dialamah

If all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail.

Its a plan; if you think corruption is bad now in politics, try giving politicians an actual reason to pad their own pockets.

Still a strawman. Anyway, it doesn't matter, neither of us are going to change our viewpoints short of some really compelling information. Only time will tell if they'll take over the West and start removing limbs as you fear, oppressing women as Goddess fears, or if they'll simply fade into Western culture in the same way all the other feared immigrant groups have done, which is what I expect. Have a good night, perchance you'll dream of eliminating all the extreme leftists who are letting in the barbarians.

Fair point. I have ideas on that too, but I work early and hard so I am much too tired to articulate now. Some day maybe. Have a good night.

That's simplistic, imo.

Strawman argument. Nobody has ever claimed that Muslim countries are gay friendly or that there aren't serious human rights issues in Muslim countries. But that's also true for plenty of other countries, including Christian majority countries and secular countries, so the notion that Islam is somehow special in creating these kinds of countries isn't supportable. If these kinds human rights issues only existed in Muslim majority countries, then you'd have a case that its because of Islam It can certainly be said that Islam supports those kinds of beliefs, just as other religions do when in the right hands, so to speak.

Islamophile is incorrect in my case. I don't love Islam; what I love is Canadian culture, which doesn't accept dehumanizing rhetoric directed towards specific groups.

1. More women are wearing hijabs; burka wearing has remained constant according to the survey you posted some time back. 2. As public sentiment against Muslims imcreases, driven by the kind of rhetoric you and Goddess and DoP like to push, hijab wearing increases. 3. When bans against face coverings are implemented, sales of niqabs go up. I have posted links to all of this. I suppose if you and Goddess were the least interested in reducing niqab or hijab wearing, you'd jump at the chance to learn more or at least consider that information in your worldview. Also, other research suggests that its the young men of the second generation of the more progressive immigrant Muslims who are more likely to become radicalized, along with new converts. They know less about the religion generally and are more easily swayed to the DoP version of Islam. The ones raised by more devout Muslims know that murder is frowned upon, that jihad is not a physical fight but a spiritual one.

If thats what was happening then sure. But its not. If Trump is called out and condemned for saying "Mexicans are murderers and rapists" because it uses the worst examples of Mexicans to define all of them, then why shouldn't anyone else be called out and condemned for doing the same with Muslims?

I will certainly continue to call you out for demonizing Muslims using your exact words.

I remember that conversation. I did not call her a "liar". I asked you some questions for clarification, and agreef with you that it was unacceptable. I also said that other Muslim women have different experiences and then provided an example. But if you want, you are welcome to post exactly what I said. Maybe I did say she was a liar and I've forgotten. I see hateful comments from Muslims online a lot. What I also see are many Muslims chastising the ones who express hateful things. Usually, the chastisers outnumber the hater. Especially on Nat Daily, I have seen that over and over. I see the same thing on other sites, Muslim Alarmists saying hateful things about Muslims and being chastised by reasonable people. But where are you when hateful things are said about Muslims? From what I can see from your behavior on this forum, you are right there clapping. Maybe you could try showing her a few of Argus' posts, when he refers to Muslims as backward, barbaric, unable to change, goat herders, universally misogynistic, gay killers. Or how about some of DoPs proclamations that unless a Muslim is actively a violent Jihadist or planning to be, they are not a "real Muslim". Or that Muslims lie to mislead us and so any Muslim who espouses progressive values is lying. Have you shown her any of those posts?

I am tired of accommodating you by ensuring the words I use are gentle enough for your sensiblities, apologizing whenever you whine, putting up with endless lies, being accused of hating Canada, wanting to turn Canada into a third world country, being told my family lies. I am tired of accommodating you. You think Islamic extremism, as evidenced by the Burka or niqab, should not be tolerated in Canada at all. You have that right. I think that rhetoric that seeks to demonize one single group should also not be tolerated in Canada, whether that rhetoric comes from Muslims targetting Jews or Canadians targetting Muslims. You know that is what you are doing or you wouldn't get so pissy when you get called on it.

