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

[Bonam]

Yes, we have a suggestion of a set of screening questions to see if immigration candidates hold "Canadian values". Fine with me, but is that we have pages and pages on this topic and new threads daily ?

Not sure I understand the last sentence, it seems to be missing a few words to make sense.

As eyeball suggested, it's really just about picking a fight, or maybe just feeling good about yourself - which is kind of vain when you think about it.

It's people talking about things that are on their minds. Nothing wrong with that.

[Michael Hardner]

Not sure I understand the last sentence, it seems to be missing a few words to make sense.

I'm saying that this topic is discussed to excess on here, especially considering the lack of substantive ideas that come out of it.

It's people talking about things that are on their minds. Nothing wrong with that.

Actually, the forum asks a little more of us than that.

Mapleleafweb operates these forums in the hopes that they will promote intelligent, honest and responsible discussion. We encourage you to speak your mind on relevant issues in a thoughtful way.

[Bonam]

I'm saying that this topic is discussed to excess on here, especially considering the lack of substantive ideas that come out of it.

Do you feel the same way about the climate change discussions? About the Israel vs Palestine discussions? About the Harper sucks threads?

If we get rid of everything that's been discussed extensively before, we'd be down to just about nothing in terms of threads.

And the reality is there is still much to discuss. There is far from universal agreement on these topics, even from people who are on the same side of the political spectrum.

[Michael Hardner]

Do you feel the same way about the climate change discussions?

Now that you mention it, I do. Maybe once a year or so new information comes up that's worth discussing.

About the Israel vs Palestine discussions?

No. There's usually a lot of news and activity around that issue.

About the Harper sucks threads?

Not always, but almost always yes.

If we get rid of everything that's been discussed extensively before, we'd be down to just about nothing in terms of threads.

It's not that, it's just that there's nothing new that impacts the discussion. Another honour killing, another bombing on the other side of the world isn't much of a change. The recent riot in Libya and the protest in Canada, though, is relevant.

How many new threads on this topic, though ?

And the reality is there is still much to discuss. There is far from universal agreement on these topics, even from people who are on the same side of the political spectrum.

There's no agreement on these topics, but since there isn't even a foundation for discussion then the "much to discuss" can't really be discussed with any progression.

[-TSS-]

The video was a silly provocation but it astonishes me and certainly many others how the video is considered as an alleviating circumstance to the resulting riots; as if ofending people's religios sensitivities gave them some right to run amok and destroy and even kill people who share the same nationality of the ones who made the video. It is frightening how many people here in the western world believe that we must bow to every whim made by muslims or if we didn't we deserve the consequences.

[kraychik]

The thing is DoP , anyone can protest for any reason. we allow it, and none of us want to advocate stopping the expression, whether we agree with said protest or not.

Nobody has even suggested that anyone's right to protest be removed.

Secondly, you and I both know there will be no change to our laws to accommodate what they want. They will never get traction, not now, not in ten years.

There will be no sharia law either.

Speak for yourself. DogOnPorch, Wild Bill, and myself are all on the same page with respect to this issue. We do not "know" that basic freedoms will be eternally preserved in Canada. The struggle against tyranny is neverending, and within a democratic society is the mechanism for self-destruction if the electorate gets lazy and passive, like you clearly have become. You just take it on faith that basic freedoms in Canada will endure despite a lot of evidence to the contrary. The best example being the (so-called) Human Rights Act of 1977 that built the foundation for the ridiculous provincially-administered (so-called) Human Rights Tribunals. The basic rights of freedom of speech and expression are being eroded in Canada, and they are under greater threat as we continue to import people into our society that have contempt for these values.

You're basically telling us that everything's fine and everything will always be fine. That doesn't make for a compelling argument when we see all levels of society, from the rabble-rousing Muslims featured in the video from the original post to academics, media personalities and politicians encouraging us to revisit our basic freedoms and restrict them further in order to acquiesce to violence.

It is no different that 1000's protest this because it says nothing on the face of it. They will never get what they protest for, and will in time move on, whether physiscally or otherwise. We already have blasphemy laws on our books, supposedly they won before the protest was organized. But you and I and everyone else with one ignorant exception, know that the blasphemy laws have gone unused for a century. On top of that, legal experts all agree a chrage under that law would never get past first sniff as it violates our charter.

What are you talking about? The Charter is regularly being violated via the notwithstanding clause. Consider the ridiculous language laws in Quebec and the kangaroo courts known as Human Rights Tribunals I mentioned earlier. All is not well, although you're trying to suggest otherwise. Unfortunately for you, not all of us are asleep at the switch. Spare us your references to "legal experts" you couldn't even name without running to so an internet search. On the contrary, real legal experts have been warning for a long time that we're eroding our basic freedoms in Canada.

