dialamah

It"s the Quebec gov who says this law is to support secularism and has nothing to do with oppressed Muslim women. What don't you understand about the oppression of dictating what women can wear, whether you are her husband or her government.

Remind me how wearing a burka is like sacrificing babies, again?

Yes, it is. That doesn't give us the right to oppress women in the opposite way. Yes, and now those women in Quebec have even less choice, two oppressors instead of one. Good thing there are so few of them, or they might be able to complain enough to be heard. I agree, these are ugly outfits. I've seen maybe a half dozen in Surrey in the past couple of years, and really dislike them. Yes, oppressive regimes love to tell women what they can and cannot wear, where they can go and what they can do.

I agree. The government dictating what a handful of women may not wear is oppressive to those women.

So we'll soon see laws banning turbans and yarmulkes, right? Not to mention those oitfits worn by Mennonites and Nuns. What about Buddhists monks in their robes - should not that be outlawed in public in the interests of secularism?

I think its a bill that will affect the least number of voters, but pander to those who lack perspective and critical thinking skills. It doesn't improve security by one iota, but it does appease the fearful by targetting a few women. Bill 62 attempts to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. An Environics study shows about 3 per cent of Canadians who are Muslim wear a niqab in public. The numbers in Quebec are not known but it’s also expected to be minuscule https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/10/18/quebec-and-its-niqab-legislation-needs-to-stay-out-of-womens-closets-paradkar.html

So you admit you have said those things I listed. Your evidence doesn't make what you say less of a complaint. Your complaints mostly apply to non-white people, You have admitted that I am right about what you believe and what you have posted. Clearly, I am not lying through my teeth.

Rich Conservatives, how else?

Are you denying that you regularly complain that immigrants from non-European countries: - Lack economic value to Canada; - Fail to fit-in culturally and socially; - In the case of Muslims, present a particular threat to Canada due to misogynistic and violent beliefs? Those are not things you believe and you have never said anything like that? I am sorry you have nothing to counter my evidence other than bluster and name-calling.

You do quote stuff, to support your complaints. But they are complaints nonetheless, and they are unending. You also fail to give any credence to any data that contradicts your complaints. Where have I called you a racist?

Maybe you could stop with the insults.

Crime worries people. In my townhouse complex people regularly break into garages, cars and storage lockers, take things from front yards and balconies. People are not saying ... "Its just property crime, doesn't matter".

I am not a liar. You claim immigrants and refugees from countries that are not English speaking, from European origins do not fit in economically or culturally and, if they Muslim, are a threat to our way of life. You have repeated this endlessly in various topics, over and over and over. Stop with the insults. Only someone of limited intelligence needs to bolster their argument with insults and I know you are smarter than that.

Read your comments in those threads; they are full of negative stereotypes about refugees and immigrants that aren't of white European descent. Constant complaints about how they don't fit in, don't contribute economically, are a threat to our culture. Many other posts in threads not started by you, express the same negative stereotypes. My claim is proven; deal with it. Back to name calling, are we?

Matter of opinion. To me, the non-divine explanation makes more sense.

You'd lose that bet. Yes it does. Property crime affects more people than violent crime, so the rates of property crime in a neighborhood do matter. Not to mention, criminals tend to begin their career in petty crimes, including property crime, before graduating to violent crimes so your attempt to wave this study away as irrelevant fails. In any case, Figure 7 in the study graphs both property crime and violent crime over the same time period, and they both follow the same path. Yes this is correct, and the tendency of successive generations to match the crime rates of all Canadians was mentioned in my post. Even so, there is no indication that they surpass the Canadian population. As to correlation does not equal causation, this is correct. On the other hand, the same data is repeated over many years, two countries and several communities. And it's certainly more reliable evidence than some pictures that change on a monthly basis. And finally, what is another variable that could account for the drop in criminal activity in neighborhoods where new immigrants settle? In any case, here is a more complete examination of the evidence demonstrating that immigrants do not increase crime rates. It's only 18 pages, quite interesting - especially where it examines the question of why people so readily assume that immigrants bring crime. Yes, this is the weakest of my evidence I think, but only because of it's age. There is enough time between then and now that second generations of immigrants will have grown to adulthood, and it would be interesting to know if there was a resulting increase in jail populations. On the other hand, the study linked above suggests that immigrants in the States are over-represented, not because they commit more crime, but because they are targeted more and because the justice system treats them more harshly. Yes it is, but it also makes the statement that immigrant youth are no more likely to be involved in crime than other Canadian youth. Then we agree that immigrants do not increase the crime rate. Excellent.

You.

Reasonable, I appreciate that. Yes, the study from Corrections Canada is 2006, I think - so perhaps things have changed somewhat. But it's still not that old, so I think it has some value. Perhaps there will be another one some day - I think there needs to be more focus on who does what if only to more effectively address problems. And I too am surprised that so many "white" guys appear on BC's most wanted list - I would have expected more from the Indo-Canadian community. So does the lack of Indo-Canadian faces/names on that list mean that there are really less criminals among the Indo-Canadian community, despite the constant stream of shootings in the lower mainland, almost all with Indo-Canadian names? Is the disconnect a result of media bias? Or maybe my own bias? It's just really hard to tell. When I look around at my neighborhood, I see a lot of non-immigrant people on the street and assume they are engaging in petty crime. The BC's most wanted list has some pretty sad-looking people on it, career criminals and career drug users too, by the look of them. But ultimately - I don't believe immigrants drive up the crime rate - it has been falling for decades now - but I suspect they engage in different crimes than non-immigrants, and perhaps have a different "crime-culture" if that makes sense. It would be interesting to know if that's true, and maybe it is known somewhere.

It's interesting how people who are constantly complaining about 'non-whites' and how they are ruining 'white/western society' accuse those who do preach and practice acceptance, inclusiveness and equality for everyone of 'self-loathing'. I only see loathing coming from one 'white' group, and it isn't the progressives.

But not in BC, where 34 of the 41 on our *current* most wanted list appear to be of European background, whether distant or or close. Last year, during the same debate it was a little closer to 50/50, with non-immigrants still outnumbering immigrants. Also, last year, I did the work and posted the 'most wanted lists' for each province across Canada and found that in most provinces, European non-immigrant looking people outnumbered immigrant-looking people, except in Alberta where the First Nations were highly represented. Ontario, including Ottawa, was the only province where immigrants outnumbered non-immigrants. Clearly, these lists change over time. I know exactly how the studies I cited could be more effectively rebutted than by "pictures", but it seems you guys aren't really going to try that hard. That's ok, though.

And they aren't allowed to establish "White identity" either, because if they "look" native, they are "treated" native, regardless of how or with whom they were raised.

Yes, I did. And I still think they counter the argument that immigrants drive up crime rates. You posted some links to 'most wanted' lists, which I have already pointed out change over time and according to location. Regarding the "Most wanted terrorists" list you linked to: I feel I must also point out that despite the title of the article "Most wanted extremists in Canada", many of those people are not even in Canada. I'm inclined to think that there should be more robust investigation into such people, but then again - where do we draw the line between adequate surveillance and investigation, and accusing, watching and arresting people who are innocent?

According to me? I didn't author the studies I cited.