Muslims in Toronto demand end to freedom of speech and expression.

[CANADIEN]

What this tells us is that you don't grasp the crux of the issue and what's at stake. You're concerned over legalities, with some of these Muslims wishing to see the filmmaker murdered or executed. Granted, these are somewhat serious threats, and the filmmaker himself has apparently gone into hiding.

The primary concern from this story should be that these folks are expressing a desire to end freedom of speech and expression as we know it, and much of the left is in agreement with their agenda. This is part of a much broader series of events that we're seeing from those who wish to destroy our most crucial freedoms. We already have absurd "hate speech" laws on the books and kangaroo courts known as "Human Rights Tribunals" administered provincially. There doesn't seem to be a significant enough degree of support for broad protections of freedom of speech and expression in Canada. If this thread is any indication this lack of support around these basic values is evidenced in here, as well. I won't even address in detail the widespread campaign of intimidation that affects ordinary people when it comes to having honest discussions about related taboo subjects, for fear of being victimised by violence. This is serious.

Seriously interesting, coming from someone who seems to have no problem limiting who can exercise the most fundamental form of expression in a democracy - the right to vote.

[kraychik]

Seriously interesting, coming from someone who seems to have no problem limiting who can exercise the most fundamental form of expression in a democracy - the right to vote.

We already have limitations on the who has the right to vote. Anyways, nice deflection from the core issues which you are unable or unwilling to address.

[Michael Hardner]

What possible reason could there be to ignore and not point out bad behavior of any group or demonstration?

Point it out and be damned. Arrest if needed. OTOH if it's a peaceful demonstration I personally support the right if not the cause or agenda.

What is the point of pointing it out though ? You can't make conclusions about the people based on it - if you could then we would do that for all groups, and we don't.

Should we do this for races ? If not religion then why not race ?

[Tilter]

In other words, you don't think there should be any added criteria when it comes to screening applicants for residency/citizenship into Canada that take into account the candidate's set of values. Keep bringing 'em in!

As far as the CBC goes, it's completely ignored this story. As has its ally the National Post. These events happened over the weekend. Not sure what you're rolling your eyes at.

and soon the sensible policies of Iran will prevail

in Canada

Edited September 26, 2012 by Tilter

[dre]

You mean answer a post with links et al?

Ok, as soon as you do,we have 3 threads where Q's were posed , yet you run away like shady does!

Sucks huh?

Actually its more like 5 different threads where poor Kraychick has had to press the EJECT button and "ABANDON THREAD! ABANDON THREAD!".

Like this one here and his confusion over what economic stimulus is...

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=21508&pid=833785&st=135entry833785

And this one here where hes forced to "ABANDON THREAD!" again...

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?app=forums&module=post&section=post&do=reply_post&f=3&t=21571&qpid=833716

This guy has hit the old eject button more times than Feldwebel Alfred Staffa!

[CANADIEN]

We already have limitations on the who has the right to vote. Anyways, nice deflection from the core issues which you are unable or unwilling to address.

We are not talking about having only citizens voting, or restrictions in regards to prisoners, or age-based limitations. And you know it well. The same as you know, or should know, that the right to vote is the most important for of expression in a democracy. So this is part of the core issue, no matter how you want to ignore it.

You want freedom of expression - as I do and we all should do? Then there must be as little limitation as possible to the right to vote.

You want freedom of expression - as I do and we all should do? Then this includes freedom for anyone to pewacefully argue that some books, or films, or other particular forms of expression should be prohibited - however wrong that position is.

You want freedom of expression - as I do and we all should do? Then it applies to all. If a certain opinion is not illegal in our country, then it is not a valid reason for barring someone from entering here.

Unless one's stated commitment to freedom of expression includes all that, then their "defence" of freedom of expression is a hollow shell.

Now, I fully expect you to come with the "you don't think there should be a set of criteria in screening newcomers that take values into accounts". If you believe that's what I mean, then you need to learn English. What I mean is clear enough - if it is not illegal, it is not enough of a reason to bar someone. Period, end of story, clear enough.

[Black Dog]

Except most of the Canadian media did NOT cover it.

And there go the goalposts, galavanting off into the distance....

Why should the "Canadian" media cover this over nay other local event or issue?

Except, you didn't read the article.

By your logic, news of the upcoming Stanley Cup Finals constitutes coverage of the event if the actual game and its final score is ignored.

Incomplete coverage, but coverage nonetheless. And again: your allegation was the "liberal" media ignored this story. It took me about five minutes of googling to come up with multiple sources of coverage for this event, from print (including the leftist Toronto Star) to TV to radio. Your premise is demonstrably false.

