Goddess

He makes some comments that sound good, but as I say - he also is demanding to have contact with his still terrorist family, which belies his claim to want to change. The conditions of his release were that he surrender his passport and not have contact with his family and he is now challenging those conditions. Not indicative of a remorseful man. I'm sorry - I don't have a soft spot in my heart for terrorists, misogynists, and antisemites like you do. He has some proving to do - quite a lot, really. He has wronged the people of Canada, the people of the US and the people of the world in the worst way possible. He has killed people and ruined families. It's going to take more than a "Woopsy-doodle!" apology to prove he's changed. That may be enough for you - but it's not for for many others. And that doesn't make us bad and him good. ETA: One of the concerns I have with the Khadr payout is that it essentially makes it okay for kids under 18 to run around the world killing American soldiers in the hopes of getting that $10 million dollar payout or a chance to rape 72 young women. It's a win/win for terrorists.

I don't see much renouncing in those quotes. The authors of the articles simply state he has renounced. His comments are more like, "Ya, I shouldn't have done that. I deserve to be forgiven." I wasn't supporting Welner, he just made some interesting distinctions between child soldiers and Khadr. Instead of discussing those distinctions, you attack Welner. Oh well. The first thing Khadr did was demand his passport back so he could go to Saudi Arabia (the birthplace of terrorism) and have contact with his still terrorist family. I would think he would want to put some distance between himself and them, but no......he actually wants to go back to the family that taught him terrorism. How do you think that's going to work out?

An American forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Michael Welner, noted these distinctions between Khadr and child soldiers:

He wasn't sent there. He demanded to go fight with his father because he didn't want to be left behind with the women. His 2 older brothers had already graduated from Al Quaeda training and he wanted to be like the rest of his family - terrorists. He has never renounced his terrorist beliefs.

The school-yard version of "I know you are, but what am I?" Thank you for proving my point. Emotionally, you are a toddler having temper tantrums.

I've had to research Emotional Abuse a lot lately for a case I'm working with and everything I read about emotional abusers, reminds me of the things you do/say/behave here. You employ many of the abusive communication styles of a narcissist - name-calling, twisting of words, gaslighting, assigning hostile intentions and motivations where there are none, demanding over-explanations so that you can nitpick, only listening for points to argue, ignoring other perspectives, character attacks, snotty/snarky/snide/sarcastic remarks, unwarranted and off-topic "drive-by" style attacks on certain posters in threads they haven't even commented on....... I hope you are taking out all your ugliness here and not in real life.

I shake my head when you say things like this because you have frequently held Egypt up as a shining example of Islamic moderation and when others point out instances that indicate the "lip service" you refer to now, you call them racists, bigots and Islamophobes (among many other worse names.)

http://www.clsrn.econ.ubc.ca/workingpapers/CLSRN Working Paper no. 135 - Zhang.pdf The studies you refer to specify when they talk about immigrants reducing crime in an area that it is Property crime they are talking about - break & enters, motor vehicle theft, non-motor vehicle theft, fraud and possession of stolen goods. The deficiency with most studies is that it lumps all immigrants together. Immigrants from one country (Korea, Phillipines, etc) can have very low crime rates while immigrants from another country can have very high crime rates. Studies that toss all immigrants together are essentially useless, but I think we all know why stats on country of origin are not included or studied. The study linked above shows on page 35 that young male immigrants increase the crime rate in Canada. The same age group causing problem in countries all over Europe. Fortunately for Canada, we have not opened our borders to illegals to the extent that European countries have, so we are not experiencing the same alarming increases of violent crimes like rapes, beatings of gays, domestic abuse and driving Jews from the country, that they are experiencing in Europe. So far, we are generally selecting immigrants that are less likely to commit crimes in the first place. Some of us would like to keep it that way. Another thing that bothers me in the above study is this line: .....sort of sounds like: Let's fudge things a bit to get a politically correct result.

I think in bigger cities Wally World has Security at the doors? I've seen them nearly at every Wally's, but I've been in bigger cities for quite a few years now.

WalMart has always had security and greeters at their doors and they often check receipts. I don't think it's because of immigrants. Theft and crime on the rise - yes.