But I dont see all of them expressing a need for change, I do see them expressing how upset that there religion was maligned (or truth, whatever floast the the boat)

Of course it isn't all of them. Muslims are not a homogenous group. The problem is that there is a large proportion of them that are demanding a destruction of freedom of speech and expression. And they're demanding it everywhere: in Canada, the USA, the UK, virtually every other country in Europe, in Russia, and in Australia. Like Michael Hardner, you don't realise that things actually exist even while you're unaware of them. Protests, riots, and attacks have occurred in Toronto, London, Moscow, Baku, Bern, Paris, Rome, Athens, Oslo, Sydney, and many other cities Western countries as a consequence of the agitation from Muslim religious authorities regarding the "Innocence of Muslims" film. This isn't something insignificant that you can sweep under the rug as the CBC and the National Post have done.

Fair enough, it sucks, but protests turning ugly are a norm of society. Should we castigate this one, yes, but we should fairly castigate all that protest violently. The violence is the problem, not the religion of said protestors.

Ever consider that these threads are specific to certain events, and not a broader discussion about violent riots and protests in general? These events have nothing to do with the 2011 Stanley Cup riot in Vancouver, and you'r desperately trying to dilute the discussion because, like Michael Hardner, the truth upsets you.

But some (one) do need to face up to that mantra because they are believing that one is the same as all.

Nevermind the fact that I have stated repeatedly and clearly that I do not lump all Muslims into one category, despite your desperate attempt to characterise my comments as such.

As Canada ages, these people will have kids who lessen the righteousness of their parents. With each and every generation the kids and their kids absorb and integrate the culture that surrounds them.

But the opposite is occurring, we're seeing increased radicalism and fundamentalism from younger generations in the West. You're just parroting a myth that assimilation and integration is inevitable, while all the evidence shows us something else. You're essentially telling DogOnPorch not to believe his lying eyes. I don't think he's buying your brand.

We saw it in Vancouver during the Oly's. Tons of kids of immigrants all cheering on Canada.

As I've already explained, this is completely irrelevant, and a desperate attempt by you to derail the conversation in order to shut down honest discussion.

We see it in Italians of 2nd 3rd and so on generations, who while holding on to some values passed down, they only hold on to innocuous parts, ie family dinners, food, etc and let go the restrictive aspects of an old culture (dad is always right, daughters cant date but the boys can go F around at will)

Italian are the only ones, see it in Polish and E Euro cultures all the time. And dont forget, there was a fair bit of mouth foaming when the damn I-ties moved in what with the curly cue railings and the nice gardens.

What you're doing is assuming that all cultures are equally amenable to assimilation/integration into Canadian (and, more broadly, Western) societies. This is predicated on the falsehood of cultural relativism.

Edited September 30, 2012 by kraychik

[kraychik]

That line-o-thought I'd normally agree with. Plus, I never start these squabbles. You can take a boo and confirm that, if you like. But, I don't think one can actually condemn too much when it comes to our ability to say things and point out that lo, the Emperor really ISN'T wearing any clothes. When I see two guys with a 'Down with Free Speech' sign, I don't get alarmed. When I see thousands willing to get off their butts and demand blasphemy laws while at the same time demanding vengeance...errr...justice, I think: "Who are THEY voting for?"

You and I both know who they're voting for, and you and I both know exactly why their political beneficiaries pander to them on these issues.

[Michael Hardner]

Of course it isn't all of them. Muslims are not a homogenous group. The problem is that there is a large proportion of them that are demanding a destruction of freedom of speech and expression.

And they're demanding it everywhere: in Canada,

...

Nevermind the fact that I have stated repeatedly and clearly that I do not lump all Muslims into one category, despite your desperate attempt to characterise my comments as such.

Of course not - you lump 'a large proportion' ... you don't provide evidence and then your response is that things occur that people are unaware of. That's a new one on me.

What you're doing is assuming that all cultures are equally amenable to assimilation/integration into Canadian (and, more broadly, Western) societies. This is predicated on the falsehood of cultural relativism.

Why would a group not be able to assimilate, unlike every other group.

[kraychik]

And I thank you. It's Brown Shirt-like behavior that riles me and I don't care who does it. Civilized folks expecting a civilized response from an uncivilized movement. Tolerating intolerance and all that jazz. It didn't work on You-Know-Who and it won't work with the forces aligned against us now. What to do next is anyone's guess. But, turning into the Beast With Five Fingers as per: the monster is us certainly isn't the right idea. Tried that with the Japanese and it turns out Dr Suzuki wasn't in command of the Japanese navy. However, I do have to agree with K--- that certain major news medias were oddly silent for their own reasons...notably the NP and the CBC....which should have covered it. That is also an example of the wrong thing to do, IMO.

