CANADIEN Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Canada is for everyone. You know of course this statement will be remembered next time you try to stir up anti-Muslim sentiment thorugh exagerated and unproven claims, don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted March 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) Good. Now, let's not forget the fact that there is actually no racism involved here. The use of the term apartheid to describe policies of the Israeli Government is inaccurate, inflammatory and quite frankly borderline idiotic, but the claim that it is anti-sematic is nothing more than the same attempt at silencing/demonizing that welcomes any criticism of the Israeli government. Calling Israel an apartheid state is Soviet style propaganda to shut down discussion, nothing more. it's exactly how the Soviets used their own propaganda machines during the cold war. Read some history people. The hard left of this country is employing Soviet style tactics to shut down debate in this country. Is this your Canada? Just last night Michael Coren was giving a talk at York University in support of Israel. After which he was screamed at by people yelling the F-word repeatedly and then he was assaulted. A man was arrested and charges were laid. Imagine now if that was a student of Jewish heritage who happens to support Israel and was cursed at and assaulted. I;m sure that would be fine as well. What if it was a Christian man who was berating a Muslim and calling for the destruction of a Muslim homeland? The media and public would be up in arms and rightly so but since it was only a Jew who cares is their attitude. Blatant double standard. I now understand why my Jewish uncle left Canada long ago for the US. The hatred of Jews has moved from the right to the left. It's now once again socially acceptable to be anti Semitic. Edited March 10, 2011 by Mr.Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Calling Israel an apartheid state is Soviet style propaganda to shut down discussion, nothing more. it's exactly how the Soviets used their own propaganda machines during the cold war. Read some history people. The hard left of this country is employing Soviet style tactics to shut down debate in this country. Is this your Canada? Let's play spot the irony here. Just last night Michael Coren was giving a talk at York University in support of Israel. After which he was screamed at by people yelling the F-word repeatedly and then he was assaulted. A man was arrested and charges were laid. Imagine now if that was a student of Jewish heritage who happens to support Israel and was cursed at and assaulted. I;m sure that would be fine as well.What if it was a Christian man who was berating a Muslim and calling for the destruction of a Muslim homeland?The media and public would be up in arms and rightly so but since it was only a Jew who cares is their attitude. Blatant double standard. I now understand why my Jewish uncle left Canada long ago for the US. The hatred of Jews has moved from the right to the left. It's now once again socially acceptable to be anti Semitic. All those words and not a single one about why QuAIA or the phrase "Israeli apartheid" are discriminatory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted March 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Let's play spot the irony here. All those words and not a single one about why QuAIA or the phrase "Israeli apartheid" are discriminatory. My points are expertly illustrated and clear for all to read. My wit is blinding to my detractors. Must be the tiger blood transfusion I just received. Winning! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 My points are expertly illustrated and clear for all to read. Was it written by someone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 I sure am. And issuing unilateral declarations aren't part of them. Well, if that's the case, then his words mean nothing. So you don't have to worry about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Well, if that's the case, then his words mean nothing. So you don't have to worry about it. You're familiar with the concept of the bully pulpit, yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 You're familiar with the concept of the bully pulpit, yes? Of course. Has that been outlawed? Also, does the bully pulpit concept apply to say, a certain first lady in the United States? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted March 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 You're familiar with the concept of the bully pulpit, yes? It was ok when Miller was the bully but now that the shoe is on the other foot the lefties don't like it. A taste of their own medicine. You see the left is so arrogant they think that they and they alone are the only ones who can lead. Sense of entitlement anyone. They are so power hungry they cannot stand it when the voters don't think they are the be st candidate to lead. The left thinks it knows better then the voters while some leaders actually listen to the voters and don't take them for granted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 It was ok when Miller was the bully but now that the shoe is on the other foot the lefties don't like it. A taste of their own medicine. You see the left is so arrogant they think that they and they alone are the only ones who can lead. Sense of entitlement anyone. They are so power hungry they cannot stand it when the voters don't think they are the be st candidate to lead. The left thinks it knows better then the voters while some leaders actually listen to the voters and don't take them for granted. This drivel from an avowed Fascist.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) This drivel from an avowed Fascist.... Democratic authoritarianism FTW. Edited March 10, 2011 by Black Dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Of course. Has that been outlawed? Nope, but it holds no real power. Ford doesn't seem to be aware of that as he has demonstrated repeatedly with his attempts to sidestep council. Also, does the bully pulpit concept apply to say, a certain first lady in the United States? You mean "smiley faced fascist?