Leaderboard

You haven't even demonstrated there is any evidence of discrimination against Muslims, let alone that it's anything like what Jews or early Chinese received.

THE government of Puerto Rico said in 2015 that the island could not pay its debts. Yet it was only on May 3rd that it kicked off the biggest bankruptcy case in America’s history. Public-sector debts total almost $74bn (around 100% of GNP). The drawn-out fiscal crisis has both imperilled Puerto Rico’s economy and upended the island’s politics. The Economist ======= In very practical terms, when a government declares bankruptcy then it has simply turned bondholders into taxpayers. Bondholders expect to be repaid; taxpayers at most hope for some benefit. In a society where 30% of voters pay no taxes at all, who would buy a State bond? Is such a society sustainable?

Whatever else becomes of me, I'll never be a right winger. Ever.

What makes what YOU think Islamophobia is, the right definition? Your definition of an Islamophobe is very very broad. I base my opinion of THE RELIGION on how its adherents act. 90% of the Muslims I've met have been demanding, violent, rude, selfish, unhappy people. The other 10% basically ignored me because I'm A.) Not Muslim, and B.) A woman. In spite of this, I don't go around ripping off hijabs and burkas, or screaming at them to go back to wherever they came from. In spite of this, I still give every single one of them that I meet the benefit of the doubt. Yes, I'm cautious around them, and that apparently makes me an Islamophobe. I don't "hate" Muslims, and the only "fear" I have is legitimate, as I have been physically attacked, screamed at, yelled at, slapped, watched in horror while they all verbally abused an Israeli girl telling her she and her family in Israel all needed to die, etc. I'm sorry, but I completely disagree with your assessment that it's only a TINY, TINY, BARELY PERCEPTABLE, "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT" MINORITY who are bringing these kinds of attitudes to Canada. It's not. But yeah,the problem is all me. I'm an Islamophobe because I don't like being treated like $hit,

All people have to do is read and learn from the internet aa to what Islam is really all about. On the internet it will show any and everyone that muslims want Sharia law implemented in all countries that welcome them in. Welcome them in and they want to take over that country. Sweden and London, England are prime examples of how far they will try to and have gone in those two countries alone. Canada in time will be no exception. They will try it here also in time. They just need the numbers, and that they will get those numbers in time because they breed like flies, and Caucasians don't anymore, and they know it too. No other religion that has come to Canada has tried anything near what Islam is trying. Islam is fast becoming an enemy of the western world. Believe it or not.

Everybody on here has, at some time or another, agreed that these things are wrong - whether practiced by Middle Eastern people, African people, South Asians, Russians, Canadians, Americans, British, etc, or whether they are Muslim, Christian or 'other': Honor killings Female inequality/oppression Discrimination/jailing/killing of gay people Pedophilia FGM Terrorist activity Lashings/Stoning/Beheadings Jailing/killing blasphemers and apostates Conversion by the sword Other stuff I may have missed that is generally frowned upon in Western/progressive countries Now, since certain people on this board think they are the only ones who "care" about this, maybe they could explain to the rest of us how they might address those issues? And by address those issues, I don't mean "Let's blame all Muslims by assuming that they support this stuff, and if they say they don't assume they are lying, and let's try to keep them out of our country". Nor does it mean accusing 'the other side' of not caring about Canada, embracing homophobic and misogynistic beliefs, hiding their heads in the sand, etc. The fact is that by 2030, according to Stats Canada, the only way to increase Canadian population is through immigration. That means that those issues have to be addressed, not by refusing adherents of the fastest growing religion in the world entry, but by addressing the actual issues you are concerned about - ideally where they are most common. That means recognizing supporting the organizations in the Middle East, Africa, Asia and India who are actively working to bring changes. How many of the anti-Muslim posters here support "Because I am a Girl" (my personal choice) or "Girls Not Brides" to fight misogyny in other countries? How many even know about "Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees", or Outright - a group that works in Muslim countries and around the world to empower gay people. The difference I see between me and someone like Argus is that I do care about these issues - I do what I can about it, without feeling obligated to hate on every single Muslim in the world. People like Argus aren't dealing with 'the issues'; they just want to build walls of suspicion and fear between "us" and "them".

But yet do our Canadian Caucasian politicians really care? Not. It's like our Canadian Caucasian politicians are trying to commit racial suicide against themselves and their own people. Shocking indded.

