CANADIEN

I used to find your bigoted drivel hilarious. I still do. It pales, in comparison, though, with the way you then turn around and claim that you treat people separately regardless of their race, religion, etc., or that you are not targetting all Muslims when you actually say "THE Muslims" every third sentence. By the way, I do not believe in political correctness. I believe in common sense. You know, don't that concept you know nothing about.

I won't comment on what other people said. I thought the Reform original platform was racist when it called for stopping non-white immigration. If this what you think of Canada, let me help you pack.

.Not a few, not some, not a majority. them all. I suppose this is not from the Argus who treat people regardless of their race, religion, etc. Interesting. workplace is located on a University campus. I see quite a number of Muslim students (mostly women) on that campus every day. And that university does not have a Koran program. This is my country, and your set of values (or more exactly, the way your prejudice dictate your opinions) is anithetical to my values and to common sense. Difference is, I will not judge your third-door white neighbour on the basis of your drivel, but of his opinion. THAT is what is called judging people regardless of their culture, race, etc. Canada is a country, and Canadian citizenship is a set of rights, priviledges and responsibility. Not a product. And many idiots are born in this country too. You know, like people who believe that a woman who is beaten or raped deserved it. pastors who tell wives to obey their husband because it is in the Bible. Seems that this kind of attitude is a problem to you only it comes from non-Whites. Feel free to prove me wrong (and btw, no, I have no reason to date to believe that you have that kind of opinion.Recently, you made a fool of yourself by comparing Muslims to the KKK. You did not see fit to respond when I asked how you would welcome KKK members. So I am asking again, how would you?

Interesting that these numbers do not say anything about motive (and I will not dismiss them because they're American). Another interesting statistic: for every Black American, there are 7 White Americans. For every Black American who is a victim of a violent interracial crime, there are... 7 White Americans. The likehood that violent Black-on-White crime is motivated by race is less then with White-on-Black crimes, as other factors enter in the mix (more Black men growing up in poverty without adequate paternal model being the main one). Not to put the issue of violent hate crimes committed by White men out of proportion (it is, thankfully, a rare occurence thse days), but there are no Black organizations wose members parade in robes and burn crosses. I doubt there are many Black organizations with Websites praising Adolf Hitler. Mr. "Canada" would have us believe that about every time three or four Black men meet their priority is to go find some white guy to beat up to death just because he's white. Of course he could not prove it even with stats, but hey that will nto prevent him from making a fool of himself... as usual.

I must admit I admire your logic. People on this site have not considered the Toronto strike important or interesting enough to discuss, so that mean they support the strikers/ By that logic, you must be in favour of, let's say: - prostitution - Quebec language laws - bank frauds - the use of torture on criminals

Others have said clearly why the "let's ban all Muslim immigration" is a bad idea. I will not repeat their logical arguments, but I'll add another one. Experience with generation after generation of immigrants show that every new group meets with distrusts, when it is not just plain hatred, that about every societal ill is blamed on them. More importantly, experience has shown that the children and the grandchildren of immigrants have more often than not integrated our society. When that has not happened, economic conditions (poverty) and discrimination is more often than not the reason. Large scale Muslim immigration is a recent phenomenum. It is too soon for any claim that the second and third generation will not integrate into Canadian society. Of course, they will be some that will say that their attitudes and values are too far away from those of most Canadians. the same was said about past groups of immigrants. And quite frankly, there is not much difference between those and some of the attitudes and values advocated in forums like this. OF COURSE, this is not to say that we should just let anyone and everyone enter the best country on Earth. Those who have committed crimes have no place here. Those who publicly advocate crimes do not either.

I was under the misguided impression that we were talking about people here, not garbage.

I have my choice of hospitals, and we both live under the same medicare system. Let's compare ourselves now with the average American saddled with the health insurer his employer has chosen for him, and who can only get the medical treatment, go to the doctor, use the hospital the insurer chooses for him on the basis, not of what is the best for him, but what is best for the investors' bank account.