It should also be noted that protests, demonstrations, and riots took place in many cities, and most of the Canadian media landscape (primarily the CBC, of course) buried the events. What they did cover, barely, were the events in Tunis, Benghazi, and Cairo. What they didn't cover for transparent reasons were similar events in Toronto, London, Paris, Bern, Oslo, Sydney, and so forth.

The CBC deliberately chose not to cover these events. Why? It's obvious to some of us.

Apparently this wasn't newsworthy as part of the broader context of the attacks on American embassies and consulates (most of the American media landscape buried these events, as well):

Edited September 30, 2012 by kraychik

[kraychik]

Of course not - you lump 'a large proportion' ... you don't provide evidence and then your response is that things occur that people are unaware of. That's a new one on me.

Of course, because until a group of "social scientists" conduct a poll about Muslim attitudes towards freedom of speech and expression and have it published in a peer-reviewed journal, we can't possibly have any idea what they might be, right?

Remember folks, if a tree falls in the woods and Michae Hardner doesn't hear it, then it doesn't make a sound.

Why would a group not be able to assimilate, unlike every other group.

Right, because in the imaginary world within which you live, all groups are exactly alike with the same proclivities. Do you ever get bored of basing your worldview off of such demonstrably untrue false premises?

[kraychik]

Not sure I understand the last sentence, it seems to be missing a few words to make sense.

It's people talking about things that are on their minds. Nothing wrong with that.

Michael Hardner hates open and honest discussion about issues that make him uncomfortable. What makes him uncomfortable, you may ask? Inconvenient truths that are irreconcilable with his utopian and leftist worldview. His brain short circuits and he begins to deride the dialogue as "unsubstantive" and "without evidence".

[Michael Hardner]

Of course, because until a group of "social scientists" conduct a poll about Muslim attitudes towards freedom of speech and expression and have it published in a peer-reviewed journal, we can't possibly have any idea what they might be, right?

Remember folks, if a tree falls in the woods and Michae Hardner doesn't hear it, then it doesn't make a sound.

Of course, I'd much rather read an entire thread based on your hunches about human nature.

Right, because in the imaginary world within which you live, all groups are exactly alike with the same proclivities. Do you ever get bored of basing your worldview off of such demonstrably untrue false premises?

Well, assimilation into a larger culture seems to be universal thus far. It's quite natural to ask why you think there would be an exception here ?

[Michael Hardner]

Michael Hardner hates open and honest discussion about issues that make him uncomfortable. What makes him uncomfortable, you may ask? Inconvenient truths that are irreconcilable with his utopian and leftist worldview. His brain short circuits and he begins to deride the dialogue as "unsubstantive" and "without evidence".

"truths" are objective facts, not fringe ideas that were given birth by your brain.

You're complaining about the nature of discussion itself. Sorry, but you don't get an exception from the rules for your pet topics.

[kraychik]

Well, assimilation into a larger culture seems to be universal thus far. It's quite natural to ask why you think there would be an exception here ?

Why don't we start with the lack of violence from non-Muslims in response to free expression that lampoons their religious beliefs? Where are the Christians storming American embassies when Bill Maher insults Christianity, or where are the Jews doing the same when anti-Semitic messages are presented every hour of every day in Muslim-majority tyrannies?

The funny thing is you occupy an island of delusion where reality doesn't exist until it's hammered into your mind. Until an idea is spoonfed to you, it simply doesn't exist, right? You can now resort to page two of your playbook: demanding studies and evidence of everything you're unaware of.

[Michael Hardner]

Why don't we start with the lack of violence from non-Muslims in response to free expression that lampoons their religious beliefs?

I think you yourself have commented on 'backwards cultures' have you not ? As such, you can go back in time even a few hundred years and find examples of Christian societies with backwards beliefs. It doesn't mean that people from the culture won't be assimilated.

You can now resort to page two of your playbook: demanding studies and evidence of everything you're unaware of.

Not playbook, it's forum rules.

[kraychik]

I think you yourself have commented on 'backwards cultures' have you not ? As such, you can go back in time even a few hundred years and find examples of Christian societies with backwards beliefs. It doesn't mean that people from the culture won't be assimilated.

Silly me, I thought we were having a discussion about contemporary politics and events.

[Michael Hardner]

Silly me, I thought we were having a discussion about contemporary politics and events.

It's relevant, though, to the point of assimilation. Children born into our society will learn our values, including those of tolerance and acceptance.

