Leaderboard

Of course they are. The Canadian Charter is consistent with the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights although most Muslim-majority countries have opted to back an alternative to the U.N. Declaration called the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which is an interesting read. It begins with the following premise: "All human beings form one family whose members are united by their subordination to Allah and descent from Adam." Well, you get the picture. It's a counterpoint to the Western understanding of human rights as enunciated in the U.N. Declaration. Unfortunately, mainly due to the emergence of open-ended Western multiculturalism, most in the West probably don't realize the extent of philosophical divergence between the Western and Islamic belief structures. We're told by self-styled "progressives" including politicians that these are minor differences that will work themselves out over time. Really? A 2017 article by a Muslim writer in the NY Times (link below) explains the problem with assuming that Muslims will simply adapt to Western values. The author notes that "[o]ften Muslims support liberalism when it serves them and reject it when it does not." So, it's not at all surprising that the Charter is being used to argue the cause of an Islamic party program in this country. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/27/opinion/is-free-speech-good-for-muslims.html

As I stated in another thread, I'm a young buck, I am 23 years old. I know the people of my generation more than most of you on this forum, especially those who attended college from 2015 to 2018. There are lots, and lots of muslim extremists, even in the ranks of the well off and well educated. Being a religious extremist has nothing to do with the West messing with the Middle East. This is a religious doctrine, and thank you for stating the obvious, because it is not understood by the ignorant at all. Read the Quran, and you'll understand there is a tone to act upon certain rules instead of being guided by principles -wrong or not- of Christian or Jewish doctrines. I wish people were more knowledgeable about islam, because it is really a societal cancer.

We have now taken in a teenage Saudi who has renounced Islam. That was the basis of her refugee claim. Now that the precedent is set, does this mean Canada is now welcoming anyone who renounces Islam? That won't play well with Trudeau's Islamic voter base, eh?

The thing is, we're seeing this phenomenon in another civilized country called... Belgium. There's a party called 'ISLAM' over there, and at first was not concerning; they just wanted family tribunals for muslims when the party was founded in 2002. But then, afterwards, it became more and more radical, since there are lot more muslims in Belgium, thus supporting djihadism and other extremist doctrines of the religion of islam. They now support a totalitarian islamic state in Belgium for all Belgians. Give a hand to a muslim, he'll chop off your arm.

Let's not forget they also asked local elders what to do and the elders looked at them like they were simpletons and said "Just kill them."

Or it would turn into a giant shithouse like Brazil, with massive, violent slums surrounding every city and corrupt police and politicians. You import tens of millions of third world people who don't speak the language, don't have any skills or education, and you bankrupt the country overnight. And yeah, no 'nanny welfare state', with no public health care, welfare, pogey or pensions - including for ex soldiers.

I'll do it in one sentence; the Liberals will incite a debt crisis, once they are forced to rein in spending as a result, that will incite the PQ back to power and referendum, the Liberals will cock that up, this time the PQ will win, Confederation will come apart at the seams, and then we will be free for all time of this Liberal Party of Canada dictatorship.

Same deal with SAC getting sent in. Only crazy guys in U-2s or SR-71s actually went into Russia.

Klingon vs Federation

Yes....for MAD to work... nuclear deterrence has to be: Credible Survivable Reliable

Right...even the Tsar Bomba had no additional military significance.

Most people are philistines. Maybe the RDS-220 was bigger in terms of yield, but the grainy Soviet footage didn't do it justice, whereas through the power of Hollywood caliber film making, Castle Bravo is one of the most terrifying yet beautiful things I've ever seen.

Except there are some very practical matters to consider when waging intercontinental thermonuclear war: Defence suppression Fratracide Command/Control/Communications infrastructure Post strike military/economic capability BDA (damage assessment) Allied players (e.g. Britain and/or France)

Yes, and it is even a pain to de-mil them, recovering their "physics packages" (warhead pit).

