Goddess

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/25/news/economy/mexico-us-wto-tuna/index.html Maybe the WTO will rule in our favour over the lumber, too?

Ya, it's great that our system can be questioned. If foreigners want to dispute it, then they should pay for it. Also, it's disrespectful. It's like inviting a visitor into your home and the first thing they do before even saying Hello is start complaining about all the things they don't like about your home. Not off to a great start of a relationship, don't you think?

Do you have anything to say on the topic here or what?

Take it to one of your loony topics, please.

We didn't stick up for the Jews. I felt awful about it when I found out.

Found this interesting article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/a-distinctly-canadian-oath-ill-swear-to-that/article20075956/ I have a bit of an issue with potential citizens who try to legally change the oath before they are even citizens. I think it's very disrespectful. And we pay for this nonsense.

Not natural born Canadians.

Thanks.

Are those duties spelled out somewhere or they just sort of implied, like the original article points out? I'm wondering if they should be spelled out.

I see what you're saying. I agree it would be difficult/not appropriate to make some of these responsibiities legally binding. I'm just wondering if there should be some responsibilities outlined and communicated to new citizens. It would impress on them that this isn't a free ride and that they are expected to contribute certain things to their new country.

Are there responsibiities of US citizenship? It seems like you are saying rights are given without any attendant responsibilities, or at least that the responsibilities are Meh.....not really a concern?

Thanks for reading the article and your well-thought-out, intelligent reply.

This may be what the witness saw, but I believe this was the beginning of the attack they saw, not the end. It was a 40 minute attack. The males were not "taking her to safety". Quite the opposite. Really surprised anyone would prefer the narrative that she made it up. But then, I did read her account and the accounts of those with her. And my first reaction to a woman's rape experience is not to suggest they are lying.

My distaste is that the articles are typical victim blaming - "I didn't see anything bad happening so therefore she is lying." and "She shouldn't have been there in the first place, therefore deserves what she got." Why would you hope that she is a liar? Maybe read her account and the account of those who were with her. This person may not have seen all of what happened, but her rescuers confirm she was naked and beaten and only she herself can say whether she was penetrated once or mulltiple times. She was hospitalized and couldn't work for many months. Why would a reporter who had previously sympathized with Muslim struggles make this up? Why would you say you hope she's a liar? I'm surprisednotsurprised by your comments. Could it be that you prefer the liar version because it fits the view you prefer of Muslims? I prefer to believe her, not because of any view of Muslims but because I see no reason why she would have lied. Or why those with her would have supported her in lying.

I was thinking of this in light of all the topics on immigration, etc. Immigrants seem to be very well versed on their "rights" when they get to Canada, but how many give attention t o what their "responsibilities" are as Canadian citizens? Perhaps it's because we are quick to inform new citizens/immigrants of their "rights" and kind of gloss over the "responsibiity" part. This is an American article but I think the same responsibilities and duties would apply here. http://www.artofmanliness.com/2016/09/26/citizens-bill-responsibilities/ It's an interesting discussion of democracy, too, and the rights and duties of being part of one.

https://temorisblog.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/rape-women-stripped-what-really-happened-to-lara-logan/ https://temorisblog.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/lara-logan-and-cbs-dont-care-about-racism-theyre-not-helping-the-womens-cause-either/ It seems this person witnesses part of what was going on and didn't see anything too bad, so.... This person also objected to it being called a "rape" and goes on to state reasons why Lara Logan shouldn't have been there in the first place. I want to be clear here: I DON"T AGREE WITH THESE ARTICLES CALLING INTO QUESTION WHAT THIS REPORTER WENT THROUGH, NOR DO I AGREE THAT THIS WAS NOT A TECHNICAL RAPE, NOR DO I AGREE THAT SHE DESERVED IT BY BEING IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME. I'm sorry I have to dignify this by posting the links for you.

I did actually just find an article that says she is lying about the whole thing. Not sure why a woman who was always talking and reporting on the plight of innocent muslims in their struggles, would want to make up such a story.

Another brief foray into this and I am unable to find anything that says this is made up by the right wing. So far, I've seen a couple of articles that object to it being called a "Rape" game, since after the women are stripped, they are mostly (mostly) penetrated in all orifices by fingers and hands and various objects. I would still call this rape, so you and I will have to disagree on this one.

Maybe google Muslim Rape Game and see what you find.

Apologists for Islam may reluctantly admit that Islam has these beliefs of gender inequality, homophobia, blasphemy, etc. but keep trying to say that Muslims rarely act on these beliefs, so the beliefs are therefore benign. But when I see the mass rapings that have gone on in Europe, where 2000 Muslim men decide to rape a woman for "fun", (And yes, I realize not all 2000 of them did the physical act of rape, but they were all aiding and abetting it, that's for sure) it seems to me that given the opportunity, most Muslims will quickly drop the charade of embracing Western values. Now, those beliefs don't seem so benign......

Why do you support 2 sets of laws in Canada - one for Canadians and one for Muslims?

It seems like the only discussion of islamic extremism that you would consider "rational" is if the focus of the conversation is not on Islam but on other extremism or problems.

I notice you have the problem of Islam extremism in quotes. It doesn't seem like you think there is any problem with Islamic extremism; or at best, you feel it's a very minor problem. I'm wondering why you feel that the problem of Islamic extremism (which I feel is a larger problem than you do) should never be discussed without discussing problems in every other religion. How does acknowledging a definite problem in Islam (and yes, I get that you feel there is no definite problem with extremism in Islam) equate to "ignoring" other problems. You're like the men at a breast cancer rally who screech "Yeah, but what about prostate cancer? Why are you all ignoring that?"

This part of the article: .....is exactly what I was trying unsuccessfully to explain to Dialamah. The article she posted illustrated this point perfectly. The level of cognitive dissonance needed to say that values such as opportunity, justice, fairness, equality are exclusively "Islamic" values, not "Western" ones and in the same breath admit that almost no Mulsim country practices these, and few Muslims practice them until they get to Western countries.......what can you do but SMH.

We're not talking about where various religions want to worship privately. No one is talking about or even advocating preventing any religion from praying. Nice try, though.