You sound a little hysterical. And, you were the one who flat-out stated that women in Islamic societies could "never leave the house" without covering. Don't use absolutes if you don't want people to think you mean "everybody". Good enough point. But as I wasn't sure in your original post if you meant it was a "legal" requirement or a social one so I covered both. I even agreed with you that in some places there is very strong social pressure to cover and that virtually every woman did. But its still not true that women can never leave the house uncovered in Islamic society, which is what you claimed. You should own your mistake instead of insisting that I am wrong. Not exactly. I have doubts about some of the sources used regarding Muslims in Europe. I don't believe I've discounted anyone's personal experiences, or called them/their families liars when they've related them, as has happened to me. If I have dismissed someone's personal ecperience here, that was wrong of me and I apologize. I have stated multiple times that I know my family doesn't comprise the entirety if either Egyptian society or Islamic belief; nonetheless I am constantly accused of claiming my family defines both. I merely present them as alternates to the claims presented here - such as women in Islamic societies can never leave the house uncovered. Or that Muslim men believe in beating their wives as an article of faith. Or that Muslims hate Christians. Etc.

I have said, many times over, and here I am saying it again because you are such a slow learner: 1. Generally, Muslims who come to Canada are more conservative in their social attitudes than secular Canadians and even most Christians. 2. The longer Muslims are here, the more they accept our more progessive values, as have all immigrants to Canada, until they are virtually indistinguishable from Canadians. Of course this is not absolute, but decades of studies demonstrate that its pretty reliable. And recent surveys of Muslims in Canada indicate it is happening among themnas well. 3. I did once say that I thought everyone who committed an act of violence must be mentally ill in some way. After some discussion with some reasonable people, I backed off on that a bit. 4. I believe our system does a good job of screening out criminals from other countries. I know its not perfect, and I understand illegal border crossings make it more difficult. I think its unreasonable for the Muslim Alarmists to act as if Canada is coming to an end because a few Muslim people committed crimes in Canada, out of the millions who are here. 5. I fully expect the law to take care of Muslim criminals, just as they do non-Muslim criminals. I do not think they are special or require any reduction of consequences even if things are done differently in their home country. 6. I have never said that I don't care who comes here or what they did in their own country. I have said I trust our immigration system and so far, it seems to be doing a reasonable job. We may differ on that, but that doesn't mean I don't care who comes into Canada. 7. I also don't care what non-Muslims believe, as long as they aren't engaging in violent and/or illegal behavior, or even encouraging hate against another group. My attitude toward Muslims isn't any different than toward anyone else in that regard.

Funny how I quoted your exact words and you still deny you said it. Here are those words again: he should ask his wife which group she would rather live under - Western society or Islamic society where she can never leave the house without wearing a blanket over her entire body and head.  What part of "never leave the house" suggests your statement applies to only some women in Islamic society? There is no place in the world where women are legally mandated to wear the burka (aka blanket over body and head) - not even Saudi Arabia. I couldn't even find a country that mandated face coverings. Yes, social and family pressure in SA and some other places mean women are completely covered and the authorities aren't much interested in protecting women who fail to cover. Yes, thats a problem in those places. However, most "Islamic" societies do not force women to cover themselves in a "blanket" from head to toe socially either. Your claim is wrong on so many levels its stunning. You talk about my sister as if her experiences living in an Islamic society is irrelevant and as if I am claiming her experience is universal. In fact, I use her experience to contradict the broadbrushing of Muslims that happens all too often. Her experience is not universal, but its more typical than you will allow in your eagerness to declaim any shred of humanity within Islam or the majority of Muslims.

Sorry, meant to say that Canada's population in 2016 was 36,290,000 and that is the latest figures I could find So, in 2011 there were 1,053,945 Muslims in Canada. Assuming, as you do, that 100,000 per year remained steady, then by 2016 there were 1,553,945. Canada's population in 2016 was 36,290,000. That works out to about 4% of the population, an increase of .80 percent, roughly. Part of the problem I see with your calculations is that you don't seem to be accounting for Canadian population growth, outside of Muslims immigrating. Canada has been accepting between 250,000 to 300,000 immigrants per year since about 2002, and between 200,000 and 250,000 between 1992 and 2002. If we're bringing in 1 Muslim person for every 1.5 or 2 or even 3 "others", then Muslims are not going to be increasing their numbers against the 'rest of Canada' at anything near the rate you suggest. If anything, I would say their percentage of population would be reduced as Canada's population increased, unless their immigration levels increased significantly and they comprised more than half of all immigrants. So, your assumptions and conclusions just don't seem credible to me. Not quite. These believes are specific to Muslims who believe that Sharia should be the law of the land. The perentage of Muslims who believe Sharia should be the law of the land ranges from 12% of the population to 91%. Thus, the survey tells us this: Pakistan is the most supportive of Sharia Law and corporal punishment at 91% and 88% respectively. Thus, 80% of the population believes that death to blasphemers/whippings and removing of hands for thievery is acceptable. In Egypt the numbers are 74% for Sharia Law, and 70% of them believe in corporal punishments: 51% in total. In Tunisia, it's 56% pro-Sharia, and 50% of those for extreme punishments, for 25% of the total Muslim population. And, as I have said before - that's bad. Still, there appears to be a huge difference among Muslims about all of this, a fact you seem to forget often and it's not nearly as pervasive as you keep claiming. Remember that it's this kind of hyperbole and misstating of surveys is why I keep calling BS on your claims. You, and others, keep assuming that you are such an expert on other people that you can determine, with certainty, that what someone is wearing defines exactly what they believe. Funny, no matter how often I provide cites and data to back up what I say that contradicts your claims, you continue to claim I'm saying completely different things. Except, I don't say what you keep claiming I say. I refuse to be buffaloed by you or anyone else into becoming a "Muslim Alarmist". Use facts, drop the scare-mongering and hyperbole, and maybe we'd find some common ground somewhere. Or maybe not.

