JB Globe

I think you're making an enormous leap of logic here based on a casual observation. I mean, can you say you're familiar with the whole notion of a "just war" in the Qu'ran? If not - why would you make this observation to begin with? Also - by your definition, America is a nation that glorifies conquest and war.

Thanks for waving the white flag. What am I? Like 42-1 lifetime against you? Do you know what my secret is? I STUDY THE THINGS I MAKE OBSERVATIONS ABOUT.

Quick question - what kills more people worldwide? Dirty water, or Islamist terrorism?

Scholars of Islam study all of that. And they don't agree with the notion that "Islam itself is evil" This is a very adorable song and dance. Do you practice much?

Really? Quote me on that. I must be a bigot because I've got a problem with Islamism too. This is what I said: "Anyone who believes Islam in and of itself is evil, is a bigot" End of story. Stop acting like a moron, it's embarrassing.

Why Some folks might think that Israel possibly resembles an apartheid state . . . 1. Different rights for different races In the case of Israel, it is different rights for Jews and for non-Jews. For example the law of return of 1950 says Jews can return to Israel and be given citizenship even if they have no links to the country other than mythical biblical ones; whereas Palestinians cannot return even if their parents or grandparents lived there. 2. Separation of so-called racial groups into different geographical areas. Even within the borders of Israel, 93 percent of land is reserved as a national land trust or Jewish National Fund land is for the exclusive use of Jews. The 20 percent of the population that is Palestinians living in Israel have to share access to the 7 percent of private land that is left. The Israeli Supreme Court has made a number of decisions that Palestinians cannot live on Jewish lands. There are not only residential areas that are banned to Palestinians but there are separate roads for Jews and Palestinians. That was never true in South Africa even in times of crisis. Moreover Palestinians have less access to water than Jews living nearby Finally the movement of Palestinians is severely restricted much more so than were blacks in South Africa. The famous pass laws in South Africa meant that Blacks had to show government issued passes to move around but Palestinians are even more restricted by walls and checkpoints and if they live in the Gaza Strip can't leave at all. 3. Security and Repression Matrix of Laws and Security. There was serious repression in the Black townships but there were never tanks or planes buzzing overhead like there is in West Bank. Israeli military violence against Palestinian communities. says Jena, is far worse than anything suffered by Blacks in South Africa during apartheid. If Israel is becoming a pariah in the world it is not because of anti-Semitism, it is because they are practicing a form of apartheid even more egregious than that practiced in South Africa. Others have compiled comments from some of the most respected leaders of the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa who see what Israel is doing as apartheid. There is a reason why the BDS is strongest in South African. People there recognize apartheid when they see it. BTW - I didn't write this, another self-hating Jew did.

Why am I a self-hating Jew? Any coward can toss around insults. Are you man enough to try and back them up? Not "could be," but WILL be. The only thing Barak and the IAW organizers disagree on is the metrics of when a state is an apartheid regime or not. Barak is waiting until Palestinians are in the majority in Israel and the occupied territories, which is about 10 years away according to demographic trends - then it will officially be apartheid for him. For the IAW organizers, it doesn't have to be a clear majority, but an ALMOST majority, which it is now. Barak also has to be inherently more cautious and restrained about what he says because he's a politician, the IAW people don't have to be. Most of the organizing committees have a large chunk of people who are Jewish, and I haven't heard of any such problems, and neither have you, because you're just making things up, because you're an idiot.

Which is why people who actually STUDY Islam as they would study any other social construct view people like Pat Condell, Hirsi Ali, and other bigots as complete morons. They're blatant cousins of White Supremacists.

1 - If you're going to present Pat Condell's ignorant diatribes as informed opinion in this post, you can't turn around and whine like a pussy when someone posts something from a special interest magazine. Be a man once in a while and take responsibility for your own s***. 2 - Why don't you show me where the supposed bias is in these links? Are you being disingenuous so you can avoid dealing with facts that counter your claims? Do you lack the brain power to be able to critique those articles? What's the issue here? 3 - This is just about shooting the messenger (the publication) and not dealing with the facts. ie - You don't have anything to counter that the dean of the school that Sultan attended said that her version of events is wrong, and you challenged me to prove Ali stated that she believes Islam must be destroyed, I proved it, and now rather than deal with something that runs counter to your narrative, you're going to avoid it at all costs. The best part about all this is that you're claiming that the Humanist, a magazine of an ATHEIST social movement is biased against ANOTHER ATHEIST, to the degree where you can disregard anything they say in an article about her. If you're not a complete hack, who is?

