Rue Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 This nonsense about the west being responsible for the abhorrent views of refugees that are based on the Koran is absurd. Yes its as absurd as arguing because at one point the Canadian government did not allow gay marriages or some people don't feel comfortable with transgendered people or are bigots towards them, you or I shouldn't criticize Mulsim society My point is we should criticize anyone with questionable views, and just because they are Muslims or refugees not avoid criticizing those views-on the other hand my point also remains, not all refugees or Muslims or anyone else necessarily has those views and its clear certain posters won't take the time to differentiate the two either purposely or unintentionally on both sides of the argument as can be seen in the responses. Nowhere in your posts have I seen you say you are against all Muslims or all refugees coming to Canada, nowehere, but the game as you know is to twist your comments or mine as if we are saying that. Its why I have defended Argus or Army Guy in the past and why I stand by you. If I thought you were a bigot I would take you on. I do not, I consider you a conservative consistent with his views and if anything who hates everyone equally. I am tired of your posts or the r responses of Argus or Kimmy or some others being restated falsely but its par for the course. None of you needed my defence and I don't always agree with you but I put that out there anyways. I also appreciate Dialamah who totally disagrees with our positions debates formally and with great honour and does not avoid the difference in opinion but addresses it directly. I respect Dialamah's views because they are stated very well and challenge my own.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 I think the idea that women having been elected as leaders of Muslim countries is indicative of the level of equality women enjoy in Muslim countries might be comparable to the idea that Obama being elected POTUS is indicative of the level of equality African Americans enjoy in the USA. Nah...it's more like the level of equality "enjoyed" by First Nations in Canada. Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Nah...it's more like the level of equality "enjoyed" by First Nations in Canada. That too. I believe we have had FN people in government. Still worse for the women, though...
Rue Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Here's a few for you. http://www.wisemuslimwomen.org/muslimwomen/summary/C86/category-search/heads_of_state With due respect On Guard you found one Turkish leader and one Indonesian leader and in both cases they are not Middle Eastern nations, and the Prime Minister is not the actual leader or head of their state and is in fact an inferior cabinet Minister reporting to the President. Other then that you picked people not elected. I love the current Queen of Jordan. She is articulate and does a lot of good charity work but she I not an elected official. In fact ironically all the women you pointed out were subordinate to their husbands in their capacities.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 (edited) That too. I believe we have had FN people in government. Still worse for the women, though... Not as many as "African Americans", particulary at the regional and local levels. Canada already has its own equality crimes against "visible minorities", so no need to draft foreigners for examples. Edited January 31, 2016 by bush_cheney2004 Economics trumps Virtue.
Rue Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Are you talking Middle East or countries where the population is majority Muslim? Because these women have been elected leaders of their countries: Tansu Çiller, elected prime minister of Turkey, 1993-1996 Benazir Bhutto, elected prime minister of Pakistan 1988-1990, 1993-1996 Mame Madior Boye, appointed prime minister of Senegal, 2001-2002. Megawati Sukarnoputri, elected president of Indonesia, 2001-2004 Khaleda Zia, elected prime minister of Bangladesh, 1991-1996 and 2001-2006 Sheikh Hasina, elected prime minister of Bangladesh 2009- Roza Otunbayeva, president of Kyrgyzstan, 2010- 2011 Atifete Jahjaga, elected president of Kosovo 2011- Not one Middle East country and ironically one who was assassinated. Lol.
On Guard for Thee Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 With due respect On Guard you found one Turkish leader and one Indonesian leader and in both cases they are not Middle Eastern nations, and the Prime Minister is not the actual leader or head of their state and is in fact an inferior cabinet Minister reporting to the President. Other then that you picked people not elected. I love the current Queen of Jordan. She is articulate and does a lot of good charity work but she I not an elected official. In fact ironically all the women you pointed out were subordinate to their husbands in their capacities. The reference was to women elected as Muslim leaders, not specifically in ME countries
On Guard for Thee Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 That too. I believe we have had FN people in government. Still worse for the women, though... We do as we speak.
