G Huxley

History says exactly that. Both Jews and Arabs are Semites, whether or not Wilhelm Marr agrees.

Let's speak accurately. Arabs are Semites. Opposition to Arabs is anti-semitism.

" I do, obviously, as that's where the term 'antisemitism' comes from. Hatred of Jews...not hatred of Arabs. " Yeah, but b.s. anti means 'opposed to' in Greek and Semite means Semitic peoples which includes both Jews and Arabs. Sorry anti-Semitism applies to both opposition to Jews and Arabs as they are both Semites. Islamic Indonesians are Semites as they are part of not only the religion, but also probably speakers of a Semitic language as well. (at least Koranic Arabic)

Who cares though. Literally the term means opposed to Semites and the and all Islamics are Semites considering they believe that they are the sons of Shem.

It is rather ironic that it seems that most Israelis are anti-semitic as their Muslim brethren are Semites too.

Interesting article: "These harsh acts are the offshoot of an ongoing attempt by Beijing to control the global conversation about China. Thousands of hackers backed by the Chinese government troll overseas websites and attack articles critical of Beijing. The Chinese government has invested in radio stations and newspapers in Western countries." http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/14/opinion/targeting-beyond-china.html?_r=0

To the full documentary film. I saw the documentary on the Documentary channel. Unfortunately I don't know where to find it for free online.

Chump change compared to the corruption in China. Also a red herring and distraction from this topic. The illegal organ harvesting trade is thought to be around 2 billion dollars worth per annum.

Approximately the middle of the doc.

You haven't watched the documentary. In the documentary an investigator calls in and they inadvertently admit that that is what is happening.

Most of the the executed prisoners the organs are drawn from were simply prisoners for having different beliefs.

Also well said.

Well said.

"When did it become popular for the West including Canada to become the conscience of the world. What right do we have to stick our noses into the inner dealings of other sovereign nations." One has a responsibility when one one does trade. I'm not suggesting Canada invade China if that's what you are implying. One doesn't trade with Nazi Germany for example.

No prob.

"This deal started under Harper. The Liberals do share part of the blame for not cancelling it. But hey we want our economy to grow right? Our government does not care about human rights issues as long as the money is flowing in. Weapons are big money." Oh well then if principles don't matter as long as the economy grows right, then there's all sorts of ways the Liberals can make money for the Canadian government. Why not start off with opening a Canadian government run pre-school prostitution ring? I mean really that's the sort of thing on par with doing open trade with a government that involuntarily force harvests' it's own citizens organs while they are still alive on an operating table to make a buck. Or selling weapons to the psychotic House of Saud as they invade and massacre their neighbours. Is this what Canada has become? Really??? Is this what you aspire to?

You probably noticed that in this thread I had all ready criticized the Liberals' stance towards China. This is the problem with viewing things with left/right blinders. You miss the actual topic at hand. That both governments have had virtually the same stance toward China and that it is a bad one.

Nerve indeed. The documentary is well worth seeing. Incidentally a number of European governments have passed laws forbidding 'health tourism' for organ transplants to countries where the practices are questionable. Unfortunately at the same time Harper was probably busy selling Canada to the Chinese regime and seeking to curtail further favour.

Let's hope that whoever the new leader is that they don't commit the same crime that Mulcair and Layton made, which was to try to get the Greens out of the debates. As long as the NDP leadership continues such shennanigans the New Party might as well take the word Democratic out of their name, because the public can see right through it.

Yes with Stephane Dion selling multibillion dollars arms deals to the Saudi tyrants in order to make up for the massive over spending, we've already seen the Liberal Party's dedication to human rights.

A horrifying documentary. China has been keeping hundreds of thousands of Falun Gong members in concentration camps, killing them and harvesting their organs. Canada should stand up against this barbarity and be wary about any trade deals or treaties with China.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saudi-arms-deal-documents-1.3533082 Yeah real change in Ottawa.

"Libya was a hole just like all of Africa. Clearly your standards are a lot lower than mine." You've never been there so you wouldn't know, so I'll pardon your ignorance, but it is obvious now that the situation is much much much worse than it was previously, the difference between night and day. "Regardless, what I said stands. The violence in Libya was not started by the West. It was an internal revolution, and the fighting was well underway before western countries began to intervene to try and put a stop to it." Again it was all geopolitics and oil. The US tacitly accepted and stood by as the Saudis invaded and brutally crushed the uprising in Bahrain. That said it is much better now in Bahrain than it will likely be in Libya for decades. If it was an internal revolution then the west (outsiders) need not get involved and the internal revolution was nothing compared to what happened once the west intervened. "Your being their BEFORE the revolution started is utterly irrelevant." I was in Egypt while the revolution was taking place there and people were gunned down by the Egyptian government at the same time as the Libya protests were taking place, the west didn't intervene in Egypt, because their friendly dictator was in power there, just as in Bahrain. " Overthrowing the elected government was not something the US government supported." The US almost immediately made heavy arms deals with the dictatorship again right after the coup. So the support is clearly noted, also that same dictatorship had just sentenced over 600 people to death for protesting. " The Saudis are not now nor have they ever been under the control of the US." That wasn't the implication. If the US did to Libya and did the same to Bahrain they would have attacked the Saudis who were brutally crushing the internal Bahraini revolt. "The Syrian revolution was inspired by the Arab Spring, not what happened in Iraq." The rise of ISIS in Syria is a direct result to what happened in Iraq.

The right: 'It doesn't matter if we just keep making the Middle East worse. it was always terrible.' Logic: Then if it's always been terrible why spend trillions of dollars making it worse? Because the right is a waste of space and a giant money drain of murderous insanity.

"The only mistake the West made in Libya was that the moment the government fell the west turned away and left Libya to its own devices." By the time the government had fallen the country was already in a complete wreck and thousands upon thousands had died. If NATO continued to garrison it as Iraq and Afghanistan it would have further over-extended itself and gone bankrupt even quicker as the Iraq and Afghan wars demonstrated. "Islamists started fighting and continue to do so even though a rather minor intervention from the west could do wonders to smash them before they grow." The Pandora's box is opened due to your continued inability to see that repeating your mistakes time and time again just further exacerbates the mess.