dialamah

Not serious are you? Cause that doesn't even stop normal soldiers who don't want to die, let alone fanatics who are willing to blow themselves up.

Is this your opinion or based on some survey or study that is non-biased with stringent controls? if the latter, please cite.

If an Arab speaking person said about Canada, the US and Europe that we were identical, they couldn't tell us apart, and we all hated Muslims, would that be true?

That is just stupid. We are "ethnically identical" to Americans, Western and Eastern Europeans, Russians, Australians; you can't tell us apart by looking at us. Nonetheless there is a lot of variety in culture, laws and government in these countries. There is a standard Egyptian that is used for written communication, in a similar way that English is used throughout the world for business. English also has different dialects so the English spoken in the UK or Australia is not exactly the same as English spoken in Canada, although English speakers can generally understand each other, even if some effort is needed. There are similar differences in dialects in Arab-speaking countries. Statements like "they are identical and you can't tell them apart" when speaking of millions of people from dozens of countries sound remarkably ignorant and racist.

We do regularly scream bloody murder about government policies that might encourage and support working people having more kids - daycare, maternal and paternal leave, tax breaks, a livable minimum wage.

I disagree, I think it is part of a civilized society to help the less fortunate, but this seems more a moral question that we may as well agree to disagree about. Perhaps I should remember from other posts of yours, but I am guessing that you have no problem with immigrants who arrive by proper channels?

Clarification: If the US was hell bent in returning them to Syria. Or gays back to places like Saudi I woukd be against returning them to the States. Ah yes, money money money, people don't matter.

This is my opinion and has nothing to do with what the US chooses to do, or even Canada for that matter. I don't believe crossing a border should be a death penalty offense, unless we are at active war with a border country.

I don't agree with killing people for crossing the border, but agree that there could be a better way of impressing upon them that illegal immigration will not work. I am not ceryain about the situation in Haiti, I am guessing they are economic refugees rather than war refugees and don't face near certain death if they go back to Haiti. Not sure I would want to send Syrians away if it meant they would be deported back to Syria.

You. All talk, no action and you want the country to support your paranoia and hatred. Me: talk and action, reflecting Canada's tradition of humanity and compassion. You lose.

I would if I could. Still as much as I am able, I am putting my money where my mouth is. Are you making any plans to join the army and go to war in the ME against Islam? Do you privately fund any anti-Islam groups? Attend their rallies and demonstrations?

I am not in Quebec, but volunteered to help when Syrian refugees were coming to BC. Apparently they had enough helpers and a full-time job made me a less attractive volunteee. I also contribute to the private support of a Syrian family. So, are you at the border shooting them?

According to a Reuters story I read yesterday, a bunch of Haitians have been deported in recent months and there is a campaign underway to educate potential illegal crossers that Canada is not really a good option for them. I suspect that people desperate to get out of the States are going to ignore any campaign trying to discourage them, including the possibility of being shot. Consider Mexicans crossing into the States or Syrians getting into leaky boats. Hope fueled by desperation are great motivators.

After shooting their parents in front of them, why not?

Kids too?

I don't imagine you are starving in some embattled area of the world, at daily risk of being beaten, raped, shot, bombed, arrested, involuntarily conscripted, or watching the above happen to your kids/spouse/parents/friends. Your "hell" seems to consist of being unhappy with politicians while you sit comfortably and well-fed in your safe home, protected by rule of law and enjoying all the mod-cons. Some hell. Everyone should share such a fate.

I don't deny that there are a lot of refugees coming into Quebec and that it is causing some local problems - so much that some resources have been moved from other areas - but a 'collapse of the immigration system' doesn't seem to be the least bit factual. The sources I prefer do not use emotional words like "collapse" or "chaos", etc. even when they describe the issues. They also describe steps the government is taking to alleviate the situation - something the right-wing on this board never do. That's why I consider what you wrote hyperbole.