Good for the National Post for speaking about the advance, but they buried the most important part: the actual event. And you're trying to spin this in a desperate attempt to shield most of the media with your fellow leftists as you circle the wagons and play the role of palace guards.

If nothing else, I do admire your steadfast and unwavering commitment to your bullshit even in the face of a enormous pile of evidence to the contrary.

[Black Dog]

The primary concern from this story should be that these folks are expressing a desire to end freedom of speech and expression as we know it, and much of the left is in agreement with their agenda.

Why is that a "concern"? Isn't allowing these people to express these views consistent with freedom of speech? Are you proposing we do not allow people to express these views.

This is part of a much broader series of events that we're seeing from those who wish to destroy our most crucial freedoms. We already have absurd "hate speech" laws on the books and kangaroo courts known as "Human Rights Tribunals" administered provincially. There doesn't seem to be a significant enough degree of support for broad protections of freedom of speech and expression in Canada.

Er...except much of what your complaining about could be interpreted as hate speech and thus subject to the restrictions you deplore. kinda difficult to see them as part of the same agenda (unless, like you, one has one's head up one's behind).

If this thread is any indication this lack of support around these basic values is evidenced in here, as well.

Cites?

I won't even address in detail the widespread campaign of intimidation that affects ordinary people when it comes to having honest discussions about related taboo subjects, for fear of being victimised by violence. This is serious.

No no: don't hold back. I'm sure you'll bring to this very serious matter the very same breadth and depth of research and thought that you've exhibited in every other one of your posts.

[bleeding heart]

Incomplete coverage, but coverage nonetheless. And again: your allegation was the "liberal" media ignored this story. It took me about five minutes of googling to come up with multiple sources of coverage for this event, from print (including the leftist Toronto Star) to TV to radio. Your premise is demonstrably false.

If something is of interest to Kraychik--particularly involving mean old Muslims or sinister lefties--then it should constitute the primary run of national news, for all sources.

If nothing else, I do admire your steadfast and unwavering commitment to your bullshit even in the face of a enormous pile of evidence to the contrary.

Yes, it takes some discipline, no doubt.

[PIK]

Predictably, you lump all Muslims together as extremist.

Even Michael Coren is more accurate than that: These were Pakistani Shia Muslims, very traditional and extremist. .. not your average Muslims.

If you lump all Christians together with Joseph Kony's 'Lord's Resistance Army. .. I think you get the point?

How many muslims were protesting against these extremists???? I can't belive we have this sort of thing in canada. Sorry people but this is the start of the end of the country we knew and love.

Edited September 26, 2012 by PIK

[Fletch 27]

Millions!!!! It just "wasnt reported on the CBC".. Ok,,, maybe none

How many muslims were protesting against these extremists????

[PIK]

Millions!!!! It just "wasnt reported on the CBC".. Ok,,, maybe none

Untill these so called moderate muslims start standing up to these people I will never trust any of them, matter of fact I don't trust any one that puts god or allah ahead of everything else. A quiet muslim is as dangerous as a extremist one.

Edited September 26, 2012 by PIK

[Michael Hardner]

Untill these so called moderate muslims start standing up to these people I will never trust any of them,

Ridiculous. We saw this after 9/11 and even after Muslim groups started behaving exactly as the anti-Muslim set demanded, we saw no change in the rhetoric.

Some people just don't like Muslims, there's no other way to put it.

[PIK]

Ridiculous. We saw this after 9/11 and even after Muslim groups started behaving exactly as the anti-Muslim set demanded, we saw no change in the rhetoric.

Some people just don't like Muslims, there's no other way to put it.

I don't like when religion it comes 1st ,muslim or christian or whoever, and to let this shit slide is very dangerous. And a snmart guy like you should know better.

[Fletch 27]

There were alot of scared people after 9/11.. Rightfully so.. There were many that condoned that horrible act.. And last weekend we had 1200 Canadian's calling for the Murder of a guy who created a 14 minute movie and the abolishment to my right to free speach. How times change...

Ridiculous. We saw this after 9/11 and even after Muslim groups started behaving exactly as the anti-Muslim set demanded, we saw no change in the rhetoric.

Some people just don't like Muslims, there's no other way to put it.

Edited September 26, 2012 by Fletch 27

[Michael Hardner]

I don't like when religion it comes 1st ,muslim or christian or whoever, and to let this shit slide is very dangerous. And a snmart guy like you should know better.

Should know better than what ? Let's put it rationally: screening immigrants based on religion is not right, it's not politically viable, and the economic costs of reducing immigration in this way will outweigh the potential risks from immigration.

The Harper government is nothing, if they're not economically pragmatic - and what are they doing about immigration ? Not that much, and they're not proposing anything like this.