Link to an article with more of the quotes. Link to Barak interview by CNN's Amanpour where she asks him about the quote. I remember folks on this website frothing at the mouth when Jimmy Carter said that unless Israelis reach a peace deal with the Palestinians, it will become an apartheid state. Apparently, he was an anti-semite because he read the writing on the wall. I pointed out then that this is nothing that Israelis hadn't been saying for years. Now you have the Defense Minister saying the same exact thing, pointing out this is nothing new. Frankly, no one throws a hissy fit when people say this in Israel, so why do politicians here in NA jump over themselves to condemn things like Israeli Apartheid Week? Is it because they mistakenly believe all Jews are aghast at the suggestion that Israel might be doing something seriously wrong? Or is it because a good chunk of non-Jewish Canadians think they're doing Jews and Israel a favour by being it's Goyim apologists?

This just in . . . Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak hates Jews: Now please, Argus an others can commence with explaining to the rest of us rational individuals how Ehud Barak is actually a self-hating Jew. For the record: I don't plan on attending any Israeli Apartheid week because I don't find them constructive towards peace, not because the central thesis is wrong. Go ahead and give me a Goy's account of how anti-semitic I am.

So you corrected my on your age, but you didn't correct me when I called you immature? Telling.

Why don't you vet people before you put them up on a pedestal? Original link here link Anyone can speak about Islam all they want. But if I want an opinion on Islamic Theology, I'm going to trust someone who's studied the Qu'ran a lot more than I am someone who flipped through the book looking for the bits they could pluck out that justified their prejudiced notion of what Islam is or isn't. That's my point - is that you can't find a single recognized authority on Islam that agrees with Ali's or Sultan's view that "Islam itself is the enemy" and "there is no such thing as moderate Islam" The only people who agree with them are White Nationalists like Geertie. That tells you something.

Of course, anyone who believes that Islam through and through is an evil and destructive force and must be eliminated from the world is a bigot. We all have no problem thinking that of folks who hold those beliefs about Judaism. Same rules apply. The Wafa Sultan phenomenon is what happens when you have a number of people who have prejudged Islam to be evil and want to do the Confirmation Bias-Boogie. That's how some people elevate Wafa Sultan, who is a Psychiatrist, to a supposed expert on Islamic Theology and politics in the Muslim world. Even though she is woefully unqualified to make judgements on religious theology (of any kind) some nutters who desperately need someone who is an "other" with special "insider information" to confirm their biases will latch onto her as a credible source. My favourite part about Sultan has got to be her rhetoric, it gives new meaning to the word shrill, ie - the title of her latest book - A God Who Hates: The Courageous Woman Who Inflamed the Muslim World Speaks Out Against the Evils of Radical Islam Now that's classic. Oh, and there's also the fact that some of her claims about her life (ie - that a professor of hers was shot in front of her eyes on campus while students shouted God is great) were discredited.

How is that you're at least a decade or two older than I am and you're incredibly more immature?

No, she's just a straight-up anti-Islamic bigot, I've yet to read any of her comments on other racial/cultural minorities, she doesn't seem to care about that angle. As for the quote you pulled, I was talking about White Nationalists in general, not Geertie. He's a bigot, but he's a crafty one - he won't explicitly promote violence, because he knows the minute he does that he'll be in big trouble. Hence his tactic is to inflame, inflame, inflame until a small amount of people on the other side snap and do something stupid and violent - then he uses this minor incident to tar and feather the whole group. Of course, if some White Nationalist thugs beat up a Turkish kid and put him on life support - that in no way represents the people in his camp, because he never explicitly supported such actions . . . He just helped create the climate where such actions become acceptable among some people.

Care to point out where I claimed Geertie used violence to promote his agenda?

So it's a numbers game? The US media will start calling these acts terrorism when more attacks occur?

I was commenting on the insinuation that something is true because the majority of the public believes it's true.

Of course, but the fact remains that most Canadians did not vote Conservative, hence why it shouldn't surprise you that most Canadians aren't fans of Harper.

He takes after his handle quite well.

It's not much different in the Globe or Star's comment sections. I think you should just remember that the vast majority of Canadians didn't vote for Harper, and even many who did vote for him are less than thrilled about his performance so far.

The thing is, millions of people believe Beck's "entertainment" IS science. What's more, Beck actually initiates many stories that work their way into the news cycle. ie - Beck says "Obamacare is socialism" and then a conservative blogger who appears on Fox News references him in their blog (or vice-versa) Then the news anchors on Fox pick up on it, saying: "critics are calling Obamacare socialism!" and push the story, they then bring in other pundits to act as expert commentary, who then agree with their fellow Fox commentators that yes, Obamacare is socialism. The rest of the media eventually picks it up as well, because they don't want to be left out of "such a big story" and then what began as some random unsubstantiated rant turns into a national story.

So, Climate Change ITSELF (as opposed to human-caused climate change ) is a fraud, because the American public thinks it's a fraud . . . If all Americans thought it was a good idea to walk off a bridge . . .

I wonder if Roubaix has any Kosher Delis? Or veg restaurants - is the mayor banning those as well for "discriminating" against goiyims and carnivores? Side note - several chains in Canada serve all-halal meat - Popeyes' Chicken being one of them.