Does being in a bus in Jane/Finch area after dark count? Of course, i would not count that as evidence regarding the prevalence of racially motivated attacks by Blacks against Whites. I will for numbers on that. Numbers that you will of course gladly provide as usual, right?.

And I thought that Sicily was part of the Western World. As well, I wasn't aware that Argentina, where the law impose lesser sanction for murder when a husband kills his wife, has stopped being a country founded to a large extent on European immigration.

My most sincere apologies. I shoud have specified I was talking about the other Argus. I am so glad to see that you would never, let's say, treat Muslims like if they all thought and acted the same. You would never peddle around negative stereotypes about immigrants like if it applied to all of them. You would not resort to drivel everytime you join a discussion about gays and lesbians. You would not wax nostalgically on how your neighbourhood was once better andmore white. Because you know, OF COURSE, that the mesure of an individual is that individual's actions and words, not that of other people who may share the same skin colour, the same country of origin or the same religion. That, you will readily admit, is the start of logic and common sense.

Many immigrants in the first half of the 20th century came from societies that harboured notions of honour very similar to those we find today in Middle Eastern and Pakistani societies. Christian societies from the mediteranean areas. And some of the first generation immigrants from those societies tried to bring those values with them. The word "honour killings" may not have been used, but it does not take much imagination to admit that there were cases when women would be beated or killed because they were transgressing unwritten codes of "honour". Of course, logic would dictate that immigrants from these societies did not by definition all embrace those notions of "honour". And that the criminals who commits these acts are not more or less guilty because of where they come from. And that these acts are to be condemned, and punished, and that they, and advocacy of them, will not be tolerated. Which means that the notion it has never happened before, or inflated figures on what is actually happening, or claims that virtually everyone from a given culture endorses that kind of action are not part of a solution; they are the beginning of another problem.

I won't claim that saying calling idiotic statements idiotic is debating. It's calling thing as they are. BTW, there has been intelligent arguments on this site that has convinced me that we need to be a lot more vigilant as to which INDIVIDUALS we let in the country. Ramblings fuelled by prejudice did not, and will not, do that.

What makes Western societies better is that they tend to show more respect for the right of the individuals to make decisions that affect them personnally without undue societal or government contraints. Also the rule of law (namely, the notion that noone, and no government, is about the law), and the balance between common good and individual rights. How ironic it is then that, in the name of protecting Western values, some people are advocating getting away with some of these core values, the rule of law and respect for the individual to name only two of them whenever it suits their fears and or/prejudice.

The real insult here is actually the way Argus keeps insulting logic and common sense. Including that little piece of drivel about "savages". If calling a spade a spade is gonna get me booted out of here, so be it... Provided of course that those here who have called me an idiot, an imbecile, an half-wit, a traitor, a foreigner, a Nazi, a fascist over the last year and a half be held to the same standard (now, to be stating facts, Argus did not stoop below the third attempt at insult I just mentioned). Mind you, I do not engage in tit-for-that, in case you were wondering. But when I see someone engage in idiotic statements on a continuous basis, I conclude they're idiots. Constant whining about gays, foreigners, Muslims (to name a few), accompanied by stereotypes and topped by ooutlandish claims and ideas (like "slavery is an idea worth considering" - I am not making that one up) and a regular use of what I would consider personal insults if it was not off the mark is not what i call clear thought. Now, you are free to believe that you can have nice debates for people who believe you have a birth defect for failing to be governed by prejudice. I've stopped believing in that possibility a long time ago. PS: You've made your point, I've made mine.

Indeed. Even if he could and did it, they would still call a forgery. After all, they have not hesitated to call a notice of birth placed by the State authorities in two local newspapers mere days after the birth a forgery. Now now, let's be fair here. The morons are not necessarily racists.

Feel free to scroll up a few posts to where I posted a link to a statement about this. A statement that clearly states that the Obama birth certificate was not treated any differently from any other certificate.. Besides, had the WND peddlers of non-sense checked their facts, they would have found that, to start with, birth certificates in the State of Hawaii are not issued by the Governor's office.

