JB Globe

Considering you care enough to respond to my criticism, I don't think it's a wrong impression. My bad, I made a mistake in assuming you knew a thing or two about sociology. You see, when you have two different minority populations in two different countries that have two radically different histories in dealing with those minority populations, IN ADDITION TO the fact that those minority communities are radically different from each other - it's actually considered laughable to try and claim that data on one is applicable to the other. Those statistics would also demonstrate that whites are over-represented in mass-murders and child molestation - a fact you're completely avoiding dealing with for obvious reasons. God forbid you admit to yourself that the world isn't racially polarized into white folks = good guys & black folks = bad guys And again for the record, I think that the whole "black/white people commit more gang violence/mass-murders because they're genetically/socially predisposed to do so" argument has as much intellectual maturity and validity as a seven-year-old does on quantum mechanics. There's more at play than your lazy-ass racial-determinism that manifests itself in you making a gross assumption about a complicated issue that you didn't do your homework on. FYI, smileys = instant fail. As for the rest - whatever makes you sleep at night. So, you're NOT racist - you just only post about visible minorities when you're trying to make the argument that Canadians who are visible minorities are inherently more criminal than Canadians who aren't. Wow, it's so clear to me now - I can't believe I actually thought you were a bigot. Congratulations, you just set the MLW record for "most straw men created in a single week" What's your secret? - Intellectual Laziness? Ignorance? Terrible debate skills? And just how did you get an exclusive supply deal from all the straw farmers in Leeds & Grenville? Really? That's weird - I wasn't old enough to vote for Mulroney.

The idea that terrorists do immoral things is something I learned as a child. The idea that these acts don't justify a state doing immoral things in response is something I learned as an adult. Which is wrong, but of course, EVERY military outfit (national army or otherwise) uses misinformation and the media as a key part of their strategy. It's wrong when Hamas does it, and it's wrong when Israel does it. Which is wrong, and frankly, it's just as bad as when the IDF uses Palestinian children as human shields. The only difference is in one case it's the official policy of the military outfit, whereas with the other it's an unofficial policy - whereby many people knows it happens, but they keep quiet about it until some evidence emerges, then someone has to be the fall guy and claim that they were acting alone. I don't know which is worse - openly embracing an immoral act, or committing immoral acts on a regular basis but not owning up to it. The problem with this is of course, there is no where else to go in Gaza - it's one of the most populated places on earth and all of it was a combat zone. This is an example of someone else's immoral actions not justifying your own. Hamas' decision to operate in dense civilian areas doesn't automatically relieve Israel of moral responsibility in deciding to shell and bomb those areas. Not according to the Red Cross. Apparently the Colonel is not aware that in any deeply polarized conflict between two ethnic groups, providing intelligence to the other side is an act of treason, and that people will rather suffer a great deal than be seen assisting the enemy. On the ground in Gaza, even if folks disliked Hamas, they dislike Israel a great deal more, and it shouldn't be surprising that they weren't jumping at the chance to snitch to the enemy. Especially considering if caught they would have been shot, just like collaborators are in any conflict. Frankly I'm shocked that someone with this guy's experience could be so naive, it's not as if the IDF was liberating Gazans from a universally despised regime - in that case, you'd definitely get people assisting the liberators. Blaming the victims in all of this is a punk move. What did the colonel expect? That people who have seen with their own eyes the injustices committed against them their whole lives by the state of Israel would suddenly look upon these phone calls and radio broadcasts as messages from a benign and loving country? Of course not - in a deeply polarized ethnic conflict those things are looked upon with large helpings of suspicion and cynicism. Expecting Palestinians to take the word of the IDF at face value is like expecting Israelis to take the word of Hamas. Do you think someone who witnessed a suicide bombing is going to believe Hamas when they say "give up Palestine and we'll declare peace?" - of course not. Which is of course, why Hamas' entire strategy of terrorism is as redundant as Israel's strategy of occupation - both of them fail miserably to achieve their goals, cause the conflict to become incredibly polarized and thus more difficult to deal with, and kill a lot of people in the process.