There were alot of scared people after 9/11.. Rightfully so.. There were many that condoned that horrible act.. And last weekend we had 1200 Canadian's calling for the Murder of a guy who created a 14 minute movie and the abolishment to my right to free speach. How times change...

There were not 1200 Canadians doing that - nobody reported any such thing.

You want to misrepresent and lie in order to "win" the argument - so tell me again about how these immigrants are morally inferior to you ?

[Fletch 27]

Take your racial glasses off for just a Minute Michael.. I could give a rats azz is they were Scotish protesters, Mexican, Swedish or whatever.. Nor if they were "Imigrants" as you call them. Im SURE some ofthem at the protest were born in Canada.

What I DO disagree with and find Morally imprehensible and sickening (Justiftying jail-time) is anyone who calls for the MURDER of another in a public forum that was meant to incite hatred and harm to another free being.. THAT is sickening.. Take the race-card off the table..

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/09/24/protesters-call-for-death-of-man-allegedly-connected-to-anti-muslim-film

Should know better than what ? Let's put it rationally: screening immigrants based on religion is not right, it's not politically viable, and the economic costs of reducing immigration in this way will outweigh the potential risks from immigration.

The Harper government is nothing, if they're not economically pragmatic - and what are they doing about immigration ? Not that much, and they're not proposing anything like this.

There were not 1200 Canadians doing that - nobody reported any such thing.

You want to misrepresent and lie in order to "win" the argument - so tell me again about how these immigrants are morally inferior to you ?

Edited September 26, 2012 by Fletch 27

[bleeding heart]

And last weekend we had 1200 Canadian's calling for the Murder of a guy who created a 14 minute movie and the abolishment to my right to free speach. How times change...

Hey, let's just promiscuously invent "facts" so we can fix them around a point of view.

What fun!

[Michael Hardner]

Take your racial glasses off for just a Minute Michael.. I could give a rats azz is they were Scotish protesters, Mexican, Swedish or whatever.. Nor if they were "Imigrants" as you call them. Im SURE some ofthem at the protest were born in Canada.

I didn't say anything about race, and I haven't brought up race. It's about a religion, an identifiable group that people look at first when something happens, and try to use it to justify their xenophobic feelings.

What I DO disagree with and find Morally imprehensible and sickening (Justiftying jail-time) is anyone who calls for the MURDER of another in a public forum that was meant to incite hatred and harm to another free being.. THAT is sickening.. Take the race-card off the table..

You played the race card not me.

You also lied about 1200 people, and damned an entire group of generally peaceful protesters.

Would you have done that if one crazy Swede in a bunch uttered a threat ? I doubt it.

So, why would you misrepresent and lie as you did, Fletch, if you don't dislike Muslims ?

[Fletch 27]

Michael, Please... Simply read the article.... The Sun actually states 2000 people trying to quash my rights to free speach and some calling for Murder... The Globe was the paper that cited 1200 people. Please do not call me a Liar. I never said it was not peacefull and the FACTS are in the media about the coments and position.

I would appreciate an appology for your comments..

And i am 100% A-OK with Muslims and any other nationality or faith. i am NOT OK with the trodding on my rights or the murder of others.

I didn't say anything about race, and I haven't brought up race. It's about a religion, an identifiable group that people look at first when something happens, and try to use it to justify their xenophobic feelings.

You played the race card not me.

You also lied about 1200 people, and damned an entire group of generally peaceful protesters.

Would you have done that if one crazy Swede in a bunch uttered a threat ? I doubt it.

So, why would you misrepresent and lie as you did, Fletch, if you don't dislike Muslims ?

[g_bambino]

So, they're using the right to free speech to protest against free speech?

In the most ironic way, yes. That's what makes them stupid. But, there's no law against being stupid, and, much to kraychik's and others' chagrin, I'm sure, no real way to stop people who are stupid in the same way from entering the country, assuming that the people we see in the video are actually immigrants, as kraychik has.

[bleeding heart]

The Globe was the paper that cited 1200 people.

The Globe said that there were 1200 protesters...or that all 1200 of them were "calling for murder"?

Because that was your claim, Fletch. Unequivocally.

[g_bambino]

What claims are hard for you to accept?

The ones you so far have provided no proof for. I already mentioned them specifically.

It's not really a conspiracy.

Again: Then why bring it up?

I'm starting to feel a bit dizzy from this spinning in circles.

[guyser]

i am NOT OK with the trodding on my rights or the murder of others.

Which rights were violated?

[g_bambino]

The National Post is a leftist paper. Right. And Franco was a card-carrying member of the Spanish Communist Party, I guess?

No kidding. That's what I meant when I described his conspiracy theories as contradictory.