The hyperbole here makes me doubt this ..."Destroyed", "Collapsed", "Shambles" "Chaos" - those are emotionally laden words reflecting a belief; the facts are most likely quite different.

Perhaps if Conservatives stopped maligning Muslims every chance they got, they'd get more votes from them. Anyway, there is lots of talk about how awful it is to allow immigration, but we do have a declining birth rate as do many/most of the European countries from which some people think our immigrants should come. We can't keep our economic engine going without people, so is the idea that we raid European countries for their "educated white" people? Do you think those countries are going to be happy about that? What if they, in return, start raiding us for our "educated white" people? And, what makes anyone think that Canada is such a great place to be that enough people will come from 'preferred' countries to make up our shortfall anyway? Marcus has clearly demonstrated that our immigration system primarily brings in people who can make economic contribution to our country, regardless of their country of origin. Criticizing a policy that focuses on an immigrant's ability to be economically successful because it's letting in too many educated and economically viable people from countries where the skin color is predominantly not-white seems like hidden racism.

Make Your Bed - Advice from a Navy Seal.

If a group of Muslim extremists marched through the street chanting "Allah is Great", brandishing weapons, waving ISIS flags, attacking and fighting protesters and happened to kill a protester what would be the reaction of anyone sane? Do you think anyone would be saying --"Oh, well, Islamic extremists are terrible and we hate them - but the protesters were just as violent and if they hadn't been there would have been no violence and nobody would have gotten killed, so they have to take some responsibility." or "Islamic extremists have the right to march and wave their ISIS flags and brandish weapons and anyone who says otherwise wants to quash free speech". Do you seriously think that would fly? And if not, why should it fly with the alt-right, White Supremacists and neo-Nazis? Then don't discuss with me, problem solved.

Indeed yes, if a counter-protester threw the first punch in any of the altercations, that's on him/her. Who was it standing armed in front of a Synagogue? Who created enough fear in some members of the congregation that they wouldn't come to their place of worship? Who created such concern in non-Jews that they felt obliged to offer to help protect the Synagogue and the congregation? Who called for burning of that Synagogue on their webpages, who marched past, shouting "Jews will not replace us" and "Hey, there's the Synagogue"? Who showed up with guns in the first place? Who yelled "Sig Heil" and who chanted racists phrases as they marched with their torches? Of course, these indications of the racist ideology and violence is ignored by these apologists, who somehow think that standing against these people 'is just the same'. I already posted about the counter-protesters at the base of the statue, rushed and beaten by the alt-right group at least one seriously enough injured that he had a stroke. And of course we all know about the woman killed by an out-of-control alt-right kid, never mind the ones injured in that attack. But hey - "the left threw some punches and stood up against these people - they're just as bad and must hold some responsibility." Contrast with the likely response if a few Muslims marched through the street, chanting "Allah is Great" and displaying bomb vests- these same rightists would no doubt demand they be shot on site - never mind excusing them with "Well, if the non-believers didn't get in the way, they wouldn't be hurt". Just why is it so important to the right that the 'other side' be blamed when the ideology of these groups is supposedly disapproved of by everyone? Why do they want to put so much blame on 'leftists' when the right-wing ideology in the States and in Canada has taken more lives than even Islamic extremists? I do not think all right-wingers think this way - they're probably a minority, although strongly represented on this forum. Trump lost a lot of support when he failed to strongly condemn the Nazi's and White Supremacists for their ideology, and tried to soften and deflect with "the other side was bad too" bullshit. For the rest? They're so busy trying to find fault with 'the left' that they've made themselves stupid.

Apparently so. It's not the Liberals who are arguing that neo-Nazis and white supremacists with guns aren't anything to worry about, that the counter-protestors were at fault and shouldn't protest facists, and that antifa should be a terrorist group.

It is the Conservative who finds losses and hardships to the poor/disenfranchised acceptable, more so than Liberals. Argus posted all about it in a thread not so long ago.