Proof that you, and the morons at the American Thinker, do not know what you are talking about. OF COURSE the statement by Dr. Fukino does not say what is on the original borth certificate. To reveal that information from anyone's bieth record would have constituted a violation of Hawaii Vital Statistics Act (HRS 338), the State's Code of Conduct for public employees and official (HRS 84), codes of ethics and confidentiality provisions governing the medical profession (she's a docteur, after all). Government employees anywhere in the USA and Canada are FORBIDDEN from revealing what is on an individual birth, marriage or death registration, unless in the form and to the people mentioned by law and regulation. Feel free to show me any state or provincial law that would authorize a government employee to tell the press the content of an individual's birth registration. As for the part about the certification not being as good as the certificate, here's what the LAW actually says Believe what the American Thinker says about the law, I will believe the law itself.

Of course, shady is free to prove you wrong and that any "journalist" can obtain any long form birth certificate of any individual just by asking the government. For example, he could try to ask for his wife's birth long form. Unless he can prove that he has her written permission or power of attorney, they will say no.

Wrong is a feeble description of what is gross ignorance on your part. Here are FACTS: The State of Hawaii Vital Statistics Act (HRS Chapter 338uses the following terms: "birth certificate"" for the document created by State authorities when recording a birth, and kept among the State's records "certified copies" for the document issued upon request of people authorized by law, that contains information from the birth certificate (Note: terminology varies by jrisdiction; for example, the Ontario Vital Statistics Act (RSO 1990, chap. V-7) uses the terms registration and certificate instead, and the terms birth certificate and registration are both used to describe the same document in Chapter 46 of the General Laws of massachusetts. If one checks the instructions for filing a request for a certified copy of a Hawaii birth certificate, he/she will notice that the only options offered are a letter of confirmation (yes, we have a registration) and a certified copies. Nowhere there is any mention of something like two distinc documents, called birth certificate and certificate of live birth. there is only ONE type of certified copy provided by the State of Hawaii, and tht title on that document is "Certification of live birth". Rumours that Obama's birth certificate (that is the original document held by State of Hawaii) hyas been sealed were debunked by Chiyome Fukino, director of the State's Health Department (responsible for vital statistics), who stated the State Governor (who happened to also be the chair of John McCain's campaign in the State) had not ordered that Obama's certificate be handled differently than other certificates (view Seattle Times article. ***** The State of Hawaii does NOT issue "long form birth certificates", only certified copies like the one Barack Obama obtained and made public. It does NOT issue photocopies of the records in their custody. Like any other jurisfiction, it does NOT provides access to the original record until a number of years have elapsed (in Ontario, the original birth registrations become publicly available (on microfilm) after 97 years). Considering this, can someone provide even a semi-logical explanation of how Obama could hold or obtain a government document that the government will not issue to him? If there is any record sealed, can anyone show by whom, and under which authority? Blogs do not count. I am talking about a regulation, directive, court order, etc., with the actual reference.

Will keep that one in mind next time some social conservative groups want the government to bar gay couples from adopting children.

And ignorance breeds prejudice.

That of course, you prove with factual information. Scores? Mind to quantify that with actual numbers?

Obviously, you do not understand, period. The certificate of live birth is the legal name of the ONE document the State of Hwaii issues when a person born in that State requests a certified copy of the birth certificate created at the time of his/her birth and maintained as part of the State records. Obama has done more than make a quick photocopy, he has asked and obtained and MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE an official document issued by the State of Hawaii. Period.

So... Muslim women can be murdered elsewhere, just as long as it does not happen here. Let's talk about backward attitude, indeed. Let's make sure the discussion includes YOUR backward attitude of treating murder as nothing more than a fodder for your hatred. BTW, interest you use the term "one of these Muslims". I thought that YOU were only talking about proponent of radical Islam. Or more exactly, that's what you claim you have been doing, and what most people here do not buy.