JerrySeinfeld

Question: What's the definition of a millisecond? Answer: The time it takes for an atrocity comitted by a Muslim to turn into a warning against "knee jerk Islamophobia" Heck - why waste precious time? The logical next step is for the local mosque / Islamic congress to issue press releases warning against Islamophobia the day before the train bombing. Efficiency, right?

Sure. All the trudeaupian multicultis have done is make the ghettos bigger, more isolated, less integrated, more violent and more agressive. But you're probably right. The best answer is to stick our heads in the sand and say "it's always been this way" (sic)

No - probably something more commonplace...like a stabbing a Jew 18 times in the chest, ripping his face off with a fork and walking back up the stairs shouting "now I can go to heaven, for I have killed my Jew!" wait - that actually happened in Paris a couple of years ago....my bad.

ahhahaha - the title of my thread is presumptive I suppose. I'm waiting for yet another story of ridiculous Islamic behavior to be spun into a thread about Islamophobia.

Um - since when do people in this country have the "right not to be offended"? Where is this stated in the charter of rights and freedoms?

I think "death cult" is a pretty reasonable description of radical Islam. It's a bunch of people who encourage and practise suicide and killing to reach their hardline religious goals. What distiguishes that from any other "death cult"?

It's not rocket science. Well actually it's probably even more complex than that - which makes me skeptical of any "conclusive" evidence that the "science is in". Picture yourself as a scientist. You are in competition for grant money. You don't exist as a scientist unless you have funding for whatever researh you're doing. Now. The amount of funding for "climate research" in the US has increased from $200 million a few years ago to $2 billion today. That's a ten fold increase. Do you think perhaps it's in your interest to start coming to "definitive conclusions" about climate? Absolutely. Anyone who thinks deniers are the only ones "in it for the money" are only looking at half the equation. Now. Think about a "climate prediction model". If you begin a study with the premise of trying to learn the effect of "carbon" on "climate", then you're model may well built on that premise. So by definition, when you increase the "carbon" in your model, the "climate" will warm up too. With these kinds of models all over the world, it's no wonder guys in labs or on laptops are "introducing" massive amounts of carbon into their models then predicting the end of the earth - a prediction already decided upon by the POLITICIANS at the UN who wrote the IPCC summaries. It's survivorship bias. If you are a scientist at the IPCC who writes a report contrary to the foregone conclusions in the IPCC summary, you are either silenced or kicked out for being "bogus". Through this process, it's not hard to see how "consensus" is reached. This is starting to sound a whole lot more like hysteria and religino, than it is science.

I find it pretty rich that a group of Muslims would try to counter accusations of a globaMuslim conspiracy to take over the free world, by 1. trying to squash free speech in a free country 2. demanding access to someone elses (free press) magazine. This is the ultimate in either 1. Irony or 2. Stupidity Especially since they're trying to make the point that they're NOT trying to take over the world.... My two cents

I once heard a quote by an author (can't remember who): "Fantasy is the luxury of the free society" It was pertaining to the people who drive around with "9-11 was an inside job" bumper stickers. The point was: if we were really living in a country in fear of our own government, would you really want to drive around with a bumper sticker like that? It's only with the confidence that we live in a free society that we can engage in such speculation and fantasy - kind of like going to an S&M parlour knowing full well you really aren't going to be stuck chained up in a cage forever - only for a brief period of fantasy completely under your own control. How does this pertain to pacifism? Same idea: Pacifism is a luxury provided by strong military countries. Europe and Canada are chalk full of pacifist anti-war types. But that luxury has been enjoyed since 1945 under the blanket of security provided by the "terrible american war machine".

Can someone please point to me where in the charter of rights and freedoms it is stated that citizens of this country hav the right not to be offended?

This thread is typical thinking: try to shut everyone up who doesn't agree with you. The Canadian Islamic congress recently filed suit against Macleans because of something written in their columns. Give it a rest. It's call FREEDOM OF SPEECH and it's protected in the charter of rights. If you don't like it, perhaps their are countries in the world more receptive to your idea of censorship and one-sided thinking. As far as the Zionist ideals "spreading like wildfire" - what colour is the sky in your world. American and Israel are quickly becoming the minority of common sense in this world. By the way - throwing around viscous words like "racism" is a common tactic of people who wish not to discuss ideas, but rather to demonize everyone who doesn't agree with thei point of view. Welcom to democracy, have a nice day.

Did anyone see how this ditzy NDP broad tried to tie a "photo of a scantily clad woman" (lol) to the Montreal massacre? What fucking planet are these people living on. The Montreal massacre was perpetrated by Marc Lepine, formerly Gamil Rodrique Gharbi, son of a muslim wife beater. Canadian men are far from the knuckle-dragging woman killing beasts we're all made to feel guilty about each december 6. Rather they're wuss-bags who sat and did nothing while their women were being shot to death by the son of an algerian muslim wife beater. Very good microcosm of what some Canadians would have us do in Afghanistan (ie. nothing).

Exactly. The UN, Canada, Europe etc. love to talk talk talk talk talk. It's a nice luxury to have when the whole idea of "mid east tension" is just a concept thrown a round at cocktail parties and discussion forums. But Israel lives it daily, which is why they act.

Israel acts as all of us would if we lived surrounded by midevil freaks.

Oh? Demographically, the concept of a free society held secure by the Americans may well turn out to have been but a glimpse of brightness in a long history of drudgery...look at what's happening in Europe. And is THIS really the kind of "democracy" you want?

This North American Union sounds like a good idea to me. Whats the difference between it and, say the Kyoto protocol?

The law can be changed and in fact it does so all the time to reflect the fad du jour. The problem with your thinking: anytime we "accept" something new, we simply change the law. If you don't think so, take a look at what's happening in Europe RIGHT NOW, where the acceptanec of Sharia isn't being scoffed at, it's being openly debated and considered.

How far does "tolerance" go? Are you willing to tolerate the intolerant? One of the fundamental flaws of the "tolerance" model is being exposed by the increased presence of Islam in today's multiculti countries: that being the contradiction of tolerances. Do you "tolerate" homosexuality? Do you "tolerate" women's equality? How do you reconcile this with your tolerance for cultures which do NOT tolerate homosexualite, women's rights etc.?

See that's the problem: we equate restaurants and TV with culture - but they equate strong underlying values and religion with culture. Remember one thing: the perpetrators of the London tube bombings ate fish 'n' chips and played cricket and dresssed in bad argyll sweaters - many were second or third generation "brits" by your definition. The problem is multiculturalism is essentially a void. There is nothing for them to assimilate to, no common values we all defend - other than where they might get a quick bite. So they find their identity elsewhere. As for August's comment about taking cultural lessons from the Sudanese - I certainly do wish our society had as much confidence and adamancy about our values as they do theirs - which is why we probably won't end up surviving.

What is this, grade 9?

I think some lefty wackos out there are just happy to put "Harper" and "Nuclear" in a lefty forum to stir shit up.

Especially when the weaker one depends upon importing the stronger one to supoprt it's social programs, and espcielly when the weaker one has developed a penchant for self-flagellation.

You're kind of missing it. If one culture is confident it's beliefs are the correct one, and defends itself adamantly as this, and the other culture is all about accomodation, what do you think happens when the accomodating culture invites the supremly confident agressive one in?

Indeed - which, I would think - would make it even more compelling for US to defend our common values instead of ditching them for every new mutli-culti fad.