Oh I forgot how limited your ability to comprehend the written word actually is. Let's recap: Here I define who I am talking about: Funny; my sister lives in an "Islamic society" Next, I describe her lack of "extremist" dress in an Islamic society and doesn't even cover her head, never mind her face. She certainly doesn't wear a "blanket" over her body. I then talk specifically about her sisters-in-law: Even one of her sisters-in-law, raised Muslim in Egypt, goes bareheaded in Western clothing, in public! I understand that its the next line confused you, despite there being no indication that I had stopped talking about my sister and her sisters-in-law, so I will simplify it for you: The rest of her sisters-in-law wear a headscarf in public; none of her sisters-in-law wear burkas or niqabs. Of course, this was in response to your statement that a woman living in an Islamic society must always wear a blanket over her head and body. he should ask his wife which group she would rather live under - Western society or Islamic society where she can never leave the house without wearing a blanket over her entire body and head.  Pointing out to you that women do leave the house without "wearing a blanket over their body and head" doesn't mean "nobody" does. It does mean that your claim that women "can never" leave the house unshrouded in Islamic society is wrong.

The 3.2% is from 2011. In 2016, the last year for which I could (quickly) find figures, it was 4%, an increase of less than 1% over 7 years. Note too, that the concern is over extremists driving this change, not regular Muslims (or so its claimed) ie. women who wear niqabs/their menfolk. That is a very tiny percentage of all Muslims in Canada. But hey, if you enjoy practicing hyperbole and BS to support your Alarmist agenda, who am I to stop you? Its a free country, after all, where we don't stop people from believing any kind of ridiculousness they want, even if it's intended to stoke fear and outrage over a particular group.

Funny; my sister lives in an "Islamic society" and doesn't even cover her head, never mind her face. She certainly doesn't wear a "blanket" over her body. Even one of her sisters-in-law, raised Muslim in Egypt, goes bareheaded in Western clothing, in public! The rest wear a headscarf in public; none wear burkas or niqabs. Its ridiculous and hyperbolic statements like the above that persuades so many people that the Muslim Alarmists aren't quite in touch with reality and their claims of "cultural disaster because Muslims" lack credibility.

That makes me happy.

Education isn't and shouldn't be the only determination of wages. If you devalue the work the policemen, firefighters and paramedics do, then who do you suppose will be doing them?

You are the one who said "they don't exist". I provided proof they exist. I'm not the the one who lost.

Its only "ridiculous" because it proves you wrong when you that Michael could not have seen Nuns in face coverings because they never had face coverings. The rest of your comments are merely blah blah blah to hide how wrong you were, since I made no analogy whatsoever, merely pointed out that Nuns did and some still do wear face coverings.

It was common for Nuns to cover their face in public throughout history and some Orders still do. In 2011, such a Nun was removed from a plane for looking too Muslim. How will you ever learn anything new if you assume people are "misconstruing" things you simply don't know about?

Yes, I do think the conversation has gone very similarly there and here. I think the anti-Muslim rhetoric started in Europe and crossed to North America through the alt-right. I have read, and posted here, counter arguments from Europe, including indications that bans increase the wearing of niqabs/burkas and give extremists fodder for propaganda and radicalization. When France implemented their ban, there was a spike in young men travelling to Syria and there was obvious use of the niqab bans in pushing the rhetoric that the West wants to destroy Islam. ISIS was very happy about the bans, I guess, because it helped their cause. Who ever rises behind ISIS will likely be equally pleased. I think the motivation among people is fear of extremism, fanned by right wing nationalists. I think the motivation of politicians when they pass these bans is to offer a kind of sop to those fears, pull the teeth of right-wing parties and keep them out of power.