dialamah

Sure but I bet many who voted either NDP or Green are happier with that than Liberal. Only those who voted Liberal are sure to be completely unhappy. You mean like civil war ramifications? Or are you overstating the usual bitching everyone does? Awww. Environmental stewardship be damned, lets not hurt Alberta's feelings. True. No doubt we are in for another election sooner rather than later. I suspect the Liberals would win if that happened, unfortunately.

ISIS Muslim Death Toll Just four Muslims who died fighting against ISIS; there are many more. But as the article also points out -- Western deaths are covered extensively, while Muslim deaths are not, and some of us assume Westerners are the only victims. Same holds true for these news stories: None of them involve the killing of Westerners, so it's not news. 41 Muslim countries form alliance to fight ISIS and extremist groups. Muslim leaders preach against ISIS', get death threats from ISIS 70000 Muslim clerics issue fatwa against ISIS and other terror groups. 100+ British Imams speak out against ISIS There are plenty more examples of individuals, groups and Muslim leaders who are speaking out against ISIS - but if you aren't looking for it, you'll never find it. Instead, you'll continue to assume that "Islam" is doing nothing. But that's not the fault of Muslims; that's the fault of people who are too lazy or biased to look beyond Western headlines.

70 years of research demonstrates that raising minimum wage does not result in fewer jobs. Making the private sector pay people a livable wage reduces reliance on government handouts and actually correlates with an improved economy. http://www.businessinsider.com/minimum-wage-effect-on-jobs-2016-5

Advanced and enlightened people who scream abuse at teenage girls and then kill people who object to such behavior. Yeah, right.

Islam is not a person, nor even sentient; it doesn't have the ability to make or carry out a plan. Muslims all over the world are fighting terrorism through words and actions. Many are dying because of their opposition; many more are simply killed in the crossfire between military powers.

@DogOnPorch @Argus As @Goddesssaid the other day Screw people who think this is post-on-demand; I'll post what and when I want to, and it won't be in response to stupid tricks like DoP is trying.

I have in the past and you dismiss it with something called abrogation, never mind that actual Muslims believe and follow those verses. You've also informed us many many many times that if a Muslim does follow any of the Quranic verses related to peace, tolerance, acceptance, etc., they aren't really Muslims. Your version of Islam is as extreme as ISIS and you attack anyone who fails to accept it.

Nah, you don't have to submit to Islam, all you'd have to do is give up the 'one true' extremist version of Islam you currently preach and start accepting that moderate and even progressive Islam is valid. Then you could fight extremist Islam by preaching the moderate or even progressive interpretations.

1. When Bush invaded Iraq, did those people 'need killing'? When Saudi Arabia kills its own citizens or a few Yemenis with Canadian and US supplied weaponry, is it because those people 'need killing'? 2. Yes, as odd as it may seem to some here I pick "our side" too, but that doesn't mean I must also believe our side's motivations are purer and so the collateral killing and maiming of innocent men, women and children is more acceptable.

Of course you don't want to and you think you do not, but you continue to follow their agenda of creating fear, suspicion and distrust of Islam and Muslims. You are actively destroying the gray area that lets Muslims and non-Muslims live together peacefully in the West. You are making it a black and white issue of us or them. This is what ISIS wants and you are doing it. Their most potent tool in the West is people such as yourself. If you read the article you'll note that this strategy was effective for them previously. In a 2004 letter to Osama bin Laden, Abu Musab Zarqawi, the Jordanian-born leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, laid out his proposal for provoking such a conflict, calling for terrorist attacks against the Shiite majority population that would lead to a harsh crackdown on the Sunni minority. In such a scenario, his group could then coerce the Sunni population into viewing it as their only protector. “If we succeed in dragging them into the arena of sectarian war,” Zarqawi wrote, “it will become possible to awaken the inattentive Sunnis as they feel imminent danger and annihilating death.” The climax of this depraved strategy came in 2006, when an attack by al Qaeda in Iraq operatives succeeded in destroying the Al-Askari mosque in Samarra, one of the holiest sites in Shiite Islam. The attack, which shocked Shiite Muslims across Iraq, ultimately succeeded in triggering a full-blown civil war that has not fully abated to this day.

Really? Innocent men, women and children killed so corporations can continue to make billions selling us shit is more moral than killing in the pursuit of some caliphate? Here are some more acceptable casualties in the protection of profit: Unfortunately, I think we're on this course now and there is no way of changing its direction. Nonetheless I see little moral difference between the motivations of the US and allies and that which drives ISIS. The comforting lie that we're fighting the 'evil of terrorism' even as we supply arms and political support to SA just doesn't cut it for me.

Whilst you are a supporter of ISIS agenda to destroy peace between Islam and the West. A foot soldier of ISIS, you've traded logic for fear and rationality for hate. Read about your task here:

My battle is with those who pursue an agenda to create or increase hatred and fear regardless of religion or nationality. I feel the same way about the innocent people who die due to terrorists as I do about the innocent people who died in Iraq or who are dying in Syria due to coalition bombings. No civilian is an acceptable casuality as far as I'm concerned.

I heard it from MSM this morning, news and FB page. Your echo-chamber serms to be isolating you from reality.

Whatever. Your hatred and fear of Islam makes it impossible for you to be rational. Anyway, I'd rather you spew here than assault and kill people, like this guy and this one, or even this guy. These killers hate and fear Islam as much as you do. BTW, your sobs about character assassination are pretty rich given the times you've called me a liar and questioned my patriotism.

I agree, I think Islamophobe is a more accurate word to use.

Read this from a bisexual hijabi woman and then maybe take a good long look at your assumptions about what people you don't know and don't even try to know, think or believe.

A co-worker is Catholic, wears a cross everyday, and attends Church at least weekly. She thinks abortion is a personal choice. Another co-worker attends a different Christian Church and also wears a cross, attends weekly but disagrees with her Churches stance on homosexuality. Assuming you know what someone believes because of what they wear is brainless stupidity.

Its not I who lacks empathy and wit. Its the guy who makes sweepingly negative and insulting statements about Liberals, immigrants and Muslims.

ASSuming you understand a person's thought process and motivation based on what they wear isn't a logical approach to anything except xenophobia.

From the guy who knows, in detail, someone's deepest religious belief based on the location of some fabric.

Is this a mind-reading miracle based on attire, or a sweepingly ignorant generalization based on attire?

Why yes I am. But unlike the average conservatives, I don't have a problem contributing to the well-being of others through my tax dollars. Even people like you.