[wyly]

I think you yourself have commented on 'backwards cultures' have you not ? As such, you can go back in time even a few hundred years and find examples of Christian societies with backwards beliefs. It doesn't mean that people from the culture won't be assimilated.

not something you go back a few hundred years to find... some of us adults on the forum are old enough to remember the bigotry of christian canadian american societies of last century

a little history lesson on christian tolerance from wiki...

Beals was 13 years old when in May 1955, she chose to go to Central High school, an all-white school. Two years later, she was enrolled as a student at Central High. White students and some parents spat at and mocked the integrating students. The Nine also faced mobs that forced President Dwight D. Eisenhower to send in the 101st Airborne Division to protect their lives after the governor of Arkansas, Orval Faubus, used troops to block the Nine's entry to the school. At least one white student, a senior named Link, helped her avoid dangerous areas during the school day, and a few Central High students were benign and even slightly helpful, but for the most part, she and the other black students faced daily hostility and persecution.[1] In her book Warriors Don't Cry, Beals described one extreme incident in which a segregationist student threw acid into her eyes, attempting to blind her. Beals wrote in Warriors Don't Cry that she planned on returning to Central High for the 1958–59 school year, but Governor Faubus shut down Little Rock's high schools that failed to resist integration,[2] leading other school districts across the South to do the same.[citation needed] Not until the fall of 1960 did Central High reopen on an integrated basis.

[wyly]

It's relevant, though, to the point of assimilation. Children born into our society will learn our values, including those of tolerance and acceptance.

hopefully those children will learn nothing from kraychik...unless the lesson learned is what is not acceptable...

[kraychik]

It's relevant, though, to the point of assimilation. Children born into our society will learn our values, including those of tolerance and acceptance.

Exactly, like Omar Khadr. Or the 7/7 bombers? Or Nidal Hassan, Faisal Shezad, or Omar Abdulmutallab? Perhaps those who plotted terrorism in Toronto and Ottawa (including the pathologist who showed up on Canadian Idol)? Maybe you're thinking of Hasan Akbar? Or maybe the massacre at the Nord-Ost theatre in Moscow? Or perhaps the massacre at the school in Beslan? Maybe the 2004 Madrid train bombings? Or perhaps those freedom loving folks shown in the original video demanding the destruction of freedom of speech and expression? Maybe Anjem Chodhary? Or the folks at Revolution Muslim? Maybe those peaceful Muslims who recently called for death to all those who "insult the prophet" in Syndey? Maybe Mohamed Merah? Maybe John Allen Muhamad and Lee Boyd Malvo? Maybe Louis Farrakhan? Maybe Jason Abdo? Maybe Mohamad Elmasry from the Canadian Islamic Congress?

[wyly]

Exactly, like Omar Khadr. Or the 7/7 bombers? Or Nidal Hassan, Faisal Shezad, or Omar Abdulmutallab? Perhaps those who plotted terrorism in Toronto and Ottawa (including the pathologist who showed up on Canadian Idol)? Maybe you're thinking of Hasan Akbar? Or maybe the massacre at the Nord-Ost theatre in Moscow? Or perhaps the massacre at the school in Beslan? Maybe the 2004 Madrid train bombings? Or perhaps those freedom loving folks shown in the original video demanding the destruction of freedom of speech and expression? Maybe Anjem Chodhary? Or the folks at Revolution Muslim? Maybe those peaceful Muslims who recently called for death to all those who "insult the prophet" in Syndey? Maybe Mohamed Merah? Maybe John Allen Muhamad and Lee Boyd Malvo? Maybe Louis Farrakhan? Maybe Jason Abdo? Maybe Mohamad Elmasry from the Canadian Islamic Congress?

or maybe like timothy mcveigh ...rev jim jones... Edited September 30, 2012 by wyly

[kraychik]

or maybe like timothy mcveigh

Wanna have a contest to see who can name more? I'll even give you a helping hand - Jared Loughner and James Holmes. The problem is, of course, that there is no underlying ideological common denominator that unifies these mass murderers. So it's a sort of apples and oranges comparison, which is par for the course with socialists like you.

[Wild Bill]

It's relevant, though, to the point of assimilation. Children born into our society will learn our values, including those of tolerance and acceptance.

Not quite, Michael. I worked with some Muslim teenagers once and learned a lot from them on the REAL situation!

I agree that children born into our society will most always WANT to learn our values! The problem with many Muslim communities is that the Imams and many of the parents are well aware of that tendency and do their level best to fight it!

