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

[Black Dog]

and godwins law isn't a law, it's an irrelevant internet meme...putting the word "law" behind anything doesn't give it legitimacy...

Cool story bro.

[Black Dog]

There's a key word here. Minority. And you are right, when it is a minority, over time, they will indeed most likely become integrated. But what about when immigrants are not the minority? What about when there are more immigrants than natives? What about when entire cities or large subsections of cities are predominated by one or two immigrant cultures? I'll tell you what happens: the native culture disappears, replaced by that of the newcomers. And there are just as many examples of this in history as there are of assimilation. If we want to maintain our culture, immigration rates must be controlled and limited so that this does not happen.

Such as?

[DogOnPorch]

My complaint is that threads that say "I don't like this situation" with no opportunity for progessive discussion aren't useful.

Apparently discussion about the situation shall remain in a tiny box w/o reference to past situations. It's sort of like discussing the roots of the Viet-Nam War without bring-up WW2.

[kraychik]

Every group is different from any other group in some respect. I'm looking for the "curse" that renders this particular group inassimilatable (?). Keep in mind that historically every new group of immigrants is described as being a problem.

Do you or do you not realise that radicalism/fundamentalism is a problem within Islamic culture to a significantly greater and more dangerous degree than with virtually all other cultures?

Put another way, do you expect CSIS to have as many churches and synagogues under surveillance for incitement towards and material support towards terrorismas mosques?

[Michael Hardner]

Apparently discussion about the situation shall remain in a tiny box w/o reference to past situations.

How so ? Black Dog and I have both brought up history in this very thread so your claims appear to be baseless.

History is sometimes the best reference point.

[DogOnPorch]

Such as?

Ummm...Canada, United States, Mexico, Cuba, Jamaica, Taiwan, Australia....etc.

[Black Dog]

Apparently discussion about the situation shall remain in a tiny box w/o reference to past situations. It's sort of like discussing the roots of the Viet-Nam War without bring-up WW2.

You know, just mentioning some historical figure over and over and over again without offering any real explanation as to why he matters to the subject at hand (in this case, immigration and assimilation) isn't particularly useful.

Edited October 1, 2012 by Black Dog

[madmax]

Apparently discussion about the situation shall remain in a tiny box w/o reference to past situations. It's sort of like discussing the roots of the Viet-Nam War without bring-up WW2.

Agreed and previous point taken...

My apologies..

[kraychik]

Because it's happened before with other groups?

Again, you're putting on full display an obvious fallacy that is evident even to those in primary school. You're assuming all groups are alike. It's so absurd on its face that it doesn't warrant any serious discussion.

[Black Dog]

Again, you're putting on full display an obvious fallacy that is evident even to those in primary school. You're assuming all groups are alike.

No I'm not. But thanks for playing!

[Bonam]

Such as?

Such as any mass migration of people supplanting the native culture of the area. A good example would be Europeans migrating to North America and displacing the native cultures. There are also dozens of examples of mass migrations in Europe and Asia throughout history.

[wyly]

Such as?

i'm struggling to think of one...even in invasions where one culture dominates the native culture invariable the invader becomes immersed in the native population even adopting their language in becoming one with the natives...the romans and normans were swallowed up by the natives of england, the franks were erased by the native gauls even losing their language...

[kraychik]

I actually provided a link, which is better than you do.

Wow, a Wikipedia link. Very compelling, you're quite a researcher! You'd make a great bureaucrat if you aren't already on the public dole.

Also, I caution you against accusing people of lying, especially given your propensity to post emotional responses ("sick" and "disgusting" reactions et al.) and the old saying about glass houses.

Oh, so now MLW is instituting rules against using "emotional" language? Perhaps you should get together with the other administrators of the website and release a dictionary outlining which words are permissible so that I don't make the mistake of using terms like "sick" and "disgusting" again when describing sick and disgusting ideological persuasions.

More opinion posted as if it were fact.

Yeah, it's sure hard to compete with your "factual" link to a Wikipedia article about immigration.

[Argus]

- 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 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

These are the points I would discount.

