Muslims Muslims Muslims

[bush_cheney2004]

..... As far as I'm concerned any nation or coalition of nations that holds up human rights with one hand while propping up a human right abusing regime with the other is committing a crime against humanity, including its own.

Then you certainly are ashamed of Canada's alliance with the US and UK ? Right ?

Your question speaks directly to my desire to see that every foreign military engagement our country undertakes is subject to a full public review and referendum. Our alliances should also be subject to the same process. If my country intends to kill people in my name then I insist on having a vote on exactly who it is that's being killed and why.

Who says it's in your name?

[eyeball]

Then you certainly are ashamed of Canada's alliance with the US and UK ? Right ?

What was your first clue?

Who says it's in your name?

The state does obviously, through people like Chretien, Martin and Harper.

[monkeyman]

Then you certainly are ashamed of Canada's alliance with the US and UK ? Right ?

Who says it's in your name?

Anyways, it's useless to speak about it, I know what many think. If American people kill thousands of Muslim and Arabic people it's fine, moreover perfect.

But if some Muslim or Arabic people kill one journalist, then it's wrong (of course) and all Muslims are assholes and terrorist.

Basically if you're a White person, it's not that bad if you kill thousands. And some people like Bush Cheney 2004 agree with that and they are proud to support one of the Biggest terrorist that the States had "Bush"

[bush_cheney2004]

What was your first clue?

Fish head cluster bombs?

The state does obviously, through people like Chretien, Martin and Harper.

Nope.....Chretien didn't even let Parliament vote...let alone little 'ol you.

[CANADIEN]

Basically if you're a White person, it's not that bad if you kill thousands. And some people like Bush Cheney 2004 agree with that and they are proud to support one of the Biggest terrorist that the States had "Bush"

I'm not a fan of Bush, quite the contrary. But a terrorist? Frankly.

[monkeyman]

I'm not a fan of Bush, quite the contrary. But a terrorist? Frankly.

In the sense that he killed thousands of people who are not even in his country and a country that didn't have some destruction weapons...Of course to do it , they create false pictures....

Maybe a HUGE MURDERER would be better

[Guest American Woman]

Look at OBL, part of the CIA, worked with the US until 911... OBL is a terrorists.

You should be careful what kind of statements you make. Bin Laden part of the CIA? Where in the world are you getting that from? How do you know he worked with the US until 9-11? Seems to me you are making some pretty strong statements there without any facts to back them up.

Edited August 14, 2009 by American Woman

[bush_cheney2004]

In the sense that he killed thousands of people who are not even in his country and a country that didn't have some destruction weapons...Of course to do it , they create false pictures....

So it would be better if he killed thousands in "his own country" like Saddam? You are not scoring any points like that.

Maybe a HUGE MURDERER would be better

No more that Chretien, Martin, Harper, Clinton, Schroeder, Chirac, Blair, Bush Sr., Reagan, etc., etc. There are no warrants for President Bush's arrest.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Basically if you're a White person, it's not that bad if you kill thousands. And some people like Bush Cheney 2004 agree with that and they are proud to support one of the Biggest terrorist that the States had "Bush"

We bombed "white people" too.....see Kosovo and Muslims. So you are wrong.

[Moonbox]

I never said you hated Muslims, if I did it was stupid.

Why ARE YOU SCARED FROM THAT ? That's what I don't understand. I mean there's not a Bronx of Extremist Muslims that are waiting to you and that would cut your hand off if you would be dumb enough to steel something?

You are scared for you personally or for the society? I mean if these people didn't have the same laws as us, which will NEVER HAPPEN, then I could understand that you could be scared. I don't give a shit about these people, they don't give a shit about me, that's how it works, it's the same for you mate.

You quoted in bold the people I'm scared of. I am afraid of people who hide behind religion to justify evil and intolerance. There's lots of bible-thumping Christians I'd say, to some degree, that I'm scared of, whether for my life or for society.

The problem with the Islamic faith, unfortunately, is that entire countries and cultures have perverted its teachings towards such ends. Countries we mentioned before like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan etc have all warped and manipulated the religion towards unwholesomeness.