Nevertheless, the USA and allies continue to field weapons and strategies for "limited" tactical nuclear warfare with intermediate range weapons. There are still over 100 American warheads forward deployed in Europe (NATO). There are far fewer of these than before, but are required for military and political expediencies. I can tell you from experience that the care and feeding of nuclear weapons (of any kind) is a major pain in the ass.

Yes...very transitional...my first patrol was on the USS George Washington (SSBN-598) with Polaris A3 missiles...but we were still using punch cards for targeting. The Special Projects Office (SPO) in D.C. was pushed hard to get a survivable nuclear deterrent at sea, and Admiral Rickover provided the power plant that made Regulus diesel boats obsolete. Radar picket subs would remain for a while.

The breaking point for me was the Somalia Inquiry, I didn't serve in the Airborne and I understood the problems there, but that wasn't the point, the point was they blamed everything on the lowest ranks and then when it came time to examine the negligence of the chain of command, they promptly shut it down. So they throw you under the bus to save their careers was the message to me. Again, message received.

No...it is ironic....worrying so much about Putin and America....from Canada.

I'm a Cold Warrior. Grew up in a small city destined to get punched by 3 or 4 megaton H-Bombs due to its position on the Pine Tree Line. I've never trusted Islam...back in the day, they threw their lot in with the Soviets for the most part...save for Saudi Arabia...which is why they are 'special' in the eyes of the Americans. Israel had the job of keeping all those cunts in line....and that they did well.

Islam and Christianity are not an equal threat to society.

I think that the Christian Heritage Party has no future, because the demography and the willingness for Christians to vote for this party isn't concerning. For muslims, I think we should take it way less lightly, as most muslims live for their religion and push for proselytism in an even more aggressive manner than Christians do, and trust me, I'm not a believer in any religion at all, but muslims are way more radical and tend to invade the public sphere way more than other religions.

I was reading an article the other day - I should have reposted it - which polled the residents of half a dozen African countries. Something like half would move to the West if they could. That worked out to about two hundred million people. And that was just half a dozen countries.

That's nice....Americans know Trump going back to the 1970's, and the scams he was pulling, so we made him our president.

I'm for Dwane Johnson, Taylor Swift, Kanye West, Snoop the Dawg, and Cher. Lots to choose from!

I'm used to American libertarian militant free speech forums with almost no moderation at all, so this forum is like a knitting club in comparison, but I don't mind, I can play it either way, and as B-C2004 said, more focus on playing the ball, free for alls can be fun, but it gets boring after awhile, been there done that. That being said, if it's like Cultural Marxist power tripping where the moderator is shutting people down based on absurd claims of offence as a weaponized fallacy, that's not worth my time.

I think this needs to be reiterated. Canada ranks consistently as one of the most tolerant populations on the planet, while Muslim lands consistently rank as the least tolerant. And yet some are trying to convince us that Canadians are the least tolerant and Muslim nations are the most tolerant.

Toronto and Vancouver provide excellent examples of the trend noted in your post. The 'ethnoburbs' (as they're sometimes called) and extended ethnic areas that characterize vast swathes of suburban Toronto and Vancouver are examples of a new kind of Western urbanism that seems likely to thwart integration. Some analysts compare them to the 'receiving neighborhoods' of old, where continuous waves of immigrants from different places congregated in mainly poorer inner city neighborhoods until they became established and integrated into broader mainstream communities. But this doesn't appear to be the purpose of the ethnoburbs, which in many cases are now characterized by large and often expensive homes and are apparently intended as more or less permanent enclaves. It's interesting that in the Wikipedia entry on enthoburbs, the five cities cited as examples are all in mainly English-speaking countries and two of them are in Canada, with Vancouver ranking prominently at the top. One has to wonder what this says about Canadian "multiculturalism" and its emerging tribalist and anti-integrative tendencies? But we dare not raise concerns lest we be labeled as xenophobes, or worse.

Ah I see the conundrum that Canada has. It tries to protect these different culture and ethnic background but doing so has also preventing it from melting into pot like we have in America. We are all immigrant on this land but we see our selves as American first and ethnic origin second.