WestCanMan
-
Posts
18,336 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
87
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by WestCanMan
-
-
5 hours ago, GostHacked said:
Israel was wiped out once. It CAN be wiped out again. But does that mean it SHOULD be wiped out? I'll wait for you and Dog to shove words into my mouth YET again.
You seem to think that talking about things like "eradicating Israel" and "wiping out Israel" and the fact that "Israel was wiped out" before is ok if you just fall a bit short of actually promoting genocide. It's not as cute as you think. It's actually a really sick little dance that you are doing. You have no clue how evil those events actually were.
mohammed himself presided over the beheadings of approximately 800 Jews (the Banu Qurayza - google it) when they refused to convert to islam. Their wives and children were forced into rape-slavery.
They have done this to over 100 million people in the 1,400 years since, and they still did things mohammed's way in this decade, in Syria.
That is the method by which Israel was wiped from the map. What you are accusing Israel of is a total joke by comparison and it's really pathetic that you would talk about muslim-style eradication.
-
2
-
-
On 11/17/2018 at 1:22 PM, eyeball said:
This is strictly about people being assholes.
We should simply have two signs in Canada to deal with this, one that reads 'Don't be an asshole' for new arrivals and one the reads, 'See you later asshole' for assholes we kick out.
We should have a sign that says "If you're an asshole you're gone" and we should abide by it. But we don't. If we actually did that then there would be no problems.
-
On 4/14/2018 at 2:48 AM, marcus said:
I don't fail to mention it. I have often mentioned Wahabism as being an ugly ideology as well. Both Zionism and Wahabism will trample over other people's human rights for their own selfish gains. One happens to have a much better PR team.
The question is, which one of these ugly ideologies do we support? Unfortunately, at the moment, Canada supports Zionism and very recently, they are supporting Saudi Arabia, through selling military vehicles. Saudi backs its crazy, uncontrollable dog, who creates chaos in the Middle East, ISIS. Not to mention Saudi's crimes against humanity in Yemen.
Zionism and Wahhabism are completely different.
To understand zionism, think about how badly muslims would want mecca back if it was taken over by a different culture/religion. Taking back what's actually yours, or something that you at least have some form of credible claim to, isn't as evil as killing people to take what's theirs by right. Zionism used to be really evil, when the land didn't actually belong to the Jews and they were committing war crimes and making deals with evil people to get it back. Zionism has changed into protecting the land that they have now which is far less "evil". It's actually "normal". Just like the Saudis would protect Mecca, and the actual families living in Saudi Arabia.
Wahhabism is entirely different. Think more along the lines of what "zionization" would mean. No other belief system, rules of law, or bills/charters of rights would be allowed to exist anywhere. Jewish law would control everything, everywhere around the world, on penalty of death and the enslavement of your children.
-
3 hours ago, GostHacked said:
Correct. So to say there were Isrealis (aside from the ANCIENT Isrealis) before 1946 is a false notion.
At no point did I ever say that Israel was there before 1946.
I'm well aware of their dark history, their major shortcomings from back in that era, the terrorists that they elected still honour with holidays to this day, whose side they fought on in WWII, etc. I doubt that you could surprise me. Remember I said that I was pro-Palestinian before (but I never at any point a proponent of genocide, which I'm now realizing you guys are. I was in favour of a return to the 1967 borders but I see the geographical folly of trying to defend a nation that's only a few kilometers wide against several countries). Unlike you and eyeball I'm not afraid of cognitive dissonance.
IMO, after consideration of the recent & distant past and everything in between, the current state of Israeli continuing to exist is by far the lesser of two evils.
Just look at the entire 1,400 year history Islam and you'll see that islamic state isn't an aberration. They're more of a continuation. Judaism has it's share of massacres as well. It's literally a big sandbox over there, and you can try to pick a side but you can never really vouch for either of them 100%.
-
1 hour ago, GostHacked said:
Where did I say any of that?
QuoteIt was done once, it can potentially be done again.
Dog on Porch just got you to say it. Apparently he's 3 steps ahead of you.
-
4 hours ago, eyeball said:
Well, I'd say that's your problem right there.
I’m ok with not knowing every possible meaning for every idiom in the English language.
You’re ok with people hinting at genocide.
I think that only one of us really has a “problem”.
-
40 minutes ago, eyeball said:
Yes it seems like a pretty weasely thing to do alright.
Only to people who pay attention to weasels blowing whistles.
And you people actually expect politicians to sort this nonsense out. That's what's really funny.
