CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) An excellent demonstration of the core of many problems in Canada: blathering useless slogans without understanding their meaning. I am sick and tired of hearing "making sure we have the best people in place". Let's not be confused here. That YOU do not get it does not mean that other people don't either. Since you're c*apping on civil servants and muse about them being murdered, I would have expected you to call for better staff to replace them. But you hate the idea. Guess that's not simplistic enough for you. Edited August 4, 2009 by CANADIEN Quote
CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) Interesting... Did a quick look through the Uniform Crime Reporting data for a few US states, and the national ones from the FBI. Most I see did not break down number of rapes by race/ethnicity of the offenders. None included data on number of interracial rape. Edited August 6, 2009 by CANADIEN Quote
CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 Any?Like Zambia? Rapes per capita # 49 Zambia: 0.0266383 per 1,000 people There are plenty of BLACK MAJORITY COUNTRIES....that have less crime than many western nations. Much lower than Iceland, a country well known for its huge Black population. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 ....None included data on number of interracial rape. Not surprising, since the very term "interracial rape" is a loaded question. What next...interracial burglary? Interracial road rage? Interracial (name your favorite criminal offense).....don't forget "WHITE" collar crime....LOL! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) Not surprising, since the very term "interracial rape" is a loaded question. What next...interracial burglary? Interracial road rage? Interracial (name your favorite criminal offense).....don't forget "WHITE" collar crime....LOL! Good one. Edited August 4, 2009 by CANADIEN Quote
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 Nope. But interesting that you would think that. I think that too. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 That's not "rank bigotry" at all, eh? That's just you holding everyone up to the same standard. Does the truth hurt? Would you like me to put up about 500 cites - from black academics and rights activists - about the fact that single motherhood and absent fathers are the heart and soul of the collapse of the culture of the Black community? "29% of child sexual abuse offenders are relatives, 60% are acquaintances, and only 11% are strangers."-Diana Russell, The Secret Trauma, NY:Basic Books, 1986. So much for your claim that most child molestation is at that hands of the 'man who got the woman pregnant.' He was talking about paedophila. The statistics you quote regard everyone up to the age of 17 years, 11 months and 364 days as a child. But paedophiles have no interest in teenagers. Most people who molest actual children, ie, pre-pubescent kids, are within the family. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 As for the claim that the linguistic skills gap is far higher... Eastern and Southern European immigrants were as likely to know no English when arriving here than Middle Eastern immigrants today True, but they learned it, fast. They had to. It was that or starve. Besides, the English mileau was all around them. Nowadays there are immigrants who have been here for years and never learned any english. Why should they? Their communities are now so large they can ignore everyone else and only interact with their own ethnic group. The government will often deal with them in their own language, and they have TV, movies, magazines and papers from home daily, as well as a steady stream of newcomers. You also leave off a huge factor. You only needed a few words of English, if any, to chop down a tree or harvest apples and pears or throw a net in the water, or shoe a horse. You need a far better grasp of the language today in order to communicate in a technological work environment. And regarding skills. That we have a lack of doctors, to cite one example, while immigrant doctors drive taxis is the sign of a structural problem, not an immigration problem. We should have mechanisms in place to evaluate foreign credentials and skills, yet what we have is insufficient for the task. You might not care about the academic credentials behind someone's diploma but most do. And most of our immigrants are not doctors, and what skills they do have is often either not transferable or not useable because of their poor English skills. What YOU REFUSE to consider, absolutely, is that we owe it to OURSELVES to live by the same principles we preach to the World. Starting with the notion that individuals are to be treated as such, not on the basis of what other individuals do. Absolute drivel. We do what we can to maintain individual fairness, but we are not required to endanger the country or compromise the quality of the immigrants we get in order to cling to some theory of yours about our nobility. The absolute fact is that if we brought in a few, really well-educated, thoughtful Jamaicans, that would have been fine. But we didn't. We brought in hundreds of thousands of Jamaicans. You bring over that many people from a given group and you are importing their culture with them. That is precisely what has happened. Which is why we have Jamaican drug gangs shooting it out on the streets of Toronto, and slums filled with single Jamaican mothers and their broods of welfare children. Jamaica's culture is utterly sick, as is Somalias, as are others. I do not like the idea of importing those cultures here just so people like you can talk about how noble you are. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 Yea...that's it....a PREDILECTION to commit crimes....ALL OF 'EM. It's in their black "darkie" genes according to Argus. LOL! A predeliction on the part of a community means just that, as opposed to a discussion of individuals. If either of you had ever gotten your IQ levels out of single digits you'd realize that. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 kimmy, honestly, if we were to imagine for a moment that we had never seen this thread, and someone were to say to you " 37,000 white women were raped by black men and 10 black women by white men in 2005 in the U.S.," would your first instinct not be to say, " Those numbers sound rather odd. They could be true, but they certainly seem improbable, " ? Given that, and with the additional knowledge that the person was trying to convince you of something, would you not think it pertinent to examine the alleged statistics for yourself and consider ways in which that person might be mistaken? Because, if you assume the opposite, that they are telling the truth, might you not miss or gloss over the fine print? Would it make you feel better, and render the subject moot if 1,000 black women were raped by White men? If I was to try to find out how many White men were assaulted by Black men vs how many Black men were assaulted by White men, do you imagine that the numbers would be heavily skewed to one side? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 Once more I'm going to address the "every year" claim.Real "honest" discussion" some are carrying on here. And once again, you just don't get it. Let's say that Blacks sexually assault White women at a rate of 10,000 to one instead of 37,000 to one. Hell, let's say Black men sexually assault white women at a rate of 100 to one instead of 37,000 to one. Do you think that means we should not discusss it and that there is no likelihood any of those sexual assaults were cases where the Black men deliberately sought out a White woman or girl to sexually assault? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 Well, when you consider the mods have left the building racists can abound. The term "racist" is so widely used and misused by so many vacuous and ignorant people that it has basically lost all meaning. Therefore, this site does not place any restriction on it, so far as I'm aware. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
M.Dancer Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 If I was to try to find out how many White men were assaulted by Black men vs how many Black men were assaulted by White men, do you imagine that the numbers would be heavily skewed to one side? Of course they would be skewed. There a lot more white rapists than black. What's your point? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 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. There is no widespread discrimination in Canada towards visible minorities. And if there were, why do people from certain visible minority communities do far better, economically, than from others? Even within the Black community (which is hardly homogenous in Canada) individuals from some nations do far worse than others and appear to be involved in criminal violence far more than others. The poverty of the Black community in Canada is not due to discrimination. It's due to criminally short-sighted immigration policies which allowed hundreds of thousands of Carribean Blacks from single parent families to come here under the family reunification program. Canada was once a nation which was proud to claim it had no slums, had no violent street gangs. It can make no such claim now. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 4, 2009 Author Report Posted August 4, 2009 Any?Like Zambia? Rapes per capita # 49 Zambia: 0.0266383 per 1,000 people There are plenty of BLACK MAJORITY COUNTRIES....that have less crime than many western nations. To be fair, most of those countries don't actually do much of a job of recording crime, and even if they do, their records can't really be relied on. Some of the worst slums in the world are in Africa and the Carribean, and they are extremely violent places. Rape, from what I have read, is almost as much of an epidemic in Africa as AIDS. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) You might not care about the academic credentials behind someone's diploma but most do. It is exactly because I care about credentials that I say we do a poor job in evaluating credentials. Absolute drivel. I absolutely agree. You are writing absolute drivel. We do what we can to maintain individual fairness Considering your "we should look first at the country of a would be immigrant, his/her skin colour, her religion before anything else" non-sense, it is clear that the "we" excludes you but we are not required to endanger the country or compromise the quality of the immigrants we get I wonder why I cannot remember suggesting we lower our standards. Could it be that I actualy want, and said I want, tighter controls at our borders, more resources, a faster refugee status denomination system, promp removal of non-citizen criminals, longer residency period for gaining citizenship? I got it. It's because I fail to include that in some bigoted ranting. in order to cling to some theory of yours about our nobility. Interesting, coming from someone who insists on calling most people not westernized enough to his taste "savages". Guess we should only say we are better, not actuallly be better, right? Edited August 4, 2009 by CANADIEN Quote
CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 A predeliction on the part of a community means just that, as opposed to a discussion of individuals.If either of you had ever gotten your IQ levels out of single digits you'd realize that. A predilection on a part of a community means just that... that most people in that community do it. And that's what you want us to believe. Too bad FOR YOU that logic and facts contradicts such an opinion. Quote
CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) And once again, you just don't get it.Let's say that Blacks sexually assault White women at a rate of 10,000 to one instead of 37,000 to one. Hell, let's say Black men sexually assault white women at a rate of 100 to one instead of 37,000 to one. Do you think that means we should not discusss it and that there is no likelihood any of those sexual assaults were cases where the Black men deliberately sought out a White woman or girl to sexually assault? What you do not get is that both the numbers you cliam and the numbers AW claims are unreliable, and therefore not a proper basis of discussion. Or perhaps you know it but you don't care. Edited August 4, 2009 by CANADIEN Quote
CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) Even within the Black community (which is hardly homogenous in Canada) individuals from some nations do far worse than others and appear to be involved in criminal violence far more than others. Canada was once a nation which was proud to claim it had no slums, had no violent street gangs. It can make no such claim now. That's true. Newspaper editorials of the old days never complained about sickness-carrying Jewish immigrants, about slums full of unwanted immigrants, about crimes commited by gangs of Irish immigrants. Edited August 4, 2009 by CANADIEN Quote
M.Dancer Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 Canada was once a nation which was proud to claim it had no slums, had no violent street gangs. It can make no such claim now. St Henri, Pointe Ste Charles, Cabbagetown...to name but 3. There have always been slums....less today than years past. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Remiel Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 Would it make you feel better, and render the subject moot if 1,000 black women were raped by White men? Does it make you feel better to assume that I am operating on feelings and not on logic? Quote
CANADIEN Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 Would it make you feel better, and render the subject moot if 1,000 black women were raped by White men? That question alone is enough to prove that for this is not about rape. It's about you trying to get others to share your prejudice. Quote
benny Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 Eye catching topic, eh? Eye catching but only for being misplaced: this is not a moral question but a science one. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 (edited) There is no widespread discrimination in Canada towards visible minorities. And if there were, why do people from certain visible minority communities do far better, economically, than from others? LOL! The very term "visiblr minority" is RACIST. No wonder you can't see the forest for the BLACK trees. The poverty of the Black community in Canada is not due to discrimination. It's due to criminally short-sighted immigration policies which allowed hundreds of thousands of Carribean Blacks from single parent families to come here under the family reunification program. Canada was once a nation which was proud to claim it had no slums, had no violent street gangs. It can make no such claim now. So what is the reason for poverty "of the White community" in Canada? Edited August 4, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 4, 2009 Report Posted August 4, 2009 ..The absolute fact is that if we brought in a few, really well-educated, thoughtful Jamaicans, that would have been fine. But we didn't. We brought in hundreds of thousands of Jamaicans. You bring over that many people from a given group and you are importing their culture with them. That is precisely what has happened. Which is why we have Jamaican drug gangs shooting it out on the streets of Toronto, and slums filled with single Jamaican mothers and their broods of welfare children. Jamaica's culture is utterly sick, as is Somalias, as are others. I do not like the idea of importing those cultures here just so people like you can talk about how noble you are..So what do you propose to do about those awful "Blacks" with "sick culture" whe were never "imported", but born in Canada just like you? Remember, the Ukrainian and Asian internment days are long gone. LOL! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.