On Guard for Thee Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 I think the idea that women having been elected as leaders of Muslim countries is indicative of the level of equality women enjoy in Muslim countries might be comparable to the idea that Obama being elected POTUS is indicative of the level of equality African Americans enjoy in the USA. Except I suspect it's much worse for the women. Of course we all know that the level of equality in becoming POTUS is directly commensurate with how many truckloads of super pac money you have behind you.
Rue Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Once again, you are saying things that don't exist. At least not outside of your head and in reality. I have never generalized Jews. Some of the leading advocates for human rights for Palestinians are Jews. Don't confuse yourself and others when describing Zionism. Being anti-Zionist is not anti-Jewish. Zionism, unfortunately, is an ideal that is okay with trampling all over another person's human rights for its own gains. If there is a Zionist that is not okay with the treatment of Palestinians and the land stolen from Palestinians (as according to international law), then they are certainly an anomaly. Your second sentence is a personal insult. Your previous comments generalizing about Jews are on this forum for all to read. Being anti Zionist can be anti Jewish particularly as you have used it. Your past references to Zionism being a cancer in need of being wiped out is precisely along with other comments an example of passive aggressive references to all Jews not just Zionist Jews. This position you take where you can slur Jews as long as they are Zionists is insincere and dishonest When you have criticized Zionism you have done so to say NO Jew should be allowed a state. You do not come on this forum to state Muslims should not have Muslim states or Britain should disband and refrain from calling itself an Anglican state or the Catholics should not have a state, the Vatican. You do not have a problem with over 150 nations in the world indentifying people for special entry for citizenship such as the Chinese, Japanese, Irish, Italians, Belgians, Germans, Czechs, Lithuanians, Estonians. Ukrainians. but when Israel does it you do. You pick out only Jews, a collective people, only Jews as the one people of the world you think have cancer because they believe and have a state. When you do so, you show what is at the pith and substance of your position towards Jews. You can only see as a people inferior to Christians and Muslims and not having the states they do. You see us as unable to define our being Jewish as an Italian doe Italians, or a Chinese does Chinese. That Sir, makes you not simply anti Zionist. The personal insult I understand. When you can't defend your position you try bait me personally.
cybercoma Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Last time I looked the problem was not with young mr khadr, as the member shady pointed out to you it was the Khadr family that has been very vocal or their dislike for our nation.....And as much as I like young omar, he is the only one within his family making an attempt to adjust.... you also dismiss the fact that the Khadr family is not alone in their distaste for our country....who speak of as though there is no issue with Muslims adjusting to Canadian culture, that there is no conversations ongoing about bringing in Shia law, or their unhappiness with western values.....You know not even all Muslim countries recognize Sharia Law as the law of the land, right? There's a million Muslims in Canada, don't you suppose if Sharia was going to become law here they would have enough Muslims to back it if every Muslim here believed that it should take precedence over Canadian law? These fears you people have are completely unfounded and show a stunning disregard for the fact that we are protecting Muslims from OTHER Muslims. Yet, there are way too damn many people here who can't get it through their heads that Islam itself and Muslims the,selves are not the problem. Now pay attention, the zealots and radicals are a problem. And that includes the knuckle dragging, bed sheet wearing, flathand saluting variety we claim as our own.
cybercoma Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 sigh. The ME has been fighting for over 1400 years, Hardly the wests` fault.And the West hasn't?
cybercoma Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 (edited) I sincerely suggested your repeated like commentary is thread worthy on its own - something along the lines of 'why is everybody keeping the white guy down?'. Your call - carry on. . Or calling Barack Obama the "affirmative action president" despite him winning a democratic election. But sure. No racism to see here. Edited January 31, 2016 by cybercoma
Guest Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Of course we all know that the level of equality in becoming POTUS is directly commensurate with how many truckloads of super pac money you have behind you. I daresay. I don't know how that makes a difference to the point, though.