I don't know if dog whistling is always "evil" or "weasely", but in this context it is totally evil. It was a sheikh, ie a leader of men, referencing religious texts which call for genocide on a massive scale.
Enough people pay attention to weasels blowing whistles that they elected Mohammed Morsi as president of Egypt. That's a lot of weasel susceptibility imo. And Egypt was considered to be one of the more moderate muslim states for a very long time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Morsi
Morsi has referenced the "hiding behind trees" phrases as well as:
QuoteMorsi, in September 2010, 2 years before he was elected: "the Israelis are blood-suckers, warmongers, and descendants of apes and pigs"
It's not difficult to see the evil, it's just unusual for politicians to call it for what it is.
-
2 hours ago, eyeball said:
These aren't Betsy's articles however, where in them does it say; death to all Jews? It should be easy to find the point of the OP in the sources used as evidenced for it don't you think?
Referencing the phrase from the hadith about the last Jews hiding behind rocks and trees, and the trees and rocks saying “Oh muslim there is a Jew hiding behind me, come kill him” is a way of saying that everything created by god will turn against the Jews, and there will be nowhere to hide from the final genocide.
You could call it “dog whistling”, ie speaking in code that will go largely unnoticed by people who aren’t familiar with the phrase in question. But it’s considered to be “an explicit message from god that all Jews need to be killed”.
-
2 hours ago, eyeball said:
Map 1 - There was no Israel in 1946.
Map 2 - The partition which created Israel didn’t result in genocide or mass systemic rape, unlike the formation of Pakistan at roughly the same time. But you don’t care about that, you keep failing to chime in on the topic.
Map 3 & 4 - would still be exactly the same as Map 2 if Israel wasn’t getting attacked all the time.
Map 5 - below. Do you see how much room there is in the Middle East for the Palestinians to re-settle to? All of Israel and Palestine make up about 1% of the Middle East. Millions of Syrians already found homes since 2016, when they were fleeing more Islamic genocides. Yet the Palestinians are still in “refugee camps” 70 years later...? They obviously don’t fear genocide. They’re just there to foment hatred. To suck in some haters.
You have 4 maps that you actually understand now. Glad to be of service.
-
On 11/23/2018 at 1:38 PM, eyeball said:
You'd have to ask someone who's actually done that.
I notice Betsy never managed to point out where in the sources she provided where it said the rallies called for the death of all Jews, can you?
If not then wtf are you trying to stand on? A moral perhaps, high ground?
Here's one. This part of the koran refers to a final battle when the Jews are finally wiped out.
You can find all kinds of people who quote that verse, and they aren't just lowly imams either.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/world/middleeast/egypts-leader-morsi-made-anti-jewish-slurs.html
Mohammed Morsi.
There are others. Basically everyone in Iran says things like that at breakfast, lunch and dinner.
These are the people you're supporting. Your homies. The anti-Israel crowd. You're such a great person eyeball. Please frown on us some more. We're not worthy.
-
On 11/23/2018 at 1:29 PM, eyeball said:
No, of course not. In the meantime notice how Israel is in fact eradicating Palestine. Are you actually suggesting you have a problem with that because your stock would definitely go up if you did.
You said you were Trudeau's age? It shows.
Israel isn't eradicating Palestinians at all. Pakistan "eradicated" people. By the hundreds of thousands. Millions. There's a big difference. You must be really mad about that because you're a humantarian, right? Or would it suit you better if the Israelis just killed all the Palestinians and then it could all be forgotten in a few years?
Palestine will be just fine when they stop firing rockets and mortars, blowing up cars, being losers, etc.
When I was younger I actually was pro-palestinian. Then the reality set in that refugee camps are actually just fiction. Those people aren't there because they need to be in refugee camps, they're just there to foment hatred against Israel. It's been 70 years now. Germany alone took in almost as many refugees in 1 years as the total number of refugees in Palestine right now. All of the Palestinians could have found homes long ago.
The people who are using the Palestinians as pawns don't want a decent solution. They want to keep the hatred alive until they finally get the chance to commit genocide just like their prophet did back in the day. You're a tool for the people who want to commit genocide eyeball. A pawn.
-
1
-
-
On 11/16/2018 at 4:06 AM, betsy said:
UK had denied asylum to Asia Bibi. The reason? They're afraid of the reaction from the Muslim community!
If that's true it's utterly pathetic.
-
On 11/15/2018 at 12:42 PM, eyeball said:
These days conservatives have co-opted the term concern to add the same stench of respectability to their racism. Same old same old.
How can a person who supports bigotry/genocide rallies possibly believe they have the moral standing to accuse other people of racism?
