Jump to content

Islamophobia in Canada


Hudson Jones

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

For them, assuming that a woman with an hijab is either a) being forced/abused or b) if not, they are fanatic and cannot possibly be trusted not to suddenly turn into a murderous terrorist, seems to be the same as 'criticizing the religion'. 

No assumes that's always the case. We know about math, probabilities, and real life.

One thing that you and most leftists are blissfully ignorant about is the fact that the hijab symbolizes more than just forcing an unwanted fashion statement on a woman. It is a huge symbol of religious bigotry and oppression around the world and there's not even a close second.

In the Southern US racist trogs still cruise around with their confederate flag, acting like it's not a symbol of racism or hate, and the hijab is the exact same thing. Just like some people are triggered by throwbacks to racism and slavery, a lot of women who escaped appalling religious bigotry in the ME are upset by the hijab as well. 

There are many, many countries in the world where not wearing a hijab is guaranteed to get a woman verbally harrased, threatened, assaulted, and even raped, and in a lot of places the police won't even give a shit. Systemic genocidal rapes have even been carried out, using the hijab to differentiate targets from untouchables. 

How cool is it to carry a confederate flag? How cool is it to wear a hijab?

I'm not some angry fool who's going to be rude to say something to a person for choosing to wear something on their head, and I'm not enough of a snowflake to pretend to be offended myself, but if we're being honest here, seeing as leftists are always having a huge conversation about how offensive certain symbols are, why does the hijab get left out? It is no better than a confederate flag. Only wearing a swastika is actually worse. 

Quote

They ignore, or dismiss as not actually Muslim, those who who really believe that Islam should not be forced, that tolerance is required, that murder/terrorism are wrong.  Or they assume they're lying to fool 'us'.    Nobody that I've talked to doubts that Muslims are more conservative than Westerners, but for the most part they're not a lot different than conservative Christians.   Some take it too far, whether Christian or Muslim - which doesn't excuse either of them.  We have laws in Canada, which both Muslims and Christians must follow.  And both religions advise their followers to obey their country's laws - so neither Christians nor Muslims can claim their "religion" trumps the law of the land.

I get that this is your elevator speech, and you'll ignore reason and facts like the plague, but I'll indulge you for whatever reason.

Of course, out of a billion+ muslims, there are hundreds of thousands of truly amazing and decent people. It's the nature of some people to be that way. But if you look at the REAL WORLD, oppressive religious bigotry exists in entire muslim countries at a level that you will only find in extremely small fringe groups in other areas. 

How do you explain that away dialamah? Are there really no conclusions that can be drawn from that? 

Can you explain to me how people of the islamic faith feel about Pakistan and Israel? Two countries formed at the exact same time in the exact same way, along religious lines? Which one of those countries do you feel is more 'progressive'? 

Quote

It's certainly a valid criticism of Islamic countries whose laws are very repressive for women/gays/non-believers which they claim is based on "Islam".  Muslim haters seem to think that means every Muslim in that country supports such oppression - and that is so far from the truth.   To  me, assuming all Muslims from X country must support the worst of their country's or fellow-Muslim's behavior is just wrong; there's many Muslims who want to get out of those countries and absolutely reject those oppressive laws and societal attitudes - but because the Muslim haters assume the worst is the "norm", they'd block those people from escape.  

Maybe the idea that there's a plurality of belief within a group is just too complex for these people.

You're talking about entire countries with blatant, government-enforced bigotry... Hmmmm.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dialamah said:

He gets it; that disgusting religion - maybe somebody decided to do something about it.  How is that any different than a Muslim, upon hearing about a terror attack saying "Yeah, it was wrong - but I get why they did it"?  Would you accept that, or would you take it as proof positive that Muslims approve of terrorism.

Keep in mind that you are one of those, who,  whenever an Islamic terrorist blows stuff up, jump all over the rest of the Muslims for not saying/doing enough to prove they think terrorism is wrong.  You ignore the many Muslims appearing in news stories condemning violence, the ones grieving with everyone else, offering comfort and aid, the religious leaders also condemning that violence - none of that is enough.

But when the situation is reversed - when it's a White guy deliberately running over Muslims, explicit condemnation isn't required.  One can even say "well, yah ... I can see why they did that", and that's ok with you.  