Rue Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 In post 30132, posted 24 January 2016 - 04:48 PM, Small C responded to my comment that sexually deviant behaviour has a genetic predisposition by stating and I quote: "What a racist notion that is." I was banned 5 days when I tried to respond to the above . I am now rephrasing my response as the original context in which I stated my response was not intended as a personal insult but to suggest throwing out the word racist too quickly can be an intellectually lazy exercise in the sense it does not take sufficient time to understand the point but gives an excuse to shut it down by crying racism. My comment at no time suggested Muslims have a genetic predisposition to sexual deviancy as the response from Small C infers. I contend calling what I said racist is an attempt to use the word to shut down by shout down, the point I was actually trying to make which was in fact to point out religion by itself is just one factor when analyzing what makes people violent-which is anything but racist, ironically. I can't be bothered to respond to Small C further on this topic other than to say to him, please type out "genetic predisposition to sexually violent behaviour" on yahoo or google or or bing to understand the point I was making. I say to everyone not just Small C, religion, environment, culture, diet, genetic predisposition, ethnicity, socio-economic status, all can be factors in shaping and molding sexual behaviour and in a rational conversation about sexual violence, all would have to be analyzed not just religion and when some of us criticize Islamic societies we do so keeping all the above in mind and criticizing their societies no different than we do our own. . That was the point I was trying to make.
Charles Anthony Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Folks, Please avoid the personal banter. None of you are the topic of the thread discussion. We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
Smallc Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 I don't believe in dividing humanity by genetics as it serves to emphasize a distinction without a difference. I was very careful to not direct what I said at a person (I did not call anyone a racist), but st the idea, which is false and less than constructive. We now return to your regularly scheduled program.
Shady Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Or calling Barack Obama the "affirmative action president" despite him winning a democratic election. But sure. No racism to see here. Nope. I referred to him as that because he's not held to the same standard as other presidents.
WestCanMan Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 I see there are posters here who are advising “caution” in Canadian dealings with refugees. There have been demonstrations in the UK by organizations advising “caution”. They are the South East Alliance (who are angry, white and proud), the East Kent English Patriots and the North West Infidels (check out their views). I read this much of your post, no need to go on any further. You just basically equated any vote against an open-door policy is equally racist. Are you for real or just trolling? If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
WestCanMan Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 you're late to the party... the, "getting pissed at attempting to provide data perspective... data qualification... where none existed prior", party! . You're late to the "admitting that there's even the slightest problem" party. If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Argus Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 please, follow closer. I said 'was on' as in the very pointed exchanges concerning one particular focus. It is most welcome that you choose to now directly speak to a broader focus... but, as always, we (Canada at large, if I might) can learn from you as you might endevour to apply your concerns inward to Canada and speak to what practical measures Canada should be following (that aren't being actioned), to relieve your fears of, as you said, 'rape clubs forming'. . Stop bringing in tens of thousands more third world Muslims every year. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 (edited) are you saying you have no representative data to support your statements/claims? Just who/what (continue generalizing as you must), within your target team has so, apparently to you, stymied your data want and constrained you in your ability to properly substantiate your concerns? Most cities are run by left wing politicians, and have directed police agencies to not collect such data. The police take their queue from this. Many Canadian police agencies “actively suppress” racial data when delivering their annual crime reports to Ottawa — a trend that is both disturbing and growing, according to a study released Wednesday. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/police-routinely-suppress-racial-data-in-canada-study-says Edited January 31, 2016 by Argus "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
WestCanMan Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 (edited) I took that as qualifying comment offering a professional insight into factors/influences on behaviour and subsequent failed integration into society. You're asking for "proof that behaviour ifluences will be forevah"? Really? Oh my! It was a failed attempt to mitigate the damage to the reputation of the perpetrators. You're trying awfully hard to swing some of the blame from the rapist to the victim. No, I was asking for proof that the north Africans were going to be held in a state of jobless limbo forever. That would be reason for some form of rebellion (raping women isn't a recognized form of rebellion though). If it wasn't going to last forever, then they should have been happy to have free food and shelter in the interim. Edited January 31, 2016 by WestCanMan If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Smallc Posted January 31, 2016 Report Posted January 31, 2016 Nope. I referred to him as that because he's not held to the same standard as other presidents. He seems to be held to a higher standard if the petty criticism is any indication.
Recommended Posts