-
On 11/15/2018 at 12:34 PM, eyeball said:
Yes but the hyperventilating in this thread is opposed to hostility and prejudice against Israel. See the difference?
I know you don't but it still needs to be asked.
If there was an Israeli version of Al Quds day calling for the eradication of Palestinians that would be just fine too, right eyeball? What about eradicating the muslim population in Canada? Would filling up some body bags with those guys be ok? No, I bet that it suddenly doesn't sound alright to you anymore. That's not because you are "biased", that's because your viewpoint fits way deep into the "bigotry" category.
-
-
The accusation of fascism was serious, so here's another example of Trudeau's fascism, although it has nothing to do with the media:
-
1
-
-
When I said "independent committee" I meant to say "a slap in the face to democracy".
-
1 year before the next federal election and there's another massive bribe coming from the Trudeau government to our nation's broadcasters.
https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/11/21/trudeau-government-announces-600-million-media-bailout/
If you recall, one of the first things that he did after becoming PM was pay off the CBC for their unrelenting, toxic, 3-yr coverage of the $90K duffygate nothingburger. That was a $695M windfall from the libs to the CBC that came from our pockets.
Now, 1 week after Unifors (Canadian Media Workers Union) has pledged to be "the resistance" to our Conservative party our government is giving a $600M "media bailout" to companies that will be selected by an "independent committee". It seems like us taxpayers are once again on the hook for Liberal campaigning.
This is fascism, plain and simple. The government is buying control of the media with our money. If Trump did this there's no doubt that leftists would see right through it, but I doubt that any leftists here will even care.
Re: Unifors:
-
2 hours ago, TTM said:
1. Your entire argument hinges on Trump and Republicans should be allowed go after the racist vote unchecked by the media. Whether you can concoct some sort of equivalent Democrat what-if is irrelevant to the ethics of Trump's actions.
2. lol. You can't tell me which definition of pander I was using. I gave you the dictionary definition I was using
2a. Normally because it would turn off the vast majority of your base opposed to ISIS, as well as independents. Trumps base however seems OK with courting racist voters
3. Agree to disagree
3a. Moving the goalposts. The constitution allows them to protest. Where it went beyond protest he condemned it
3b. lol. Only O.J. knows why Jessica Simpson was stabbed
3c. He stalked Martin. He was told by police dispatch not to follow him shortly before the incident.
4. The race war comments come from the BLM opponents on the right
4a. Analogy: "Fetus Lives Matter" supporters and their leaders sometimes protest, vandalize, issue death threats, and occasionally murder. But both these groups are at their heart about moral/political disputes. They are not hate groups.
5. Yes. Killed with bullets, specifically.
5a. No, 2017 was abnormally low, and I didn't want to appear to be cherry picking, so I gave 2016 as a more typical year
5b. Not always. For example:
https://globalnews.ca/news/4659397/chicago-security-guard-police-shooting-jemel-roberson/
"happens to have a gun on person, but not wielding"?; "registered gun in glovebox"? (to reference an infamous incident); child with beebee gun (to reference another); opened fire before giving the suspect a chance to put the gun down; etc.
5c. opened fire before when wielder is not actively threatening anyone; opened fire before giving the suspect a chance to put the knife down; suspect happened to have a pocket knife but wasnt actually wielding it; etc.
6. Please attempt to recognize subtlety and figure of speech when you see it. Tribalism is hardwired into our genes. Thus colloquially, "we are all a bit racist". Recognizing this and correcting for it when necessary is the direct opposite of wallowing in these thoughts and acting on them
7. Agree to disagree.
7a. Had my father been one of the murdered police officers, I would not have been offended by that speech. I can understand how some could though.
8. You missed my point completely.
1 They didn’t go after the racist vote.
2 I gave you the definition of pander that fit your comment in the context which it was written. Trump didn’t court the racist vote. Stop quoting CNN stooges.
3 a)thoroughly disgusting.
BjThe goalposts aren’t moving. If he makes that speech that ends in “there are a whole lot of great reasons to be out there protesting” it’s not a speech against the riots.
C1)Whatever reason OJ had for stabbing NBS it was illegal. That was a stupid analogy. C2) If Martin was being perfectly compliant, and not belligerent, then Obama made a salient point. There’s zero evidence on the face of the earth that supports his position, and one witness to the contrary. If Obama was wrong then he caused extensive rioting, looting, arson and cop killing for no reason.
4 BLM is all about division and fear mongering, which is actually worse than hate mongering. Humans kill things they fear. Pro life people aren’t racist, BLM is.