Anyway, I'm sure BC condemns this killing even though he didn't explicitly condemn; I'm sure he also 'gets' why the kid did it.  But still, the kid wouldn't have had those reasons without people like Argus and DoP harping on how evil Muslims are.  Note, I didn't say Argus and DoP specifically caused this - just the people who believe and talk like they do, in person and online.

There’s still no evidence that race or religion had anything to do with it.  How about you wait for actual election evidence before erecting your straw man.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Shady said:

There’s still no evidence that race or religion had anything to do with it.  How about you wait for actual election evidence before erecting your straw man.

The cops think so; they've specifically said that he targeted them because they were Muslim. 

"There is evidence that this was a planned, premeditated act and that the family was targeted because of their Muslim faith," said Waight.  

Maybe they'll change it later, who knows.  But until they do, you have no basis for saying 'there's no evidence'.  Stop lying.

Edited by dialamah
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue of subconscious bias is very well known and documented. An AI system can be strongly influenced by selection of data its trained with. If a teacher or assistant has only eyes visible or sometimes not even them and that "tradition" extends only to one gender with young children exposed to it for years, what subconscious message will it teach them? Will it be the one of understanding and inclusiveness and who can assure of that?

Again this is not about default answers but the ability of a mature democratic society to raise and discuss issues which are important to the society for the benefit of entire society. And if all avenues for a reasonable discussion are closed, what remains?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I believe that you and one other poster perhaps wrote some criticism of Islam as well.  Can we put a harpoon in the argument that people who foment hatred are criticizing a religion? They're doing nothing of the kind, they are dehumanizing people because of their faith

you claim everyone who disagrees with your dehumanizing "Muslim haters" is dehumanizing Muslims by criticizing them

only those who agree with you dehumanizing "Muslim haters" are not dehumanizing Muslims by criticizing them

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, dialamah said:

And yes, Hamas deserves criticism.  Should every Palestinian be judged as a mini-Hamas?  Isreal has done some pretty horrific things too; is every Jew to be judged by what Isreal has done?  Heck, Canada allowed/contributed to the death of 215 native children, at least!

OMG what a farce.

Here's a thing. 215 native children definitely died, and it was definitely a tragedy, but in almost every instance it was almost certainly from disease. It's unconscionable that most of these children probably didn't get to see their moms while they were dying - that's where the true, awful 'guilt' lies. Residential schools can be viewed as an abject failure with the benefit of hindsight, but it was 'progressives' that felt like kids needed to be extricated from the stone age who were in favour of the Res schools, not pedophiles and axe-murderers. There needed to be a better way to help children grow into the modern age, but our ancestors failed (miserably) to find it, and we are not proud of it. It is a source of shame, but let's keep things in perspective. Hell, if you wanted to find real crimes, I bet that some really bad shit happened when the gov't went to take those kids away from their parents. If I was a reporter interested in digging up some real, true Canadian shame, that's where I'd look. 

 

Here's another thing. In Pakistan they committed a genocide against 3 million people just in the 1970s, and it was only their second-largest genocide since the end of WWII. A Grave with 215 children in it would be minuscule there, and if they found it they wouldn't give a shit. You could build an outhouse on it if you wanted to. The Pakistanis don't spit on the grave of their leaders from back then. The muslim world isn't irate about it. It's not a source of shame.

 

How's that for perspective? You're comparing something which Canadians feel is a tragedy, and where 215 kids died from disease, with actual genocides in the millions from countries (Turkey as well) which still feel like those were justified. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WestCanMan said:

Here's a thing. 215 native children definitely died, and it was definitely a tragedy, but in almost every instance it was almost certainly from disease.

the Nazi holocaust deniers claimed the same thing about Jews in their concentration camps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. you claim everyone who disagrees with your dehumanizing "Muslim haters" is dehumanizing Muslims by criticizing them

2. only those who agree with you dehumanizing "Muslim haters" are not dehumanizing Muslims by criticizing them

 Huh ?  No... you can criticize a religion without making the people subhuman.  I know it's hard but - again - people on the thread have done that.