AL-AQSA MOSQUE ADDRESS: WE WILL SOON ESTABLISH THE CALIPHATE, LIBERATE JERUSALEM AND CONQUER ROME This mosque is the third most holy site in Islam, said to be where Mohammed ascended to heaven. And this guy: Hizb ut-Tahrir - is an Islamist. What will devoted Muslims all over the world think of this? Well, I know what JW's used to think of pronouncements that came directly from the Governing Body in Brooklyn........the word of God himself.

https://womenintheworld.com/2019/03/11/iranian-lawyer-who-defended-womens-right-to-remove-hijab-gets-38-years-148-lashes/?fbclid=IwAR0eKA2TU4Hhscsfk0w1VB-uHMdbfEOFvTlklyaxWVNsTgToFOlmDkGBAaY

You only need to google Jews in France to see what's going on there. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/04/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/ Rue, I also fear for Jews in countries where large masses of Muslims are re-settling. No one is saying "All Muslims", but Argus is correct - it is a disturbingly large number of them that are openly antisemitic and it is awakening the "sleeping" antisemitism that has been present in Europe since WW2.

The reason you do this - unintelligent responses to an article you didn't even bother to read - is so you don't have to address the issue: The top 10 countries for abuse of women are all Islamic-ruled.

The author's name is at the top of the article in very large letters. When did you live in Cote d'Ivoire? I assume you are extremely familiar with the country to discount what is said in the article - again - WITHOUT EVEN READING IT.

You obviously didn't read the article.

To argue that culture is to blame for things like these and not religion, means you are ignorant of the interdependent relationship between culture and religion. While there is variety in different societies and cultures, you only need to look at the extent to which any given culture gets it morality and ethics from a dominant religion to establish the extent of blame that can be placed on the religion. In those countries, religion is what regulates the culture. The worst nations in the world for gender equality are Islamic ruled. That is the religion that is dictating the values, ethics and morality of those societies. And that religion has an absolute stranglehold on it's people in every country it rules. I don't find it surprising or shocking that the worst countries for women all faithfully adhere to this extremely misogynistic religion.

Reading that made my heart hurt. There are lots of Canadians that appreciate you very much, are grateful and humbled by all of your sacrifices. I'm one of them.

Ukraine is saying the airliner was shot down by a missile. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-51055219

There was all the oil tanker seizures in the Gulf, too. Iran has been escalating hostilities for quite a while now.

i don't know how to make "Do you believe the Iranian government (which you say consists of Muslims) exemplifies Islamic beliefs?" more specific. The question is quite specific. If you don't want to answer it, that's fine. But don't waste all our time by pretending to be stupid.

Wow. It's obvious you deliberately try to be vague. Either you don't really know what you're talking about or you are very conscious of creating plausible deniability for yourself to protect your religion. Then you always have an "out". "I never said that" or "That's not what I meant" It makes you appear dishonest. You said the Iranian government was Muslim, I ask you if you believe that and you ask me how many non-Muslims. Since we are talking about the Iranian government, I assume you are asking how many non-Muslims are in the Iranian government. That has nothing to do with anything and doesn't answer the question. I ask you - If the Iranian government is Muslim, do you believe that they exemplify Islamic values. I don't even know what your reply means. Don't bother responding. I don't think you can give an honest answer if your life depended on it.

You believe the Iranian government is Muslim? Do you believe that the Iranian government exemplifies Islamic values, then?

You are comparing things that are universally wrong and harmful to things that are universally good. Are you saying that an uncovered woman is like a smoker or a liar? That is a judgement on your part. Other Muslims say it is not a command. No. They came there to hear his opinion on that. They basically ask for that information by attending. It would be rare exceptional circumstance where you would be entitled to tell another Muslim what they should or should not be doing. Do Muslims lose their right to privacy and self-determination when they join the religion? I told an experience of a friend of mine who worked with quite a few Muslim women and one did not cover. The others harassed her mercilessly for it and my friend supported her. I was told that that does not happen and that my friend was lying. Now you are saying that Muslims have a right to harass each other for what they do or do not do. ??? You don't know what I know or don't know. My attitude is critical towards all religions because I have dealt extensively with the damage it does to people. Religions all use the same tactics with slight variations on the details. Your's is no different. Well, you and the other one here assume all the time that because some of us are critical of Islam that we randomly go about criticizing and yanking off hijabs....... Is covering a choice or not? If it's a choice, then a woman who is uncovered should be allowed to be uncovered without anyone shaming or humiliating her or telling her she must cover to be saved.

You don't have a right to say that to individuals. When you say they "should" cover, you're automatically making a judgment that being uncovered is inferior. If YOU feel that YOU should cover, you are free to do that. You are NOT free to tell other women that they "should" cover - even other Muslims. Now, "some" people here will accuse me of telling women they should NOT cover. I do not do that to individuals. Here, we are on a discussion forum discussing the very subject and I am allowed to have and express my opinion. The same as you do - HERE you can say that "Women should cover" but you should be prepared to say why and have others disagree. When you tell individual women that they "should" cover, you are both making a judgment that uncovered women are not doing something they "should" be doing AND you are pressuring others to follow what you believe. Have your opinion or belief. But keep it to yourself unless you are asked. Or are on a discussion forum.