When large populations buy into this bullshit, you end up with mindless weapons who instead of thinking for themselves are taught to have 'faith' in nonsense. When the 'faith' is strong enough and indoctrinated enough, they can justify anything. That's what scares me.

I'm not scared of you. I'm not scared of your parents or friends. I don't wet myself every time I see a hijab or a funny beard. I am scared, however, of how far people will press their religious convictions, particularly some of the ones in the Middle East etc.

[Argus]

Dude you're a dumb ignorant:

Right. Most of your family still probably thinks a toilet is a magic fountain.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...oll-shows.html:

"A lot of people think the idea is very good, but when you start talking of every day implications, the number dropped," said Ira Soekirman of Roy Morgan Research, an Australian company which conducted the survey."

That is the source you give me ? When you clearly see what's written in it ?

And 52% is the huge majority of Muslims?

I never said anything about a huge majority in Indonesia. And what the quote says is that yes, when you talk about that the numbers drop - from 52% to only 40% who want to cut the hands off thieves, to only 45% who want to force women to wear headscarves. But if you think that's _good_ then that just shows how backwards your own thinking is.

Cause that is still a whole hell of a lot more than "a couple of assholes". Sorry, pal, but there aren't "a couple of assholes" among your people, there is a whopping huge fucking crowd of them who belong in the fourteenth century and not in Canada.

You know what, you can stick the Shariah up your arse, is it better like that? You don't even know what Shariah is, you think Shariah is bad, because it says that you cut he hand of someone who steels. Now people who want Shariah are not like us according to you (I'm not for Shariah). But people who are for the DEATH PENALTY in Canada, are they like ''us''? Or is it ok for them to ask for the death penalty because they are Whites ?

And here we see the Muslim getting angry and denouncing anyone who argues. This is another aspect of the backward cultures in much of that part of the world. They cannot stand it when people dare to question their beliefs. They become angry, and often violent. You don't believe in Sharia, you say, and yet you grow angry and defensive when I insult those who do believe in Sharia. Why is that, sonny? Half your family believes in Sharia, maybe?

People like you are ignorants, T.V. tells you Shariah is bad, you'll say Shariah is bad, T.V. will tell you Muslims are dangerous, you'll think that Muslims are dangerous.

Uhm, no, the ten thousand terrorist acts committed by Muslims since 911 are what tell me Muslims are dangerous.

What do you know about Shariah? As I said, I don't know pretty much about it, so I don't tend to speak about it a lot, even though it's 100% sure that it has no place in Canada, because it's CANADA. However, your condemning the Muslim countries and people because they would like to apply the Shariah and you know nothing about it!

It's a brutal, barbaric legal code developed centuries ago and advocated and supported by people who are universally ignorant and/or religious wackos.

Did it ever came to your mind that it's more than CUTTING HANDS OFF and Scarves, and that Shariah would not be applied the same way in every country ? And that Shariah is applied in only 6 out of 48 Muslim countries ?

Yes, but it's only applied in those countries because the corrupt governments in the Muslim world don't want it interfering with their lifestyles. The majority of the people want it, and we're talking about Muslim attitudes here.

And yes, I'm aware it means more than cutting off the hands of thieves. It means executing young women for having sex outside of marriage, burying them in the sand and stoning them to death, and crushing homosexuals to death, and so much more.

T.V. tells you that Shariah is bad, so it's bad that's it..

..

Yup. That's it.

That's how brilliant you are! A lot of similarities exist between the Shariah and the English law and United States law, just in case you didn't know it.

I bet English law doesn't consider the word of a woman to be worth only 1/4 the word of a man, or say that if a woman says a man raped her, and doesn't have fine, upstanding witnesses to testify, then she should be executed for admitting to adultery.

So I'm going to repeat it one more time: Your scare toward Muslims is basically related to the Shariah,

No, it's more about their backwardness and violence, not to mention their brutality and ignorance about women.

[Argus]

This is where the rubber should be hitting the road on this whole business of wading into foreign quagmires. It didn't make sense to me then and in the light of blowback, in the context of its official description, its clear that selling out certain principles and cozying up to bastards like Hussein, the Shah, the list goes on and on, is just plain wrong. As far as I'm concerned any nation or coalition of nations that holds up human rights with one hand while propping up a human right abusing regime with the other is committing a crime against humanity, including its own.