Muslims do not need to be banned.  Terrorists come in every creed, race, religion.  You can use stats to prove anything.  I can prove Muslims are terrorized by whites, and that whites are inhuman lots of ways using statistics but that doesn't make it true.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

 Huh ?  No... you can criticize a religion without making the people subhuman.  I know it's hard but - again - people on the thread have done that.

Muslims do not need to be banned.  Terrorists come in every creed, race, religion.  You can use stats to prove anything.  I can prove Muslims are terrorized by whites, and that whites are inhuman lots of ways using statistics but that doesn't make it true.
 

I did just that

criticizing without dehumanizing

but because I called you out on dehumanizing "Muslim haters" who you were categorizing as such for dubious reasons

you claimed I supported the murder of Muslim families

stop lying

everyone who doesn't agree with your ridiculous dehumanizing generalizations are evil and hateful according to you

those who agree with your dehumanizing are the only ones you claim aren't being hateful and evil

your actions prove this to be the case

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, dialamah said:

The cops think so; they've specifically said that he targeted them because they were Muslim. 

"There is evidence that this was a planned, premeditated act and that the family was targeted because of their Muslim faith," said Waight.  

Maybe they'll change it later, who knows.  But until they do, you have no basis for saying 'there's no evidence'.  Stop lying.

Where’s the evidence?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question for you guys Michael and Dialamah about confronting Argus and DoP, and others, about spreading hate. My question is this what responsibility does our own government have in this situation, lets not forget the media bombarding everyone's TV nightly with terrorist attacks from across the globe, coverage of dead Canadian soldiers being escorted home, and their coverage of ramp ceremonies of crying soldiers loading up on to a Herc a close comrade in arms in a flag draped coffin... This went on for years, every night there was something on TV, and none of it was portraying Islam in a good light, and when one good story did come up it was sandwiched between bad stories....

While in Afghanistan we would have dog and pony shows for our government MP and other officials, patting us on the back for bringing peace to the region, while off the record asking how many we were killing, what was our losses ,what areas had we pacified, keep up the good work...They wanted to know are they getting their monies worth... Knowing full well why we were here " to close with and destroy as many of those terrorist bastards as possible", and collateral damage was negated with a check for a few thousand dollars... You can't do that job and not have serious dislike for the enemy.. That enemy came from almost every middle eastern country on the planet... and at home they are continuously being updated on Afghanistan, other middle eastern countries one can not just turn it off, it does have an effect on most people... This hate is all around us in various forms, and it is coming at us in all directions.... and it is in majority of people, much like racism and other bad behaviors it is not going to change over night. 

Edited by Army Guy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

1. My question is this what responsibility does our own government have in this situation, lets not forget the media bombarding everyone's TV nightly with terrorist attacks from across the globe, coverage of dead Canadian soldiers being escorted home, and their coverage of ramp ceremonies of crying soldiers loading up on to a Herc a close comrade in arms in a flag draped coffin... This went on for years, every night there was something on TV, and none of it was portraying Islam in a good light, and when one good story did come up it was sandwiched between bad stories....

2. While in Afghanistan we would have dog and pony shows for our government MP and other officials, patting us on the back for bringing peace to the region, while off the record asking how many we were killing, what was our losses ,what areas had we pacified, keep up the good work...They wanted to know are they getting their monies worth... Knowing full well why we were here " to close with and destroy as many of those terrorist bastards as possible", and collateral damage was negated with a check for a few thousand dollars... You can't do that job and not have serious dislike for the enemy..

3. This hate is all around us in various forms, and it is coming at us in all directions.... and it is in majority of people, much like racism and other bad behaviors it is not going to change over night. 

1.  It's geopolitics.  We assisted in an invasion of Afghanistan that was justified by the terrorist attack on NY in 2001.  I suppose you could see it as a war against a pernicious ideology and I won't argue that here but then why not accept people who are leaving that way of life ?   We accepted Italians and Germans after WW2 and investigate those who were actually responsible for terror not those who lived under it.

2. Well I forgot or didn't know you were there.  A friend of mine was there and we drank a beer and he told me of the good they were doing, building schools and so on to create an open society for them.  I don't think he hated the actual people he was fighting for.  I think he believed that some Muslims were good and being born into a religion or country doesn't mean you are directly responsible for the crimes that happened when you lived there.  