Being able to watch TV channels, talk to the relatives, hear about multiculturalism at school... to me negligible. We have a melting pot the same as the US... government spending on such things is marginal and the influence of far flung cultures... my impression is that they're not great.

They are certainly not negligible. Ethnic immigrant communities today can read newspapers and watch the daily news from 'home', watch movies, video and television from 'home', talk regularly with relatives at 'home', visit 'home', and arrange for their children to marry someone from 'home' (and do so frequently) so that the following generation will continue to resist assimilation. This is far different from early immigrants, for whom 'home' was far in the distant past, beyond reach and sight, and nearly impossible to even consider visiting again. That is a huge mental break with the past which does not exist today. Hell, we have half a million 'Canadians' who went 'home' to live in Lebanon. How much commitment to their new status as Canadians do you think these people held? Think they'll be assimilating any time soon?

[kraychik]

They have to go to school and mix, they have to work ... every other group has done this and assimilated.

They don't have to do anything. They certainly don't have to mix or work. Moreover, Canada's "multiculturalism" policy specifically seeks to prevent acculturation from occurring.

Edited October 1, 2012 by kraychik

[Black Dog]

Such as any mass migration of people supplanting the native culture of the area. A good example would be Europeans migrating to North America and displacing the native cultures. There are also dozens of examples of mass migrations in Europe and Asia throughout history.

The first example was more of an invasion than a migration. And mass migrations aren't really the same thing as what we're talking about here.

I'm wondering if there's any examples of peaceful and steady (as opposed to massive and sudden) immigration that has resulted in the sublimation of the original culture.

[Michael Hardner]

Do you or do you not realise that radicalism/fundamentalism is a problem within Islamic culture to a significantly greater and more dangerous degree than with virtually all other cultures?

I haven't disputed that, have I ? If we're talking about Canadian policy (the forum this is posted in) then I'm more concerned about the perceptions around it and how it relates to policy. It's difficult to quantify the effect of culture, impacts on Canadian society vs. benefits and so on.

I do trust the Harper government to be very sharp about economic assessments in general, so maybe you can rest assured on that count. Then again, they don't seem to have made many changes to immigration so far.

Put another way, do you expect CSIS to have as many churches and synagogues under surveillance for incitement towards and material support towards terrorismas mosques?

No, I don't expect that they would. In the end, though, such things are done by a weighing of values. If you don't happen to like immigrants (I'm not saying you do or don't) then that would weigh into it.

[Michael Hardner]

They are certainly not negligible. Ethnic immigrant communities today can read newspapers and watch the daily news from 'home', watch movies, video and television from 'home',... Think they'll be assimilating any time soon?

I followed news from home when I lived overseas. It was less and less relevant to me as time went on. It's tough to measure such things, but that's my impression.

[kraychik]

Well, perhaps you could expand on your point and show why it's relevant. But we know that's not your style, which is to crap on the carpet and scamper away.

Many people have gone to great lengths in this thread to spoonfeed you information. We cannot force you connect the dots. If you don't realise by now that there is a dangerous current of Islamism that runs through many Muslim societies, and that we are importing many of these people into our country via irresponsible immigration policies, then there's really no hope that you're ever gonna see the light.

It seems to me that you've dug your heels deep into this indefensible position, and that you decided long ago to bury your head in the sand so as not to offend your leftist sensibilities.

As far as the relevance of the Quran quote DogOnPorch linked us to, perhaps this will resonate with some:

[kraychik]

Except that's not what I said. Past experience with immigration shows assimilation to be the norm, therefore it's reasonable to expect that Muslims will, by and large, assimilate. It's a broad statement to be sure, but logically sound.

That's exactly what you said. You're now trying to parse words. Despite all the terrorism going on around the world from Islamists, you still refuse to acknowledge the problem and the common denominator while it's smashing you in the face.

Beats me. Muslims are a big group and they are not monolithic in their beliefs or the extent to which they adhere to them.

Nobody ever said Muslims are monolithic. More strawman argument desperation from our resident 40-something video gaming eternal bachelor.

[Michael Hardner]

Let's make a mutual effort to respond once per post ok ?