Drivel.

It's been shown in country after country, that when a foreign government, ie, the Russians, Cubans, or Chinese, actively support a revolutionary group, that group will win unless the government opposing them is as nasty as they are, and backed up by someone else. You cannot defeat a brutal Marxist insurgency in a democracy. You cannot be desperately trying to get court orders to put wiretaps in place, and be incapable of arresting known insurgency supporters due to lack of admissible evidence. That way is certain defeat. Every insurgency which has been defeated, to my knowledge, was defeated by a nasty government which kicked in doors and hauled people off to the cells by the truckload.

Hell, we had a tiny terrorist cell in Canada, never mind a big violent guerrilla insurgency backed up by foreign arms, and Trudeau still found it necessary to suspend civil liberties and bring in the army. What do you think he'd have done if the FLQ had numbered ten thousand instead of ten, all of them armed, all of them attacking government targets day after day?

[Argus]

Anyways, it's useless to speak about it, I know what many think. If American people kill thousands of Muslim and Arabic people it's fine, moreover perfect.

I don't believe the US ever sets out to kill innocent Muslims. On the other hand, most of the attacks by Muslim terrorists and militants are directed against innocent people. There IS a difference, even if you can't see it.

But if some Muslim or Arabic people kill one journalist, then it's wrong (of course) and all Muslims are assholes and terrorist.

10,000 fatal terrorist attacks since 911, killing 60,000 people. That's not exactly an occasional isolated incident by a "couple of assholes".

Basically if you're a White person, it's not that bad if you kill thousands

.

Oh what a shocker. It's the race card. Now I suppose we'll see the PC stormtroopers blowing their horn "Da-da-da-daaaa!" and coming to the rescue. Phhhht.

[eyeball]

Drivel.

It's been shown in country after country, that when a foreign government, ie, the Russians, Cubans, or Chinese, actively support a revolutionary group, that group will win unless the government opposing them is as nasty as they are, and backed up by someone else. You cannot defeat a brutal Marxist insurgency in a democracy. You cannot be desperately trying to get court orders to put wiretaps in place, and be incapable of arresting known insurgency supporters due to lack of admissible evidence. That way is certain defeat. Every insurgency which has been defeated, to my knowledge, was defeated by a nasty government which kicked in doors and hauled people off to the cells by the truckload.

Just about every insurgency has been preceeded by a nasty government which kicked in doors and hauled people off to the cells by the truckload. What's also painfully obvious is that the results are probably worse when the most freedom loving, liberty preaching government in the world is providing aid and support to these nasty governments. That way is certain dysfunction and blowback.

Hell, we had a tiny terrorist cell in Canada, never mind a big violent guerrilla insurgency backed up by foreign arms, and Trudeau still found it necessary to suspend civil liberties and bring in the army. What do you think he'd have done if the FLQ had numbered ten thousand instead of ten, all of them armed, all of them attacking government targets day after day?

Negotiate the separation of Quebec I suspect. As it is we now have a insurgent party in Ottawa. I wonder if Trudeau ever imagined that might happen at the time?

[bush_cheney2004]

Just about every insurgency has been preceeded by a nasty government which kicked in doors and hauled people off to the cells by the truckload. What's also painfully obvious is that the results are probably worse when the most freedom loving, liberty preaching government in the world is providing aid and support to these nasty governments. That way is certain dysfunction and blowback.

But that's how that country was born in 1776.....you were the nasty government with kings and queens. How do you like us now?

[monkeyman]

Right. Most of your family still probably thinks a toilet is a magic fountain.

-------------

Personnal attack, brilliant.

I never said anything about a huge majority in Indonesia. And what the quote says is that yes, when you talk about that the numbers drop - from 52% to only 40% who want to cut the hands off thieves, to only 45% who want to force women to wear headscarves. But if you think that's _good_ then that just shows how backwards your own thinking is.

Cause that is still a whole hell of a lot more than "a couple of assholes". Sorry, pal, but there aren't "a couple of assholes" among your people, there is a whopping huge fucking crowd of them who belong in the fourteenth century and not in Canada.