You're still keeping with this? Give it up, this post is as stupid as it is offensive. You admitted the stats don't even apply to Canada because of the radically different history and composition of our black communities to those in the US. So WTF are you still going on about here? As I said before, if you are intent on driving down Idiot Blvd. with posts like this, you could have easily have made a post called: "Why do white men mass murder?" or "Why do white men molest kids?" But you didn't, because it would break your impeccable track record - Whenever you make posts that deal with race, ethnicity, or religion, they always try to portray non-white non-Christians in the worst possible way. Yet you won't outright admit you are prejudiced against non-whites & non-Christians - you still like to distance yourself from outright racists (as in, people who admit their racism to themselves), because you like to think of yourself as a good person. However, I think the only difference between you and an admitted White Nationalist is honesty, really. In practice, your line of thinking is identical.

Yeah, it's that, plus the gross generalizations, taking facts out of context, omitting other facts, and not being aware of one's own biases & knowledge about the subject at hand that are the problems here.

You clearly haven't spent too much time on this board if you're expecting scholarly debate on issues pertaining to Islam. Welcome to the gutter.

In case you're wondering, it's statements like this which make me doubt your claims of having a bunch of non-white friends. You didn't even say "little discrimination" you claimed there is NONE. Which, if you did have non-white friends, you'd never come to that conclusion - assuming you talked with them about this subject, and took their word for their experiences. And if I've learned one thing for certain - whenever someone claims that there is no discrimination, there's usually at least some discrimination, if not more - and a lot of denial going on. There are many reasons: some communities have higher rates of people who came as refugees than others, some communities do a better job of organizing and supporting themselves than others, and some have natural advantages because of their country of origin's history (ie - people from strong democratic countries like India, are better able to get involved in Canadian politics) . Also, there's the "difference factor" - xenophobes always focus their attention on whatever is PERCEIVED AS different to their own "true Canadian self" In the 19th century it was Catholics, in the 1930s it was us Jews, and now - racially it's black Canadians, and religiously it's Muslims. So, if you admit the US data is non-applicable here, why did you post it in the first place? At all? Zero? - See, this is why I say you're in denial, because you're so absolute that there's no such thing as discrimination. Even someone who may agree with your line of thinking, but who is rational, would look at the available evidence and come to the conclusion that discrimination is at least PARTLY to blame. Are you being honest when you write stuff like this? Or are you fully aware of how ridiculous this sounds? The closest thing Canada has to a slum is Gastown and the vicinity in Vancouver. And that isn't a result of immigration. Also, I'd like to know that in comparison to what other large North American cities you believe Canadian cities have a major street gang problem? From what I can tell, even our worst years are better than most American cities' best years - and they don't have nearly the immigration rates we do.

To repeat myself - you have a habit of putting conservative Muslims in the same category as militant Muslims.

The thing is, you don't make enough of a distinction between "Islamists" and regular conservative Muslims.

Actually, Israel should think about what's in it's long-term economic, political and security interests. If you look at the future with a mind free of the tribal mentality that plagues this conflict, and an objective understanding of history, you'll see that the only chance Israel has of peace and security is to start acting in accordance with international law. If the critics don't have any ammunition, they can't do any damage. And right now Israel is force-feeding them bullets. It's difficult for even Israel's staunchest allies to defend it right now - from Israel's perspective, the Gaza blockade is a bad strategy - it doesn't accomplish it's security goals (Hamas is still supplying itself through the Egypt tunnels), and it damages it's international political position. Of course propaganda has something to do with it, but it would be disingenuous to say that Israel's moral standing hasn't been affected by its own actions in the past decade, and not purely as a result of some PR campaign against it. The Palestinian cause has taken a hit as well, now that Hamas is the vanguard of it. It seems like more people are becoming dejected in general of the whole conflict. I think this impulse is human, not Western.

Which, of course, seems to be tied to a predilection towards poverty, and towards being the biggest targets of discrimination by the ethnic majority. I wonder if they are related. I'm looking toward your next post: "Why do White Men mass-murder and molest children?" Because, after-all, you're not being selective in your subjects now, are you?

The tunnels are already up and running again without the concrete, and while weapons are a portion of the cargo - most stuff being smuggled in is civilian goods. Like I said back in January, it wasn't going to take long before the black market got going again. The Israeli blockade is simply doing more damage to Israel's international reputation than it is to the Gaza black market. I think it would be prudent from Israel's perspective to end it.