Many Muslim church leaders actively rail from the pulpit against diluting not just the values of Islam but more often the cultural values of the country from which that community came. It is rare to see immigrant Muslims from many different countries worship at the nearest mosque. Almost always there is a specific mosque for that specific immigrant community.

So the teenagers I talked to were between a rock and a hard place. They wanted the freedom of being mainstream Canadian kids but were under immense pressure to instead practice and preserve the cultural values of whatever country their family came from.

Of the dozen or so kids I worked with, ALL of them were expected to go through with marriages arranged by their parents, even though the kids all believed that this was NOT something from the Koran but merely a cultural practice of the "old country". The kids were all secretly dating each other but were all sadly aware that nothing could ever come of it, since they eventually would be forced to marry under the arrangement.

I think the difference perhaps with Islam is that Canada has never seen a large immigration from cultures so dramatically different from our own parent culture. Britain, France and Europe were basically all Christian, either Roman Catholic or of various offshoots. Most cultural values were quite similar. The idea of arranged marriages hasn't been held for centuries! We value individual freedom far more highly than do communities in countries like Somalia. The idea of the local parish priest running our lives died during the Middle Ages.

So your premise about assimilation is only true in general. With the specific cultures of many middle eastern countries that happen to be Islamic, those that govern the culture are well aware of assimilation and actively fight it!

This is a new thing for western societies and is becoming the source of much friction and backlash. Countries like France would only become officially Islamic after much blood was spilled!

I'm afraid this problem will only get worse before it is resolved. Even here in Canada, older immigrants are resisting the assimilation of their children to the point of drowning nearly the entire female side of a family by pushing a car into a canal!

True, these are isolated instances but their very extreme nature implies that there are likely far more instances that while not going that far are likely examples of strong and violent to a lesser degree.

It is a unique situation, Michael. It must be dealt with in a unique manner.

[Michael Hardner]

I agree that children born into our society will most always WANT to learn our values! The problem with many Muslim communities is that the Imams and many of the parents are well aware of that tendency and do their level best to fight it!

That will change with time.

I think the difference perhaps with Islam is that Canada has never seen a large immigration from cultures so dramatically different from our own parent culture.

This country was founded on such cultural differences, which is why tolerance is such a mainstay of Canadian culture.

I'm afraid this problem will only get worse before it is resolved. Even here in Canada, older immigrants are resisting the assimilation of their children to the point of drowning nearly the entire female side of a family by pushing a car into a canal!

Honour killings happen in other cultures too and we don't stop immigration because of crime and regressive attitudes from the homeland.

It is a unique situation, Michael. It must be dealt with in a unique manner.

I can accept that - as long as it's dealt with positively.

[Bonam]

Well, assimilation into a larger culture seems to be universal thus far. It's quite natural to ask why you think there would be an exception here ?

Why? That question can be answered from two angles. Theoretically, and empirically.

From a theoretical standpoint, here's a few reasons:

- Modern technology allows people to communicate with and stay in touch with their homeland and its culture more than ever before. In the past, immigrants in a new land were immersed in it and had basically no communication with home. Today that is not the case.

- The rates of immigration. Assimilation happens at a certain rate. If the rate of immigration is higher, then the immigrant culture starts to overwhelm the native culture. There are plentiful examples of this in history, such as European immigration overwhelming Native American cultures.

- The relatively recent policies of modern multiculturalism, which emphasize "celebrating" diverse cultures, rather than encouraging immigrants to adapt to their new culture, as was the norm in the past

And then we have empirical evidence that shows assimilation is not working as it has in the past:

- Growing ethnic enclaves

- Entire areas where foreign languages are dominant

- Unrest due to supposed offenses against some immigrant cultures

- Human rights tribunals repressing the rights of Canadians when people of foreign cultures feel they have been "offended"

- Thousands of individual cases of honor killings, "home grown" terrorism, religious violence, gang rapes, and other criminal acts committed by individuals of certain foreign cultures, at rates far higher than comparable acts are committed by people not from those cultures

Now, if we were getting some huge benefit from all this immigration from certain parts of the world, maybe one could make the argument that the above was somehow worth it. But I challenge anyone to provide proof that having hundreds of thousands of immigrants from third world societies/cultures somehow benefits Canada. There are immigrants from all around the world, from more advanced nations whose cultures more closely match our own, from Europe and China and India and Southeast Asia and South America, with valuable skills who have spent their lives living under the rule of laws not too dissimilar to those we have here, who are also waiting, by the millions, to get into Canada.

Why do we have to scrape the bottom of the barrel of barbarous third world hellholes and theocracies for our immigrants when there are so many better candidates? And why do we require such high immigration rates to begin with, when unemployment rates remain as high as they are?

Edited September 30, 2012 by Bonam