians for Social Responsibility, ... . You just go on and on repeating the "commie" lies.

The evidence that Nunes has id not good for the FBI, NSA and others under Obama leadership and so the Dems and their news supporters and spinning and spinning to kick out Nunes. So until Schiff agrees to go back to the meeting and let everyone who want to testify, we just hearing spinning and fake news,

It must be difficult for you, when there is research like this, from an Israeli-American geneticist and bioinformatician with a doctorate in molecular evolution, showing how Ashkenazi Jews are descendants of Khazars. I guess he's another self-hating Jew who isn't trying to justify the Zionist narrative. If anyone is interested in learning more about the research, see the above link and see this article: The new research suggests that most of the Jewish population of northern and eastern Europe – normally known as Ashkenazic Jews – are the descendants of Greeks, Iranians and others who colonized what is now northern Turkey more than 2000 years ago and were then converted to Judaism, probably in the first few centuries AD by Jews from Persia. At that stage, the Persian Empire was home to the world’s largest Jewish communities.

How many people have clicked on the links in the Kissinger post to read more on the deeply evil history of the USA? As Artie Johnson used to say, "Veeeery veeery interesting!" Very Interesting But Also Stupid

It's called a guy who sees the greatest of evils wants to focus on an inanity to divert attention away from this greatest of evils. Because he is emotionally invested in, what? 25 years of hating on Muslims. Did you even read the Red Scare article? And that 5 to 6 million doesn't even include the 4 million Muslims who have died from the 1990s on.

I just had a look back. It seems that you are more bothered by "Complete idiots burning books on the ends of sticks. Tossers", than you are by two men, and I quote, "who were responsible for maybe 5 or 6 million people between them who were actually killed". Why?

Another US high official, much much worse than a tosser, I give you Henry Kissinger, himself a Jew. These examples of deeply amoral individuals are not the exception, they are the rule in the American prez administrations.

Extremists, you have the gall to say. Right after you see a common US high official who is much more extremist, much more vicious, much more amoral, I give you, Brzezinski. Just one little cog in a long parade of equally vicious US administrations.

What has this got to do with anything but a feeble attempt at distraction? This was a zero issue for you, and everyone else, prior to September 11, 2001.

Please, Goddess, logic. 4,000,000 to [what pitifully small number in comparison]. Let's look at this in a balanced manner. I said I would look at all.

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

Under Obama, the US relinquished control of the internet, maybe some of you missed that. Obama was always good at slipping in a rabbit punch while he's smiling at you.

Make this case to the people, give them them facts they need to make such a decision. If there is intel that is too sensitive to release to the public then be prepared to at least present it to a large panel of highly respected impartial experts who can then report their advice to the public to weigh. I'd also be prepared to make that intel available post conflict and it better be true. Basing war on a lie should constitute a crime against humanity. No, I said they should not be who decides such an obviously conflicted question. Going offshore to kill other people in our name is an issue that is far too important to leave up to politicians or soldiers alone. It is such an important commitment to make that it should bear the stamp of unequivocal support from as many Canadians as can possibly be mustered. That's why I said to make the vote mandatory. You, the politicians and the public only thought there was a majority. You should have insisted in knowing there was no ambiguity and had a VERY clear mandate from a super-majority. Instead you were sent off half cocked on a cockeyed mission that only got more cocked up as time went on. Now the world is a fricken' mess and why is just as fricken' obvious.

Agreed. I never understand why some people are like "stay and fight for your country" or "fight for what's right". Why bother? If a certain place no longer meets my standards, I'll just move somewhere else instead.

Ain't going to happen...

Not me, country ain't worth dying for, has you seen what Kathleen Wynne does with our taxes, they have all the money, let them do the fighting and dying. I'm not dying for a country who has robbed me blind of my tax dollars to line lobbyist pockets. Let Wynee and her lobbyist do all the dying, they are getting all the money.