Scotty

A terrorist with a knife slashed and stabbed people on a subway in London. A couple of men confronted him, but most just stood around watching or holding up their cameras. A man with a knife is dangerous, but if he is mobbed by a number of people he can probably be brought down pretty easily. When no one is willing to confront him he can do as he wishes. I wonder what it says about all those men who just filmed it instead of trying to help. The 33-year-old said he and another passenger took on a man to protect passing children and kept up the fight until police arrived. Mr Pethers, 33, said: ‘There were other adult men standing there, just filming it on their phones. There were so many opportunities where someone could have grabbed him.’ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3348758/Man-29-charged-attempted-murder-Tube-station-two-men-attacked-man-allegedly-declared-Syria.html

So what you are saying is that Justin Trudeau is as dishonest and corrupt and self-serving as Brian Mulroney was? This is your excuse to justify this theft of public money?!!

It is more public money going to pay for a millionaire's servants than Mike Duffy took from us, which you seemed to care a very, very, very, very, very, very, very great deal about!

Do you have evidence Trudeau the first and Mulroney had taxpayer funded nannies?

I bet you would have had a problem if the prime minister was named Harper.

You need to distinguish between the Conservatives and the Progressive Conservatives, who are really liberals. You cannot get elected out east without promising lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of goodies to the electorate. That's essentially all they care about. Who is offering the highest price for their vote.

At the rate they're going they'll get there!

So what IS the upside?

You launch personal attacks on people every day and you whine when they talk back to you? Who do you think you are anyway?

Yeah, lots of Canadians are morons. This is supposed to be a surprise?

Muslim rape gangs in the UK http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5386/british-girls-raped-oxford Muslim rape gangs in Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes Pakistani child rape gangs in the UK http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/250972/one-million-child-victims-muslim-rape-gangs-uk-arnold-ahlert Muslim rape gangs in Sweden http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape Muslim rape gangs in France http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/223741/muslim-gang-rapists-france-french-are-all-sons-daniel-greenfield

There is plenty of knowledge of the hateful attitudes of the people in the middle east and much of the Muslim world, especially as relates to women and gays.

What makes you think we'd be in favour of this stupid scheme if the Conservatives were running it? It's a stupid idea no matter who is in charge.

It's all ridiculously wasteful. Why bring people over here at great expense and house them and feed them and cloth them when we could be checking them out much more easily and cheaply back in Turkey or Lebanon? It makes no sense, whatever. For that matter, spending billions to look after a few refugees here instead of giving that money to Turkey or Lebanon to help them look after ten times more is lunacy. But the lefties have to do it so they can feel good about themselves, I guess. Actually helping isn't as important as putting on a show of how good you are.

The UK embraced multiculturalism decades ago and did its best to show utmost respect for differing cultures. That hasn't stopped the race riots or the Muslim rape gangs preying on underage white girls.

Unfair. The nordic countries are a very open society and invited refugees from the middle east in and made them at home. Unfortunately, the clash of cultures between free living female nordic girls and harshly conservative Arab men has resulted in a huge increase in rapes across those countries.

France is an enlightened democracy, and very left wing. It is one of those countries where you can be arrested for saying something racist to someone. And it has the European Union over them, whose courts can be appealed to, as well as multiple human rights bodies. I would suggest that if 70% of prisoners are Muslims that means Muslims have been committing a lot of crime in France.

Harper wanted to take his time and find businessmen and people who spoke English, as well as Christians who are in more danger and are more likely to integrate. But that's out the window now in our frantic rush to grab anyone available to fulfill Trudeau's campaign promise. So here is what we'll be getting by the thousands. Most are not educated, know nothing about Canada, not where it is, not even that it's largely Christian. http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/matthew-fisher-refugees-will-face-a-cultural-cliff-in-canada-and-canadians-will-be-tested-too

dozens vs tens of thousands...

Wasn't the leader of the group that bombed Paris a family man with a daughter?

I wonder how many times your average minister or priest has read the bible. I guess they're all 'extremists' in the eyes of some, ironically, in the eyes of those who keep making excuses for extremist Islam.

People go to jail proportionate to how much crime they commit. From what you are posting it seems most of the crime in France is committed by Muslims.

Under sharia's civil code, a woman's testimony is worth half of a man's. A man can divorce his wife by repudiation, whereas a woman must give justifications, some of which are difficult to prove. Child custody reverts to the father at a preset age; women who remarry lose custody of their children even before then; and sons inherit twice the share of daughters. An example of the kind of decision that is contrary to UK law and public policy is the custody of children. Under British law, the child's best interest is the court's paramount consideration. In a sharia court the custody of children reverts to the father at a preset age regardless of the circumstances. In divorce proceedings, too, civil law takes into account the merits of the case and divides assets based on the needs and intentions of both parties. Under sharia law, only men have the right to unilateral divorce. If a woman manages to obtain a divorce without her husband's consent, she will lose the sum of money (or dowry) that was agreed to at the time of marriage. http://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/jul/05/sharia-law-religious-courts

You haven't demonstrated that this is the case. All the claims about poor intelligence or targeting are from one study from one journalist, and even its claims are parsed. It might say that more than the target were killed, but who were these others? Were they civilians? If a terrorist leader is taken out in a convoy who is likely to be around him but other terrorists? If a terrorist organizer is taken out in a training camp who are likely to be the other casualties? If a terrorist is taken out during a military campaign where he's trying to conquer a town full of infidels so he can slaughter them aren't those around him likely to be military?

Just like Muhammad! Muhammad was a military leader, laying siege to towns, massacring the men, raping their women, enslaving their children, and taking the property of others as his own. On several occasions he rejected offers of surrender from the besieged inhabitants and even butchered captives. He inspired his followers to battle when they did not feel it was right to fight, promising them slaves and booty if they did and threatening them with Hell if they did not. Muhammad allowed his men to rape traumatized women captured in battle, usually on the very day their husbands and family members were slaughtered. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm