kraychik

Riots/protests/demonstrations/attacks have taken place around the world in association with this YouTube film trailer, "The Innocence of Muslims". And it isn't just in Muslim majority countries, it's happened in Syndey, Toronto, Paris, Athens, and other cities. And the message is universal: WE OPPOSE FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION. Unsurprisingly, these stories have been largely buried by leftist media outlets. When the stories actually are covered, the leftists (on CNN and MSNBC, for example) entertain the idea that freedom of speech and expression is too broadly protected in the USA and that it needs to be curbed into to acquiesce to intimidation from Islamists. One of many examples: Mike Barnicle Suggests Prosecuting Florida Pastor In American Ambassador's Death http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YV1Mc8z2Wc Christiane Amanpour expressed a similar message when she was on CNN on September 12, questioning the breadth of protection guaranteed by the first amendment with no challenge from her host. Again, the contempt the left has for the most fundamental of all freedoms is on full display all the time.

It's been that way for years. It's not only ideological, either, it's a shared financial and commercial interest. They coordinate with one another all the time. This isn't a secret.

They vandalised the posters. That's clearly suppression of the message and is rooted in a contempt for freedom of speech and expression, which is systemic among the left. It was not a group of conservatives that vandalised these posters. This is another form of suppression of free speech and expression, and is parallel to leftist students who shut down speech from those they disagree with, for example Ann Coulter at the University of Ottawa or Benjamin Netanyahu at Concordia. This is standard fare from the left.

I wasn't addressing you specifically or responding to your post.

Just another example of the left's contempt for freedom of speech and expression.

The idea is to require voters to have some skin in the game. There are invariable problems with extending votes to people who contribute far less than they benefit from government administered programs. It is moral hazard. What you're doing again is proving that you don't actually understand what democracy is, and don't realise that it is an umbrella term under which many iterations exist.

I reply to you when I feel like it. I find you boring, uninteresting, unintelligent, ignorant, and dishonest. And I think you try to hide it under a false veneer of civility. Don't be surprised when I don't reply to you.

Wait... Pakistani Shiah Muslims are more "traditional and extremist" than "average Muslims"? Did our resident communist jacee just make something up for the sake of argumentation that is not only blatantly untrue but smells like a crude and bigoted generalisation? Ironically, she just falsely accused me of doing something similar. The irony of the left never ceases to entertain...

Right, because until there's a peer-reviewed research study on these subjects, reality can't exist. The truth is in front of you, and you're committed to contentiousness so you just bury your head in the sand. You've already made clear that you oppose any screening on the basis of values for people wishing to become citizens, you're absurd position has been exposed, and now you're demanding scientific proof that you know doesn't exist. It's a comment on the leftist nature of the majority of the Canadian media landscape. The story is being ignored, and you're posting a smiley as if what I said isn't true. Media bias is revealed just as much by what ISN'T covered as it is by what IS covered. God forbid someone actually acknowledge the pervasive leftist bias of the Canadian media landscape! It's obvious to some of us, but that doesn't seem to include you.

Where did I do that?

Of course, none of the above is true. It's actually the exact opposite. Again, thanks for the quote. It really tells us all we need to know about your credibility on this issue. The Muslim Brotherhood is all about theocracy, ergo, they are Islamists. The term "Islamist" has a well-established definition. Looks like you get your (mis)information from the same source as Obama's chief security advisor:

Your position was clear after your initial post. You do not want any screening criteria to be implemented for new immigrants which would take into consideration their values. Member of the Nazi party? Come on in. Member of the Muslim Brotherhood? No problem. Member of your local chapter of the communist Worker's Party? Welcome. And why do you support this? Because we can't establish a foolproof system. Ever heard the phrase, "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good?". Or to put it another way, you want to burn down the entire system for a few exceptions that fall through the cracks. There's no question that we have plenty of Canadians who subscribe to a set of values that are antithetical to freedom. I'm talking about immigration and "multiculturalism" policies as they pertain to this threat. Why in the world are we increasing the number of Canadians that are hostile to the most basic freedoms of our democracy: those of speech and expression? Answer: Because of people like you. There's nothing "conspiratorial" about it. The CBC and the National Post, and I'd guess the majority of the Canadian media landscape, have completely ignored these events in Toronto over the weekend. What's ridiculous is the truth.

In other words, you don't think there should be any added criteria when it comes to screening applicants for residency/citizenship into Canada that take into account the candidate's set of values. Keep bringing 'em in! As far as the CBC goes, it's completely ignored this story. As has its ally the National Post. These events happened over the weekend. Not sure what you're rolling your eyes at.

Thanks for this gem. I'm adding it to my signature.

Which people?

There was a protest at the American consulate in Toronto from Muslims who demanded an end to freedom of speech and expression, while also finding a few moments to attack Israel and Zionism with some thinly-veiled anti-Semitism. Why is this important? It reveals how irresponsible immigration policies import people who subscribe to a set of values antithetical to Canadian values of freedom. Couple that with "multiculturalism" policies that actually encourage people to cling to these anti-Canadian values, and you've got a recipe for cultural destruction. Predictably, the CBC and its fellow leftist co-conspirators ignored this story. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgzfxjsly-c

g_bambino - See what I mean? I rest my case.

Looks like I touched with a nerve. The truth upsets you. You really want to go there, though? You want to start posting videos of "Palestinian" kids saying and doing despicable things? Assaulting people, chanting "death to Jews!", dressed up as suicide bombers, etc? There are literally hundreds if not thousands of different videos documenting this that are easily accessible, because it so widespread and systemic in their culture and society. There's really no comparison between Israeli society and "Palestinian" society. There is no moral equivalence.

I gave up on him after having read that last post of his. He's either unwilling or incapable of having a serious discussion. It's just contentiousness for the sake of contentiousness.

You're not a left-winger? Thanks for proving my point that those on the left often view themselves as "moderates" or "centrists". You're objective, unbiased, and fair. You're post-ideology, post-partisan, and you only want to do "what works". Right?

False choice or not, Islamism is the common denominator of all the uprisings in the so-called "Arab Spring". The Muslim Brotherhood is the dominant faction securing control of Egypt, Libya, Yemen, and Syria. These countries are all mobilising towards Islamism, and reasonable arguments can be advanced for placing at least part of the blame for these developments at the feet of the Obama administration.

What's important about the lack of recognition from the so-called "Palestinians" towards Jewish sovereignty in Israel is that it is indicative of their lack of sincerity towards a real two-state solution (more appropriately known as the two-state delusion) for two different peoples (while ignoring the fact that Muslims already compose majorities in about sixty states). They (the so-called "Palestinians") may as well be recognising another Arab or Muslim state, and the reason they refuse to acknowledge Jewish sovereignty is because they cling to this fantasy that they will actualise the so-called "right of return" in order to destroy Israel as a Jewish state and remake it into another failed state populated with "refugees". More fundamentally, they view the entirety of Israel's land as belonging to them, so they cannot recognise Jewish sovereignty over any of the territory.

Notice how leftists like wyly immediately respond to you with the gross term "climate change denier", as if somehow you're to be likened to Holocaust deniers. Pretty disgusting, but then the left is inherently more susceptible to group-think and takes its marching orders from charlatans like David Suzuki and Al Gore.

I already rejected that iteration.

Nobody's judging an entire group of people except you, when you judge all of us of thoughtcrime.