Kosher co-sign.

I am a white male who has never experienced "anti-white racism" in my entire life. I also have never heard of any white male acquaintances experiencing this either. Given the fact that I live in Toronto, and interact with people who aren't white on a regular basis, and in a variety of situations, if this was as common as you and other random internet posters are claiming, than surely I would have experienced, or at least know someone who has experienced at least one example of it by now, but I haven't. Also given how there are no statistics to back up any of your claims, the only LOGICAL conclusion is that you are either deliberately misleading people about this issue, you are ignorant of the actual facts, or you are deluding yourself. I find a good litmus test for people like you is to ask you specific personal questions, such as: Where do you live? What kind of relationships do you have with people who do not share your ethnicity? When was the last time you had a serious discussion with someone of another ethnicity than you about race-issues? Generally two things come out if the person answers these question: It becomes clear they either live in a community where there are little/no people present who are of a different ethnicity OR they live in a highly segregated community and have had little/no interaction with people of other ethnicities. Meaning, it becomes clear that they don't have any actual personal reason to have come to this line of thinking, and since there aren't any substantial objective facts that support their argument of White Superiority either, the don't really have much to stand on. But generally, people do not answer these questions, because to admit that they have never had a conversation with someone who isn't white, and never experienced "anti-white racism" would make it seem like they were creating a problem where none exists, and that the motive for their views has more to do with loosing WHITE PRIVILEGE than loosing equal status.

This post could have easily been titled "Why do white men become serial killers?" or "Why do white men molest children?" And someone could have gone on to create an equally stupid and lazy argument that white people are inherently more likely to molest or mass-murder, because of some genetic pre-disposition, or social conditioning from "white culture" And besides, given the fact the African-American community is radically different in history and makeup than the various Canadian communities of African descent, why does anyone think these stats are applicable?

So, rather than respond to the numerous criticisms of your arguments thus far in this thread, you've decided to post something completely off-topic. Instead of defending your claims, you've decided to try and pull a character assassination on people who are calling you out. Specifically, claiming that those who are opposed to you are "lefties," making the false claim that it was only "lefties" that fought against Jewish immigration to Canada in the 19th century, (it was Liberal & Conservative politicians), and somehow using this to smear the current reputation of today's "lefties" Which of course, is about as smart as saying: "John A. MacDonald was a xenophobe, therefor all Conservatives are xenophobes" But I digress - rather than respond to claims of blatantly false statements you've made, enormous holes in your argument, etc - you're attempting to throw a bunch of s*** at the wall and hoping something sticks. You're also completely avoiding answering the question of "Okay Moxie-kiddo, we get it, you think Muslims are evil, so what's your solution?" and I believe you're avoiding this because you wouldn't be able to come up with a solution that wouldn't out you as an extreme White Nationalist. It would make you admit your racism to us and perhaps to yourself too. And that's why you're not going to talk about solutions.