It's the personal experience of 20 years of slagging for being a lefty that's given me a good sense of what discrimination and bigotry feels like. F-k the god-damned right.

That's Ottawa. Have you looked at the most wanted in BC? Mostly white faces. Even in Surrey, hotbed of immigrant crime, 7 out of 10 are of white Canadian origin. In Edmonton, a lot of First Nations. In Calgary, mostly white faces again. In Winnipeg, all white. Toronto, mostly immigrant or immigrant descent. Out of Canada's 110 most wanted, 32 might be of Middle Eastern/African descent based on either their pic and/or their name; the other 78 look to be Canadians or from Asian/European/South American immigrant populations, again based on their pic and/or name. Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto have approximately the same ratio (between 20% and 23%) of immigrants within their populations; Surrey is over 30%. This might lead a person to ask "Why are there so many immigrant people on wanted lists in Toronto/Ottawa and so few on the Vancouver and Surrey lists if immigration and crime are related?" I did ask that question and did not find any really satisfactory answer but I did find a couple of sources that at least looked at the issue of immigrants and crime. Report from Stats Canada outlining the difference between Caucasian and non-Caucasian offenders: This Walrus article is particularly interesting in that it discusses how first-generation immigrants reduce crime-rate and make neighborhoods safer, but that second-generation 'regress' toward the mean and become more like non-immigrant populations in terms of criminal behavior. Still, as the article points out: Ultimately, I don't think one can draw conclusions about crime based on wanted posters. They are, after all, merely a snapshot in time: in a year or two or three, perhaps Vancouver and Surrey posters will show more people of immigrant descent, and Toronto/Ottawa will be mostly white.

Yes, as I said I don't think Rebel Media is "real media". They're political propaganda pretending to be news, much like Breitbart. I think it's sad that real news organizations only picked up the story after Rebel covered it. We saw the same thing in regard to the Cologne New Year's Eve debacle-- the story was blowing up on social media, but the major media outlets only started covering days later after public anger at the media became impossible to ignore. They knowingly sat on the story, made themselves complicit with the police and politicians who tried to keep it quiet, and only came clean after their credibility had already been tarnished. Their failure became a big part of the story. What we see in Canada has been far less dramatic, but follows the same pattern. -k

Are you a Muslim? Why do you pose as one in your responses such as the above? Why is it you engage in the very discriminatory stereotypes you claim others do with Muslims posing as if you are Muslim and speak for all Muslims? How are your slurs and stereotypes of this scapegoat you invented called "right winger" which appears to stand for anyone you d sagree with and blame all things on responsible for Islamophobia? Hmm? Your contribution on posts is to engage in the very same negative slurs against this invented "right wing group" as you think are directed at Musli You pose as if you speak for all Muslims and their feelings but never once have you come on this forum and acknowledged you are a Muslim. So is one to assume you are a Muslim or just a patronizing bigot generalizing that they all have the same feelings and views as you do? Racism? Nonsense. Muslims come in every skin tone and colour. They are not a race. They are a religious group. They have no race. Race is an outmoded meaningless stereotype label affixed to perceptions of secondary genetic traits of sin colour, nose shape and hair texture. You engage in Nazi definitions and you call others right wing and racist? You not any right winger is stereotyping Muslims with racist terminology,. As a Jew we went through discrimination in Canada like Chinese, Siekhs, Ukrainians, Irish. blacks who came escapings lavery in the US, Japanese, Italians, hell even Germans during WW1 and 2. We all went through it. Not ironically like the aboriginal peoples before us but similar. We don't need some phony liberal guilt sheltered privileged silver spooners lecturing us. No gay person or women needs to be lectured by you what a fundamentalist Muslim says about them. So just what is your agenda? Are you a Muslim? You act as if you speak with personal experience as to the feelings of one? You either are and won't admit it on this forum, or you are a "racist" claiming to know know how all Muslims think or feel. So which one is it?