-------

What do you want to prove by that ? Majority of Muslims are bad for Canada, the majority of Muslims here should go back to their country ? Of course, they are a real threat to CAnada, you see it each time you walk on the streets!

And here we see the Muslim getting angry and denouncing anyone who argues. This is another aspect of the backward cultures in much of that part of the world. They cannot stand it when people dare to question their beliefs. They become angry, and often violent. You don't believe in Sharia, you say, and yet you grow angry and defensive when I insult those who do believe in Sharia. Why is that, sonny? Half your family believes in Sharia, maybe?

--------------

Of course, Violence is only used by Muslims, not Basques, Ira, FLQ, Us Army etc. So basically each time a Muslim person is mad, it's because he's Muslim, not because it's a human being with some feelings. Damn these Muslims!!!!!!

Uhm, no, the ten thousand terrorist acts committed by Muslims since 911 are what tell me Muslims are dangerous.

-------

Did you ever see one happen in Canada or from your own eyes, or it's the T.V. that tells you what to think. You should be more scared of thugs and gangster before Muslims little buddy. And of course pedophiles that are a presnt threat to Canadians....(I'm speaking like you do now)

It's a brutal, barbaric legal code developed centuries ago and advocated and supported by people who are universally ignorant and/or religious wackos.

----------

You don't even know about it, except what T.V. told you to think. Are you for Death Penalty, because our Neighboors Americans kill more people per year using the death penalty, then hands are cut in Muslim countries.

Yes, but it's only applied in those countries because the corrupt governments in the Muslim world don't want it interfering with their lifestyles. The majority of the people want it, and we're talking about Muslim attitudes here.

And yes, I'm aware it means more than cutting off the hands of thieves. It means executing young women for having sex outside of marriage, burying them in the sand and stoning them to death, and crushing homosexuals to death, and so much more.

-----------

Did you ever see one ? Again T.V. educates you, Women burried in the sand ? Where do you take these examples.

As I said again, you think that applying the Sharia is applying EVERYTHING. `

I'm against Sharia being applied in CANADA at 100% but unlike you, I'm not dumb enough to think that the majority of people that would like to apply Shariah would burn women in Toronto or Saskatoon. Basically you're scared about something you don't know and you saw on T.V.

I bet English law doesn't consider the word of a woman to be worth only 1/4 the word of a man, or say that if a woman says a man raped her, and doesn't have fine, upstanding witnesses to testify, then she should be executed for admitting to adultery.

-----------

Again, you're speaking about the Stupid person that will apply the Sharia at 100%, not everyone who wants the Sharia will agree on that, a lot won't .

Edited August 15, 2009 by monkeyman

[monkeyman]

You should be careful what kind of statements you make. Bin Laden part of the CIA? Where in the world are you getting that from? How do you know he worked with the US until 9-11? Seems to me you are making some pretty strong statements there without any facts to back them up.

You think Anti Muslim people don't do the same lol !

[monkeyman]

Drivel.

It's been shown in country after country, that when a foreign government, ie, the Russians, Cubans, or Chinese, actively support a revolutionary group, that group will win unless the government opposing them is as nasty as they are, and backed up by someone else. You cannot defeat a brutal Marxist insurgency in a democracy. You cannot be desperately trying to get court orders to put wiretaps in place, and be incapable of arresting known insurgency supporters due to lack of admissible evidence. That way is certain defeat. Every insurgency which has been defeated, to my knowledge, was defeated by a nasty government which kicked in doors and hauled people off to the cells by the truckload.

Hell, we had a tiny terrorist cell in Canada, never mind a big violent guerrilla insurgency backed up by foreign arms, and Trudeau still found it necessary to suspend civil liberties and bring in the army. What do you think he'd have done if the FLQ had numbered ten thousand instead of ten, all of them armed, all of them attacking government targets day after day?

Well that doesn`t happen, so one more time, you paranoi my friend !

