Leaderboard

No. We start with the observation, and then ask why this is such typical behavior throughout the Muslim world. In every Muslim nation. It is extremely atypical elsewhere, but entirely typical in Muslim nations. And then we suggest there is a link between such behavior and Islam (not far fetched). Then we examine the religious texts of Islam and we find much justification for the things people are doing, ie beheading and otherwise murdering those they consider to be insulting Islam or violating the tenets of Islamic law. We examine what Islam says about how to treat unbelievers, and find a great deal of support for violence against those who refuse to submit (Islam literally means submission). Again, it is hardly a leap to suggest the behavior is linked to the teachings of Islam. Hey, I might think the Amish are screwy, but they're not dangerous screwy, and they're not growing by leaps and bounds. I think "our" Muslims would eventually be influenced by Canada's more tolerant beliefs if given the chance to assimilate. But they're not getting that chance. A steady stream of tens of thousands of Muslims is immigrating here every year and bringing those hostile and backwards attitudes and beliefs with them. Saudi Arabia continues to 'generously' fund mosques and Islamic schools and community centres in Canada and even provide them with mullahs trained in Saudi Arabia and religious texts from Saudi Arabia. I think this has the potential to be extremely destabilizing as their numbers grow, and I think we need to greaterly lessen the number of Muslims coming from certain parts of the world, and review their social views before admitting them as immigrants. I also think we need to bar all Saudi money and require that prevent their mullahs from coming to work in Canada.

Amazingly, we are just 15 months away from the next federal election. Yet, the Liberals are now staking out what will be their main plank to win a second mandate. It seems it will center on their immigration and refugee program policies. All the signs support this strategy. But it this the way to go for the Liberals given the problems that have cropped up at the illegal border and the number of immigrants accepted in recent years and from where they originated? When it comes to wooing the immigrant vote Butts is no Jason Kenny and Trudeau is no Harper.

Ever since Doug Ford proposed slashing the size of Toronto City Council, federal Liberals have been talking about doing "whatever they can" to "protect Torontonians" from the proposed legislation. As far as I can tell, the Trudeau government has three options in terms of legal and constitutional recourse: 1) Reservation - basically, order Ontario's Lieutenant Governor to veto the bill; 2) Disallowance - basically, get the federal cabinet to formally nix the legislation once it becomes law (the feds would have one year following Royal Assent to invoke this); 3) Well, that's it - the proposed law appears to be perfectly constitutional otherwise. These powers haven't been used in a very long time, probably because their use tended to blow up in the faces of the federal party using them and/or their provincial counterparts. The last time they were seriously invoked was by the Liberals during the Albertan SoCreds' first couple of terms, and the resulting political firestorm played a big role in laying the foundations for that party's dynasty (and the Albertan Liberals' irrelevance). Pierre Trudeau briefly considered disallowing Bill 101 and other PQ legislation, but (wisely) decided it would do more political harm to provoke the separatists in that way. This is a different situation. Ford is many things, but he's not a separatist. Obviously, the only circumstance under which the Liberals would even consider invoking disallowance or reservation is if a clear majority of the Toronto CC passed a motion demanding the feds do exactly that. That would present quite a decision for Trudeau: - If he disallows, Ford Nation would go apoplectic, but that in itself might not cost the Liberals a lot of votes; - OTOH if he ignores such a motion, the NDP would immediately pounce. Singh would charge that Trudeau has turned his back on Toronto, and would warn voters in other major cities that Trudeau can't be trusted to protect their interests if he won't go to bat for Toronto. That could potentially cost the Liberals a lot of votes in places where it would hurt them most. Thoughts?

That is a stunning link. Carfentanil in that quantity, 42 kg, could only be intended for use as a chemical weapon.

He certainly did run on cutting the size of government

I expect Canadians will get a good tongue-lashing from him for causing this person to open fire on the public. Sort of like his "Canadians have no appreciation for Canada, only refugees appreciate Canada" speech for Canada's 150th Birthday - that was nice. Or maybe like his indignant speech to chastise Canadians immediately after the hijab-cutting hoax.