So you are admitting that you are not consistent and don't care about consistency? As for 'common sense' it changes a lot depending on time, location and who you ask. In the late 40's and early 50's in Britain, it was 'common sense' that you want to prevent people from spreading 'indecency' and as a result, the 'indecent' acts of homosexuals were illegal. Such awful 'common sense' led to Alan Turing committing suicide. In Russia, it is 'common sense' that you want to protect children from 'gay propaganda'. In Saudi Arabia, it is 'common sense' that you want to stop 'hateful acts' like homosexual acts since they are hateful against the perfect design and perfect intent of the perfect creator Allah. In Ireland, Stephen Fry is going to be charged with Blasphemy for saying "I’d say ‘Bone cancer in children, what’s that about?’ How dare you create a world in which there is such misery that is not our fault, It’s not right. It’s utterly, utterly evil. Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid god who creates a world which is so full of injustice and pain?" because it's 'hateful' and supposedly violates Ireland's nonsense blasphemy laws that are intended to protect the Irish people from 'hate'. You really want a society where the government bans and imprisons people based on speech they arbitrarily deem as 'hateful' or because they claim that whatever they want to ban is 'common sense'?

I can understand it must have been a harrowing experience, so I guess it's understandable how other people who were there tell a different story.

So I guess then we'll have to assume you were actually at the Mosque in PQ when the shootings happened so as to be able to direct us so accurately as to what occurred there.

I assume your thoughts are as faulty as another frequent poster here who thinks that CBC is controlled by "Big Brother" The story might have been even more fun for them had it of actually been a Muslim terrorist instead of some local dude gone wrong. What does Breitbart say anyway?

Had it of been a Christian church attacked you probably would have heard "Oh My God" from someone.

No, I mean the actual one that shows there was one perp, and that they mistakenly arrested someone who was trying to administer first aid and was released when that became evident. I know the little alahu akbaar thing excites you, but sorry, that was from a mosque member.

You mean police reports that said two suspects were arrested: Bashir al-Taweed and Hasan Matti? Those police reports?

That is exactly the kind of smug attitude the MSM in Sweden, the UK and Germany have had, the same attitude their governments have, and the reason why extremism and support for extremism is rising across Europe. All of them and their governments have been desperately explaining how Islam is just another religion, and how Muslims are not involved in anything anti-social or criminal and how they're so very welcome. And yet, despite this virtual unanimity among governments and media in Europe and North America, public opinion polls show the public's view of Muslims is getting worse and worse. Why do you suppose that is? We're talking about liberal, secular populations here.

You apparently decide who is mainstream...so anything is possible in that regard.

Exactly. Unless there was a provision in such a hypothetical union that permitted the former Canadian province to retain its form of government, but the entire United States would remain presidential (so the federal government of the US would remain presidential, the new states--former provinces--would not have to change their own governments). I don't know if that would work. Essentially you're right. Americans have a phobia of parliamentary democracy and Canadians of presidential democracy. The former is more suited in a "collectivist" version of democracy; the latter, in a more American-style "individual liberty" model.

So your counter argument is that 'aha, it's not legal in an airport!'? What kind of argument is that? It's like if someone is losing an argument on the legalization of homosexuality and then they say 'go to Saudi Arabia, try that 'morality' and then report back w/ your results'. You have no good arguments left. Admit it. Just concede and accept my position.

Humans are generally pretty good at reading emotion/expression, even just from the eyes, so it's possible she could tell.

If you want to define it as incitement to violence or not, I don't really care. But if we go down this route, is advocacy of capital punishment for mass murders not incitement to violence? In that case, should we make it illegal to advocate for capital punishment?

If we go by that standard, we'd have to ban a lot of things to be consistent. Some teenage girls in Oregan thought that Slenderman was cool and tried to kill a schoolmate to sacrifice to Slenderman. Does that mean we should ban Slenderman? How about all the people killing in the name of Islam? Does that mean we should ban islam as well? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slender_Man_stabbing

Or if they are planning to plant a bomb. But if people are just questioning to morality of planting bombs, that should be allowed.

Wow! Substitute the word "Quran" for the word "Bible" and you've got exactly what a Muslim woman said the other day, when I objected to her insistence that Muslim women had to wear hijab.

I'm confused by what you are trying to ask. My position is that advocacy for terrorism (any terrorism) should be legal as long as it doesn't fall under conspiracy to commit a crime.

Terrorism isn't defined by one's personal opinion about what is justifiable killing. From the perspective of the government, killing people to make a political point would be terrorism.

Why not? If I'm a German citizen in Nazi Germany that is actively killing Nazis to stop them killing jews in the name of the ideology of liberalism, then I am definitely a terrorist. I am a non-state actor committing violence against people in the state in the name of an ideology. That is terrorism. I'm arguing that not all terrorism is bad. That doesn't mean all terrorism is good or that I'm arguing that it is justified for PETA to destroy labs.