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Nope, but it holds no real power. Ford doesn't seem to be aware of that as he has demonstrated repeatedly with his attempts to sidestep council. You mean "smiley faced fascist?" Are you calling The Professor a hypocrit??? Complete Nonsense!!! You seem to be afflicted with Professor Derangement Syndrome... (PDS...For short) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 Nope, but it holds no real power. That's what I thought. You mean "smiley faced fascist?" Exactly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted March 10, 2011 Report Share Posted March 10, 2011 That's what I thought. Exactly! What kills me about this is you think Michelle Obama has more legislative powers (relativly speaking of course) than the mayor of Toronto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 What kills me about this is you think Michelle Obama has more legislative powers (relativly speaking of course) than the mayor of Toronto. What do you expect from people who don't even live in Toronto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted March 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 What do you expect from people who don't even live in Toronto. It's really scary that the left had power for so long in TO that they feel that they are the only ones fit to lead. $50 million mismanagement must never be allowed to happen again. Ty Rob Ford for saving Toronto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 Ty Rob Ford for saving Toronto. Should we knell at his feet and call him father as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted March 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 Should we knell at his feet and call him father as well? That's completely up to you. If you're in need of a father figure, go ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 What kills me about this is you think Michelle Obama has more legislative powers (relativly speaking of course) than the mayor of Toronto. But youve already stated that Rob Ford doesn't have any legislative power in this regard. So which is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Canada Posted March 11, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 I enjoy how the gays against Israel call it an apartheid state when Israel is the only place in the Middle East where gays are free to have parades and even live. Muslim Middle East gays actually come to Israel to live free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 I thought right-wingers didn't believe that such a thing as hate speech existed? I found this interesting as well: So both sides were represented: sounds like free speech in action. Ford only wants one side represented, ergo Ford is against free speech. You missed the point. The question is should the city fund such events. It started out as a gay event. Now its a gay event being used by a specific political interest group for other reasons. No the city should not fund events that provide individuals platforms to express personal political views and seize non political festivities to engage in such things. That is the point. Why the phack should the city fund such political opinions? If the group asking to enter the parade was "former gays now saved by God" you would be the first to say they should not be there. That is the point. You are being selective on the political issues you want at such events, the city should not be. Whether Jewish gays had the opportunity or in fact were forced to have to counter this display was a reflection on the gay community's failure to keep its cultural event inclusive to all peoples. The message of these particular anti-Zionists did not belong at the gay parade any more then loading this parade with other political interest groups did. This was supposed to be a celebration of gay culture not anti Zionism. If you think everything and anything should be used to propogate anti Zionism and get city funding you are mistaken. I also think its time the gay community police itself. They could have done a far better job on this issue. They could have easily said to this group, its not the place or the time to engage in such politics. They chose not to. Now when you set that precedent it opens the window to every other political interest group and their ideology. what next anti-abortionist gays, white supremacist gays, etc.? This has nothing to do with left or right wing ideology of the anti-Zionists. It has nothing to do with their being gay. It has to do with their message not being about the gay culture at all. It also raises the question as to what benefit the city derives from allowing gay culture events be hijacked by political opportunists for different agendas. The gay community lost a lot of respect and goodwill over this issue not just with straights but gays. They need to get their act together on this one. The people these gays were getting into bed with are not exactly pro gay. Maybe some of these idiots can come to the West bank and Gaza and find out how gays are treated there before they shoot off at the mouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted March 11, 2011 Report Share Posted March 11, 2011 You missed the point. The question is should the city fund such events. It started out as a gay event. Now its a gay event being used by a specific political interest group for other reasons. No the city should not fund events that provide individuals platforms to express personal political views and seize non political festivities to engage in such things. Yeah, city events should only be used as platforms like a Don Cherry in a pink suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted March 12, 2011 Report Share Posted March 12, 2011 I can't stop giggling, because on the front page this displays as "Mayor Ford to nix Pride Fun..." -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted March 12, 2011 Report Share Posted March 12, 2011 Pride is having some financial issues and the loss of funding from the city would be a serious blow. Ford surely knows this and is using it as leverage to force PT to stifle participation. Basically, he's blackmailing PT, which appears to be his new modus operendi. Didn't the city threaten to withhold funding over the same reason last year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.