You seem to be implying that this can be used as evidence to back up your belief that Islam is an evil religion. Are you aware that Christians in West Africa do this as well? Therefor, according to your own logic (to which I do not subscribe) Christianity is an evil religion. How is it that you are not aware that Christians do this as well? Perhaps you shouldn't make such grandiose statements about regions and/or religions of the world you don't know too well. I believe he was calling xenophobes xenophobes, he didn't mention anyone by name or by implication. The question is, why did you think he was talking about you? Perhaps because you constantly are labeled xenophobic? Why do you think this is? Could it be that there is some orchestrated campaign against you personally? Could it be that there is a campaign against your freedom of speech? Or could it be that, yes, in fact, you make statements and have attitudes which are xenophobic? Are you really asking if we think murder is acceptable? Really? Don't waste our time with foolish questions, please . . . Not inherently, no. It depends on the grounds by which you oppose it. If you oppose it because it's Muslim and you believe Islam is evil, than you're xenophobic. But, if you oppose it because you don't want multiple courts, and think one court for all is fine, than that's not a xenophobic reason. 1 - You are not the majority, people who share your views (White Nationalism) are such a small minority in Canada that not even the old Reform-Conservative party members will go anywhere near you with a 10 foot pole. 2 - You're twisting the definition of "Islamist" to include anyone who doesn't share your view that Islam is in itself evil. Thus, that's how you've come to think that people "head-pat" Islamists, when in those "Islamists" are just ordinary Muslims. Listen, you can't cherry-pick articles from authors (Tarek Fatah, not the other way around, btw) that support your views, then ignore ones from the same author that don't support your views. Well, since Mosques in Canada don't sell that book, and because that book doesn't exist, I guess your campaign is done, right? Didn't you just quote a Tarek Fatah? Are you not aware that he wrote the following in an article the National Post the week: "It is true that Islam's holy book, the Koran, does not sanction honour killings. But to deny the fact that many incidents of honour killings are conducted by Muslim fathers, sons and brothers, and that many victims are Muslim women, is to exercise intellectual dishonesty." Meaning - that there is a problem within the Canadian-Muslim community of discrimination and violence against women, but it is not a problem with the practice Islam in general. That means it can be dealt with accordingly, like it was in the Italian community 40-50 years ago (funny how we forget this fact) we can improve the situation. We don't have to throw the baby out with the bathwater. But of course, improving the situation would require working with the Muslim community, and you don't seem to want to do that, because to you, every Muslim is a Islamist. There would also be one less reason for you to justify your hatred of Islam if there was no more domestic violence issues. You talk a lot about how much you dislike Islam in general, but you're short on solutions. If you honestly believe Islam is an evil religion, than there's only really one kind of strategy you an advocate - varying degrees of state discrimination against Muslims. Maybe the reason you don't talk about solutions is because it would make you appear blatantly racist. ie - banning only Muslim immigration, discriminatory laws against Muslims, mandatory testing of Muslims for "extremism" etc. But please, share with us your ideas. Then by your logic again, Judaism, Hinduism, Sikhism are all misogynistic religions. You could put most Christian denominations in there as well, as only men can be pastors/priests. Can you at least be consistent? Is that too much to ask?

I'll cosign this. Two years ago I was producing and researching a documentary that is part of an educational unit for Ontario high schools on immigration. The research I did pretty much spelled out your points here. You wouldn't believe the kind of crap that was written about Jews, Poles and Italians back in the 1940's in newspapers. It reads like some of these diatribes against Muslims today. There were all kinds of unsubstantiated chicken-little predictions about the fall of Canadian society. All this talk about the inferiority and unadaptability of "those people" - they even cited the existence of Jewish neighourhoods (Kensington Market) and Jewish schools as evidence that Jews would never integrate, and thus we should shut off immigration. It's interesting to reflect back on how things were, and realize that there have always been White Nationalists in Canada. What's scary is to think what if Canada had caved in to their demands? Where would we be now if we had blocked all kinds of non-European-Anglo-Protestant immigration? What makes the current crop any different from the past? Their xenophobia is still trying to hold back this nation because they're incapable of living in an integrated society.

When you say "Canadian people" you mean "White Christian Canadians" - I wasn't aware that White Christian Canadians are at risk of honour killings at the hands of Muslim-Canadians. You learn something new everyday. Sorry, but this one exceedingly rare phenomenon does not mean "Multiculturalism isn't working" Show me which countries do immigration better than Canada. And by better I mean integration. And like I said earlier, "honour killings" (or rather, when Muslim parents murder their children) are about as common as when white Christian Canadians murder their children, so why do you only get hysterical when the perps are Muslim?