3. So focus your hate on the enemy, not on those people who share attributes with the enemy.  And be like normal people and condemn terror when it happens.  Don't look for reasons it didn't happen.  This may well turn out to be some other kind of event from what we think, and we will know soon enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And again, it is not about faith, religion, ethnicity etc but specific acts by certain individuals. It is wrong to attack and hurt based on religion. It is wrong to threaten and terrorize. And it is wrong to force one's understanding of their tradition upon broader society and the entire society. This is not an automatic right; and in some cases it may cause problems.

These aren't equivalents or quid pro quo justifications. They are all wrong, different wrongs, and none of them or all together make things right.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't think we can see eye to eye on this, because you are, ground-level, an emotional thinker.

Given every post you make on the subject seems to be coming from a guy pouring tears down his chest as he pounds his fingers on the keyboard that's a pretty rich accusation to make towards anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1.  It's geopolitics.  We assisted in an invasion of Afghanistan that was justified by the terrorist attack on NY in 2001.  I suppose you could see it as a war against a pernicious ideology and I won't argue that here but then why not accept people who are leaving that way of life ?   We accepted Italians and Germans after WW2 and investigate those who were actually responsible for terror not those who lived under it.

actually Canada treated Italians quite poorly in WWII, interning them, though on a smaller scale than they did for the Japanese

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, myata said:

An advanced democratic society must be able to discuss the issues like religiously motivated attire in public places and specifically, education system in an intelligent and civilized manner for the benefit of the entire society. Pretending that there's one default true answer, and especially claiming the privilege of always and by default having the right answer does not offer any solutions. It only demonstrate absence of understanding and ability to discuss serious matters as grown up citizens in a civilized and intelligent manner.

Yes. Extremists like MH would throw a blanket down over all discussion which criticizes or insults a given group, probably applying pretty harsh laws to silence all dissent. Much of the Left stopped supporting freedom of speech years ago where that speech goes against their social beliefs. And as their beliefs have become more extreme their anger at dissent has strengthened, as well.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

He gets it; that disgusting religion - maybe somebody decided to do something about it.  How is that any different than a Muslim, upon hearing about a terror attack saying "Yeah, it was wrong - but I get why they did it"?  

So you're saying we should ban Islam since it routinely teaches violent beliefs towards minorities? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Ask the cops.  They're claiming it.

I would not really doubt it myself. However, just because London police had that immediate reaction - understandable given some nut in combat gear runs over a Muslim family - does not make it so without some statement the guy made, or something on his computer or in his history which showed he hated Muslims. I am curious about what evidence they have, other than, as I said, the obvious notion that a guy dressed like that running over Muslims likely hated Muslims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really care much about religion. In some/many cases I wouldn't know the religion of the people I deal with or what kind it is and meaning has. But I may have concerns with specific acts by specific people

If a violent attack is motivated by religious, ethnic or other factors it's a hate crime and must be condemned and prosecuted.

If an ethnic gang robs bystanders, it's still a violent crime.

And if I have a kindergarten-age daughter whose teacher wears head to toes burka with a slit for eyes every day I have the right to think how it would affect her and also raise my concerns somewhere where it would have some effect.

None of this is some fobia. And I tend to think that none of this is about religion too.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

actually Canada treated Italians quite poorly in WWII, interning them, though on a smaller scale than they did for the Japanese

That's exaggerated. Only a few hundred Italians who were hard core fascists were interred. The great majority of  Italians were not.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Argus said:

That's exaggerated. Only a few hundred Italians who were hard core fascists were interred. The great majority of  Italians were not.

it wasn't just fascists, mistakes were made, an overly broad brush was used

and interning people for thought crime or pre-crime is lame af anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

it wasn't just fascists, mistakes were made, an overly broad brush was used

and interning people for thought crime or pre-crime is lame af anyway

Not when you're in a life or death struggle with a country they support and a dictator they deeply admire.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

 

And DoP keeps telling us that if a Muslim doesn't embrace murder/terrorism, either they just haven't gotten to it yet, or they aren't 'real Muslims'.

 

 

Lies are all you have, aren't they? 

I have said no such thing you disingenuous POS. 

Edited by DogOnPorch
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...