5 cop killI got bad. Non-compliant criminals posing a threat to police and getting killed, Darwinism.
6 if Trump said he was a bit racist you wouldn’t be 1% forgiving, and tribalism isn’t racism. Cultural differences are real. Racism is just racism.
8 My point can’t be missed TTM. Giving reasons why random Jews or cops were murdered, at their funeral, is thoroughly disgusting no matter who does it. There’s no reason for Obama to bring up things from 150 years ago when a BLMer or new black panther kills some random cops today.
-
4 hours ago, Rue said:
Trump is a rude insolent swine. He communicates like a dose of syphilis.
Of course Acosta has used rubber gloves.
Trump can not expect respect when he shows none. He has brought the havoc on himself by choosing to be a large a-hole.
Proctology exams are a bitch no matter who does them not just Acosta.
As for Sarah Huckabee she eats new born babies for breakfast. She is one of those monster aliens from Lost In Space. We need Dr. Zachary Smith to deal with her.
Trump is a blowhard. He's a good policy guy though. He was a far better option than the Benghazi bungling, misogynist, monster Hillary.
Acosta is a loser, a liar and a moron.
Unfortunately for you, trump is the Potus and he does deserve respect, even if you don't like him. Acosta has to behave a certain way to sit in the big boy room. Trump actually does, even if you don't like his decisions. The rest of the world put up with "mo arson Obama for 8 years. Time to calm down, stop the rioting for a while. It's been a nice break from all of that.
-
17 hours ago, TTM said:
1. I love that you think the ultimate softball question is a "gotcha" and "pathetic". I love that you can claim Republicans and Trump don't pander to racists, but also think it's unfair to ask him to repudiate an endorsement by a famous white supremacist (of whom he is quite familiar with)
2. pander (verb): to act as a pander (noun)
pander (noun): someone who caters to or exploits the weaknesses of others
He is offering a president who does not dismiss their racist views. He just (wink wink) doesn't know what you're talking about. Pandering.
3. A simple google search returns multiple direct quotes, as does the speech previously posted
4. Because you find their factually correct position politically incorrect does not make them fear mongers. Getting folks worked up about imaginary "race wars" is fear mongering
5. Police killed by citizens:
In 2017, 44 cops shot, 1 stabbed, possibly a handful of "other". This was an abnormally low year, 2016 saw 66 cops shot
Citizens killed by police:
1129 shoting deaths in 2017 (27%black)
170 armed with knife (??% black)
147 unarmed (37% black)
~4000 deaths per year on average in police custody for all causes (but does not include some deaths during attempted arrests due to differing state reporting methods)The majority of the unarmed shootings would be "suspicious", a number of the "armed with knives", a small fraction of the "armed with guns", and a small fraction of the remaining deaths in custody. Best case there is 3-4x more "suspicious" deaths in custody/during arrests than police killed. Worst case is an order of magnitude more.
Note also that there were about the same number unarmed black people shot by police compared to police shot by anyone in 2017
6. So we are
7. Obama said those things. He was also addressing the country regarding all of the events surrounding. As he should.
8. If Trump was the president of Isreal (or Palestine), at a funeral where if was relevant, then no problem. However, while they indirectly support it, the US government or parts of are not involved directly in Zionism or the occupation. In the US, there were no mass protests and riots about Zionism or the Palestinian occupation, and the vast majority of those who get worked up about it are not actually directly affected by it. The Soros conspiracies are made up. There is no reason to bring it up (other than to pander)
1 It's a pathetic question for the reasons I stated. They never ask the Dems to do disavow votes from Antifa, BLM, New Black Panthers, Nation of Islam, etc. Same crap, different pile.