[Oleg Bach]

Secularism is weak. Put an old school pragmatic Christian up against a Muslim - and you will have a friendship - or a war that the Mulsim can never win - Christianity - enforces the power of the individual--which makes for a great warrior..where as Muslims on mass are an insect collective that depends on numbers - on mass - on over whelming the host or advesary - in time we will be over whelmed - and we have idiots withing our media that insist we should curb our birth rate - (carbon foot print crap) _ Islam has no plan to curb their birth rate - we are stupid.

[capricorn]

Are you scared of Muslim People? Do you really think they don't like Canada and don't want to integrate (Immigrants) etc...

Ten or fifteen years ago, the word Muslim wasn't in my lexicon. I didn't know what a Muslim was and I wouldn't have recognized one if I bumped into one. I used to think that a Muslim had to be an Arab, don't ask me why but that's the initial impression I got. I learned that Muslims are associated with Islam, a religion I knew nothing about. I also learned that other nationalities embraced Islam, including a lot of white persons.

I am aware of Sharia Law and the little I know about it, well, I don't like it. I wouldn't want my children to be ordered to abide by it. I'm Catholic and I raised my children in the Catholic faith. Yet, I don't want the Catholic Church to dictate its morals on them. They should be free to make their own choices without the threat of hellfire hanging over them. All religions are restrictive by nature and in their edicts. These restrictions should be supple enough to enable an individual to live their lives without religious shackles.

Am I afraid of Muslims? In general, no. Extremist Islamists? Yes. But no less than I am afraid of Catholic extremists. I distrust and fear both.

It's difficult to know whether Muslims like Canada and want to integrate. First of all, most Muslims who immigrate to Canada probably come from countries with a year round warm climate. Adjusting to most regions of our climate is probably the first challenge they face upon their arrival. Most leave their gripes in their home country and just want a new start. I would say if they can take the climate, leave old battles behind and work to earn a living, Canada welcomes them. Those who can't take it, well they just go back to where they came from and to them I say good luck. It's a missed opportunity but such is life.

[Oleg Bach]

I'm more fearful of black secularist gang bangers than Muslims - The poor blacks in Toronto are conditioned to fear us - and we them- and atmosphere of division is forming - and the media is not helping - forget the Muslims - worry more about getting stabbed for looking at someone the wrong way - some one who is not a Muslim but a product of liberal conditioning - who has been taught to be a racist by a school system that teaches inclusiveness that excludes and devides...Muslims are civlized - what Canada has created though social experimentation is not civilzed.

[Guest American Woman]

QUOTE=American Woman: You should be careful what kind of statements you make. Bin Laden part of the CIA? Where in the world are you getting that from? How do you know he worked with the US until 9-11? Seems to me you are making some pretty strong statements there without any facts to back them up.

You think Anti Muslim people don't do the same lol !

Um. No. I don't.

lol !

[Wild Bill]

I am aware of Sharia Law and the little I know about it, well, I don't like it. I wouldn't want my children to be ordered to abide by it. I'm Catholic and I raised my children in the Catholic faith. Yet, I don't want the Catholic Church to dictate its morals on them. They should be free to make their own choices without the threat of hellfire hanging over them. All religions are restrictive by nature and in their edicts. These restrictions should be supple enough to enable an individual to live their lives without religious shackles.

You've put your finger on perhaps the greatest difference between the traditional religions of the New World and traditional Islam, which is also the greatest problem.

We have a tradition for hundreds of years of separation of Church and State. To a traditional Islamist, there is NO separation!

Militant Islamists who live here in the West seem to hope that they can gradually change western society into one which they approve. Attempts to get Sharia Law recognized are merely first steps.

What they don't seem to understand is that to those of us who've grown up here any attempt to merge Church and State is instinctively resisted. It is such a fundamental and basic value that the only way it could be imposed is at the point of a gun.

Salespeople have a term they call "deal breaker". This refers to a deal having at least one condition that cannot be accepted by one or the other parties. It doesn't matter if they are offered the wealth of Midas. That particular condition is so unacceptable that they can never accept it.

Having a religion control the State would be impossible to accept by American or Canadian society, and not just the religion of militant Islam. You would find only a few "Jimmy Swaggart" types to support the idea.

Even trying to impose such an idea with violent force could not work. To western society, doing such a thing would be similar to trying to impose compulsory baby killing. Even the meekest people have limits.