Wow, a Wikipedia link. Very compelling, you're quite a researcher! You'd make a great bureaucrat if you aren't already on the public dole.

There was good information in there. It's better to post something like that than your previous response "I reply when I feel like it"

Oh, so now MLW is instituting rules against using "emotional" language?

I have read posters (of the right ilk) post about how leftists aren't rational and post "emotional" responses rather than "logical" ones. It's actually refreshing to read you defending irrationality believe it or not.

They don't have to do anything. They certainly don't have to mix or work.

Immigrants don't have to work, eh ?

I don't know what to say to that. I have met a lot of immigrants in Toronto and in my experience they're less likely to be unemployed than Canadians.

Moreover, Canada's "multiculturalism" policy specifically seeks to prevent acculturation from occurring.

I disagree. Stated goals are here:

The key objectives of the policy announced in October 1971 and elaborated upon over the years, were these:

to assist cultural groups to retain and foster their identity;

to assist cultural groups to overcome barriers to their full participation in Canadian society; (thus, the multiculturalism policy advocated the full involvement and equal participation of ethnic minorities in mainstream institutions, without denying them the right to identify with select elements of their cultural past if they so chose);

to promote creative exchanges among all Canadian cultural groups; and

to assist immigrants in acquiring at least one of the official languages.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0920-e.htm

See how easy it is to provide a link ?

[kraychik]

And the millions not rioting?

We're not talking about those people though, are we? So why are you bringing them up? Let me guess, in order to deflect the conversation towards something completely irrelevant. I suppose this is what you call "staying on topic"?

[Argus]

I haven't heard of too many problems lately. The US government gives them special consideration, and possibly Canada does too. It's a little more touchy than allowing Turbans, though, as they don't like paying income tax.

You're right, we English and French have assimilated poorly into their country and we're probably the worst example of immigration so far.

You appear to be making light of the questions because the answers don't support your view. What sets the likes of the Amish apart from other groups like, say, Ukrainians or Italians or Germans, who did assimilate? I would suggest it was a rigid, religiously based culture. I'm not suggesting the Italians and Ukrainians and Germans of a century ago weren't religious, but the Amish took it up a few notches. Centuries later, they retain both their cultural beliefs, and their own language. The natives also had a different religion, and a far different culture which their elders rightly did everything they could to continue to survive. The natives have assimilated more (for the most part) than the Amish, but in large measure, i believe, that's because most wound up adopting the religious beliefs of the majority community. That did not happen with the Amish. Nor is it likely to happen with Muslims.

And the fact you haven't heard of problems with the Amish is utterly irrelevant. The Amish are pacifists. No one has ever said the same about Muslims. Nor are the Amish proselytizers, while Muslims are directed by their religion to convert everyone they can, by force if necessary. And despite your beliefs, according to what I've read, the younger generation of raised-in-Canada Muslims are MORE, not LESS religious than their parents, and tend to be more radical in their religious beliefs, as well.

[madmax]

Nobody ever said Muslims are monolithic. More strawman argument desperation from our resident 40-something video gaming eternal bachelor.

Hypocrite2

: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Kraychik.....

Did Blackdog beat you on your Nintendo....

Seems you got enough to say on the gaming forums.

http://www.gamespot.com/search/?qs=Kraychik&filter=forum

[DogOnPorch]

How so ? Black Dog and I have both brought up history in this very thread so your claims appear to be baseless.

History is sometimes the best reference point.

Black Dog also made references to 'turds' while madmax suggested I 'eat it' which also seems pretty baseless.

Meanwhile...

It is tacky, apparently, to keep bringing al-Husseini into any discussion let alone one about militant Islam and the suppression of free speech. After all, he, al-Banna, Qtub, al-Qassem, etc, only "wrote the book" on it. I suppose it is tacky as he was a Nazi who initially led the Middle East's cause celeb. Nobody supporting it likes to be reminded that the Palestinian Cause is essentially a (not)dying ember of the Third Reich. But, that sounds very similar to not talking s**t about the Big Mo-, to me. Sorry to offend.