2 /ˈpandər/
verb- gratify or indulgeHe's not pandering to a group by the act not telling them to f off. If I was running for election and returning Isis terrorists wanted to vote for me why should I tell them not to do what would end up being the smartest & most meaningful thing that they had ever done to that point in their life?Pandering would be if he spoke highly of them, or put things in his platform that advanced their cause in a way that was less advantageous to everyone else.Duke is a former Grand Wizard, just like Hillary's mentor and Democrat US Senator Robert Byrd. Did Byrd ever become part of a group that's not racist? Nope. He died a Demorat. So Duke probably still is a racist too.3. Obama's speech in front of those dead cops was disgusting. Every other speech Obama made about rioting was just a bit of lip service with a heaping side of "exactly why the riots are happening in the first place". He never put anything into proper perspective, ever. Instead of "Only Zimmerman truly knows why Martin got shot" he says things like "That could have happened to my son" or whatever. Obama's comment only makes sense if GZ just walked up and shot him for no reason whatsoever. If a confrontation got out of hand, that's something that was within Martin's control.4. Getting folks worked up about imaginary "race wars" is fear mongering. IE, BLM are fear mongers. Thanks for the clarification. Here's a public tweet from one of the Canadian BLM leaders: ""Plz Allah give me strength to not cuss/kill these men and white folks out here today. Plz Plz Plz." 'Splain that bit of racism and division away if you could plz TTM. ....***cue cricket sounds****5. That's not cops "shot", it's cops "killed". Every single one of those is "beyond suspicious".Of course 2016 was an abnormally high year. Thanks to Obama making martyrs of cop killers.Zero percent of armed shootings are suspicious, very few with knives are suspicious, and truthfully, incidents which are initially considered suspicious but are found to not be suspicious fall into the "not suspicious" category.6. Obama can only speak for himself in that regard. He's a bit racist. All his friends and family are a bit racist. You're a bit racist. No surprises there.7. Obama's speech should have been about those things, and those things alone. If your dad was a dead cop laying in a coffin behind Obama would you like Obama to say that your dad and other officers were partly to blame for his murder? Or would you find that disrespectful? What if it was your son laying dead there? "Well, it's kid of his fault for wearing the uniform. They all share a bit of that blame".8. That's neither here nor there. Trump could have referenced actual things that people don't like about Israel. They've had actual terrorists take on leading government roles. And Israel gets billions from America every year. He could have said that "sometimes, some Jews complain about Christmas decorations". That's actually bigotry against Christians by Jews!!!!! AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! The point is there was nothing you could say that has anything to do with the actual killing of a group of random Jews at a baby naming ceremony than blind, stupid, bigotry. That kind of talk would have been intolerable, hateful and unforgivable. There was no good reason to shoot those cops either. There's no reason to reference anything that ever happened in the US, killing those cops was a plain evil act with no mitigating factors. Period. -
9 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:
Well, you are, so it’s not nobody. Of course, the Israelis should not have done that. Technically speaking, I think you’re talking about the events in East Pakistan there rather than Bangladesh which didn’t exist at the time. If you really want to complain about something that’s being undercovered, pick an African country like Congo.
I’m pretty sure that I actually mentioned the Congo on here at some point in the last few weeks. I’ve heard that more people died in their civil war than all the people on both sides in WWI and WWII put together.
-
That's the way things go in that part of the world. 1 million rohingya refugees sounds like a lot but the muslims in pakistan killed more people than that in Bangladesh in 1970.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Searchlight
They even raped between 200,000 - 400,000 women in "a systematic campaign of genocidal rape." (That kind of rape has nothing in common with "non-consensual sex" where a guy gets forceful when his girlfriend just wants him to go to 3rd base. It's when militia members kick in the door and kill the husband and then rape the wife in front of her kids).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_Bangladesh_Liberation_War
That's right in the same neck of the woods that Burma is in. The Burmese even say that a lot of the Rohingya came from Bangladesh at the time of the events above. They know what will happen in areas where they are the minority. It's estimated that muslims have slaughtered over 100 million people in that part of the world since they first invaded India.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, Boges said:
So Reporters can only ask follow up questions if Trump lets them?
Sounds like a transparent government LOL.
It's not Trump's policy. The Whitehouse policy has always been that the President offers a reporter a chance to ask a question and then that reporter gets to ask their one question. It's up to the president who asks the next question.
He does let people ask more than one question, but it's his call. After Acosta got kicked out Trump answered over 60 questions from 30+ journalists. So it almost averaged two per person.
Jim Acosta doesn't give back the mic when he's supposed to, and he doesn't have a press pass so that he can argue with the President. The guy's an ass and this should have happened long ago. Maybe CNN is actually trying to make Trump look classy by comparison by allowing Acosta to be there.
-
1
-
Toronto Al Quds Rally
in Provincial Politics in Canada
Posted
How did it grow eyeball? Did someone attack Israel and then end up getting hoisted on their own petard?
You're asking other people to tell the truth while you're being deliberately misleading.
Israel's land mass went from what, 0.85% to 0.86% of the land in the Arabian peninsula? And now the Palestinian refugees have nowhere to go for the last 70 yrs? Is that your point?
Why are you so fixated on that land? Can the Hindus get back some of their land in Pakistan? Can they get their lives back? Can 70,000 women be un-raped now?
Your humanitarian streak is focused on a very specific group of people. You don't care about anyone else. That actually seems more like bigotry than humanitarianism.