What is needed to get through these problems is time. Perhaps we won't get enough but we can hope. Militant Islam is being driven by people of primitive cultures who have modern weapons. The weapons are necessary because as ordinary Muslims thrive and are educated in modern societies they become more 'civilized', for lack of a better word. They refuse to follow old fanatics and think for themselves.

Some folks still need to understand that most Muslims are good citizens and good neighbours. The conflicts are coming from relatively small pockets of primitive cultures. I say 'relatively' because there are so many people in the world of the Islamic faith that those small pockets can represent tens of millions of people. An even smaller fraction of that amount are willing to commit violence and terrorist acts.

It's the age old problem. 99% of a group may make good citizens but it only takes one with a big enough bomb to be a problem!

It is also sad but true that if screening immigrants proves impossible the only other choice may be discrimination in allowing them entry. This is not fair but that is irrelevant. Governments have a first duty to the safety of their populations. They must provide this however they can. If certain countries have a higher percentage of those who might threaten our society then we may have no choice but to close the door to them.

Politicians hate making such choices. Essentially, it requires making a value judgement of other cultures. Some Islamic countries would be deemed as having an unacceptable culture that makes immigrants from those countries more of a risk. However, lifeboat choices are not popularity contests. As for fairness, none of our citizens should have to die for the idealism of someone else!

[Argus]

[/b]

First of all, learn how to post. If you wrap everything in quotes none of it gets carried over for a response.

Not that most of what you had to say was worth much of a response, but it is Saturday morning so..

Personnal attack, brilliant.

Yeah, it was preceded by your equally brilliant Dude you're a dumb ignorant: Not to mention followed by You know what, you can stick the Shariah up your arse,

You want to talk like that don't go sniveling about personal attacks.

What do you want to prove by that ? Majority of Muslims are bad for Canada, the majority of Muslims here should go back to their country ? Of course, they are a real threat to CAnada, you see it each time you walk on the streets!

I think that Canada does not benefit from having Muslims here, and that we should take no more. I'm sure there are some who are fine people. But the culture of Muslims seems among the world's most backward. The religious and social intolerance and hostility of Muslims in general throughout the world, but especially from the middle east appears to be worse than any other culture on the planet. No one here really denies it. They just hope that the backwards Muslims who have come to Canada will adapt, or at least, their children will, and cast away their primitive cultures and religious intolerance of their parents.

For me, I see no reason why, given the numbers of people who want to come to Canada, we should bring in such a backwards people, a people who cling fanatically to their old ways, their old beliefs, and are hostile to our culture. We owe them nothing. We could easily replace them with Asians or others from eastern Europe perhaps, who would cause less trouble and be far and away more likely to adapt and adopt Canadian culture and values than Muslims.

Of course, Violence is only used by Muslims, not Basques, Ira, FLQ, Us Army etc. So basically each time a Muslim person is mad, it's because he's Muslim, not because it's a human being with some feelings. Damn these Muslims!!!!!!

Again, you are making excuses. No one does violence like the Muslims. The IRA at their very worst, never blew up car bombs in the middle of crowded markets or sent killers into schools and pizza parlors to murder children. They never machinegunned schoolgirls at bus stops or flew airplanes into crowded buildings. Almost no one does such things except Muslims, and Muslims do them routinely.

10,000 fatal terrorist acts since 911. That's not a "couple of assholes", okay?

And no, it's not all Muslims, but Muslim society breeds these people, and Muslim society does not exactly condemn them either. The most fanatical hatreds are preached in mosques, and carried in newspapers and taught in schools throughout the Muslim world on a daily basis, so don't shrug and say it's just "a couple of assholes". Even if most Muslims aren't out blowing up school buses, they don't seem to have much of a problem with those who do.

[Argus]

It's the age old problem. 99% of a group may make good citizens but it only takes one with a big enough bomb to be a problem!

I would suggest to you that no one who believes in Sharia law makes a good citizen, and we should not want any of that sort. And if the numbers in the surveys are correct, then countries where 50%-60%-70%-80% want Sharia law are not countries where we ought to be recruiting our future citizens.

The risk is a hell of a lot higher than 1% that they will not be what we want.