When it comes to Trudeau, he is only concerned about his image and nothing more. I mean let's be honest here. If Trump was not doing what he has been doing as far as showing his concern about tragic incidents that have happened in America do you think that Trudeau would be doing it now? Trudeau is being forced to do it and nothing more. That prime mistake of ours has no time for Canadians. The fool shows us that every day.

Immigration has for the most part, been handled well over the years - if only because immigrants plan their lives around coming here, are self-supporting, follow the process and are prepared to join our Canadian family. Asylum claimants on the other hand - for the most part - show up in Canada and require the full support of government to acquire the skills they need to live, work and even to survive in Canada. It's a tremendous responsibility for both the refugee and Canada. That is where Trudeau has been such a dismal failure. It takes a lot of planning to develop what should be a 5 year plan for refugees. The Federal government's current responsibility ends after one year - then they become the Provinces' responsibility. Trudeau's reckless open-border policy has been devoid of any such responsible plan - no consultation with the Provinces prior to his "irregular crossing" ignorance. Putting aside those many thousands that are simply economic migrants who should be immediately shooed back to the US - those that genuinely require our help are getting none from Trudeau - no plan - no funding - no support. Meanwhile, real refugees who are trying to escape persecution are left to linger even longer in squalid camps. There is no virtue in Trudeau's actions. He's hurting the people Canada should be helping. He and his backroom idealogues care only about votes. Their grasping of this issue is an attempt to paint Conservatives as heartless and uncaring. If handled properly, it will be the Liberals will be proven heartless. Trouble is, the CBC and The Star will be on the Trudeau bandwagon. Maybe hang some garlic to ward them off?

I don't think that most of the Ontario people knew what they were getting into either when they voted in Wynne as premier. I do not believe that Wynne told the Ontario citizen's as to what she had in mind for them. As they say let's wait and see. I mean come on can Ford do any worse as to what Wynne has done to Ontario? I can only see Ford making Ontario great again and not worse. It's best that we all just relax and have a drink. Gawd only knows that I need a drink after dealing with some members here. Cheers. LOL.

I heard in an item on yesterday evening's news indicating that Trudeau will be in Toronto today, presumably for the funeral of one of the victims. And I assume it likely he'll make an excursion to the Danforth for photo-ops. He's in town anyway, so why not, eh? Maybe he bought new socks? In a column today in the generally pro-Liberal Toronto Star, 'A little patience won't hurt us'', Andrew MacDougall, while lamenting the proliferation of non-factual theories coming from all corners about the shooter, also notes that in the new media age public authorities must be more transparent than has apparently been in the case in the Danforth shooting. MacDougall states that "A population that knows they'll be updated regularly is one less likely to troll the wilds of the internet for alternative sources of information." He goes on further to opine that "...the frequent proactive disclosure of information is the best course of action for police." MacDougall's piece tries to have it both ways but in the end reflects the reality that even moderate media voices are becoming aware that the way this growing fiasco has been handled undermines confidence in the objectivity of public institutions. If he speaks at all, I wonder whether the feckless Trudeau, who'll no doubt affect a solemn persona in Toronto, will promote the cause of transparency or, alternatively, lecture us about conclusions we mustn't draw. My money is on the latter. We'll see.

The EU is no stranger to starting fights over trade, including higher/longstanding tariff and non-tariff barriers to U.S. exports, notably agriculture. To say that Trump started the fight shows a lack of perspective on trade/tariffs:

Because it's not like other religions. Because immense amounts of space in its central religious texts are given over to how believers should treat non-believers, more than half, in fact,. And how they should treat non-believers are, for the most part, not kindly.

I think it is fun to watch from another nation in "North America". Canada smugly scoffed at the ideas of Donald Trump...then Ontario elected its own version in a landslide while sending the hated Liberals to minor party purgatory. This is what democracy looks like.

Not really. If that were the case, you'd have Israelis/Jews doing the same thing. Talk about a whole society being marginalized and discriminated against. And look no farther than our own indiginous people - but you don't see them shooting people up and down the street Even the remnants of slavery in the US has not caused Blacks to regularly carry out such heinous acts. Islam is the common thread - and the "enabler" for these acts.

A bit early to decide yet, isn't it? I'm in favour of wait and see. To heck with some opinion panel full of outraged liberals.