I was talking to Mr. Canada before you decided to horn-in on this one, but okay . . . That's false. You'll usually find that they're not "spur of the moment" - there's usually a history of domestic violence that continues to escalate. And often times you'll find the murder is pre-meditated, and doesn't come about because the perp's kid spilled his milk and he/she flies off the handle. There's a LOT more we can do, and quite frankly, all of us are to blame when it comes to these problems, because most of us only pay lip service to improving the mental health system, because when it comes time to throw money behind it, we start whining about raising taxes. And of course, it should be noted that such killings are exceedingly rare, and certainly no more common than parents-murdering-their-children, which I suppose is what you call it when a parent who is white and/or not Muslim, Hindu or Sikh murders their child. Widely-supported implies that most people in these communities hold this view, and I haven't really seen any evidence of this. I think the severity of this view rapidly decreases once you get out of the smaller pockets where it's held. I know you're going to go on this whole "You're justifying the killings! You support Honour killings! You're a multiculti apologist!" tip, but whatever, you're kind of a joke to me, so who cares? But to the others who aren't so bull-headed, I'm not down-playing - I'm contextualizing here. The reason I'm doing this is because if we pretend that Honour killings are some sort of epidemic because of Islamophobic hysteria in lieu of actual facts, we're going to come up with a solution befitting an epidemic. And since the actual numbers tell us that this thing is statistically rare, our "solution" is going to be way out of whack with the actual problem, meaning it will probably fail. It will probably greatly alienate the Muslim community if we start acting like this is a nation-wide catastrophe, because it will appear to them (and rightly so) like we're being heavy-handed not because the problem is so severe (it isn't) but because we as Canadians don't like Muslims. And without their involvement, the situation won't actually change, and if the community may feel under attack by the barrage and turn inwards, thus making the situation worse. Basically, the solution has to be on the same-scale as the problem, I'm all for acting on this problem, but it's got to come from a grassroots level, it's got to include Imams who have been campaigning against domestic violence for years now like: Imam Badat at Islamic Foundation in Toronto, Syed Soharwardy at the Calgary Islamic Centre, Sheik Alaa El-Sayyed, national president of Islamic Supreme Council of Canada, and Mohammad Alnadui, vice-chairman of the Canadian Council of Imams. You've got to get leaders who have CLOUT in the community on-board. If you don't get the community on-board, it will be an abject failure. The thought of a bunch of Harper & Iggy cronies and radio personalities finger-waving at Muslim-Canadians is just pathetic.

What a bunch of antisemites . . . And when I say antisemites, I mean those people who aren't militant-ultra-nationalist-zionists.

Why is it of all the cases in Canada where parents murder their children you only go on these posting blitzes when the case involves a family who is Muslim? Do the lives of white children not matter to you? Are you racist against white people?

Is he? Or are you putting words in his mouth again? What he seems to be saying is hatred begets more hatred, which is a truism that you could apply to both sides of the situation.

I always questioned the "self-defense" argument. I never understood how it made Israelis safer to plop a few hundred religious-zealot-settlers in the middle of Hebron. I don't understand how Israelis are made safer by the fact that the IDF has to deploy a whole company just to protect these people from their Palestinian neighbours. It doesn't make sense to me that enabling situations such as to occur, brings Israelis anymore security.The occupation is the single most bone-headed move in Israeli history, and is up there with the decision by the PLO decades ago that independence from the democratic state of Israel would be better achieved by using terrorism than civil disobedience.

It's only surprising to people who don't have friendships with Muslims. Actually, since Israel-Palestine is at the core of antisemitic views in the Muslim world it IS the point. Speculation again. But as we've discussed, your views on Israel-Palestine are so hardline, anything but rabid praise of Israel is considered to be anti-Israel in your books. To you it's a cosmic struggle of good vs evil. You just can't wrap your head around why someone would take a pragmatic approach to the conflict. You can't fathom how someone could criticize both Palestinians and Israelis for not being interested in peace. Which is why the thought of someone criticizing Israel to you and then going and criticizing Hamas to a Hamas-supporter is beyond comprehension, so I must be making it up, right? But they weren't your friends, now were they? Arabs are the most antisemitic Muslims for obvious reasons - they're closest and most directly affected by the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It's just like how there's more blatant Islamophobia in Israel than in the Jewish diaspora. But I digress, I still haven't heard you explain why you know my reality better than I do.

True, but I was referring to mainly the freedom to express opinions in the media. In that sense, I'd argue that Israel has a more open environment when it comes to discussing the I-P conflict than Canada or the US. Op-Eds that get called antisemitic here are commonplace there, the reason being that right-wing Israeli lobby groups here can get away with calling something antisemitic even if it's not at all, because non-Jews would never have the nerve to question those accusations, lest they be labeled an antisemite. You can't do that in Israel, because Israelis wouldn't buy it, they can see it's a cheap tactic to try and silence someone so you can avoid having to deal with their argument.