Islamophobia in Canada

[Rue]

EDITED

I will say in response to Michael Harder I find your opinion stated on this thread about thread drift inappropriate. You once again take a moderator process and commented on it as a participant.

You commented on thread drift as a participant and yet as a moderator told me I should not.

.

Why are you even discussing a moderator policy?

Please stop using your participant role to discuss moderator policy couched as your participant opinion.

Now in direct comment as to whose religion is more violent, I agree with the posters who say, its not the religion, its the people interpreting the religion we need to focus on.

Next in direct comment to Eye, if you can't understand what the expression "off script" means ask me- stop making melo-dramatic negative assumptions as to what it means inferringif I was justifying or siding with what Trump said.

"Off script" refers to the fact that Trump does not have people write his political scripts. He does not have people drat, vent, plan what he will say.

I was referring to the fact that politicians make veiled, negative generalized slurs all the time-the difference with Trump is he does no pay a script writer to sugar coat them.

You think Justin standing with a bunch of refugees is not as bigoted as anything Trump has said? I do.

I believe Trudeau chose specific private sponsored refugees to pose with.

He won't be standing there when the fundamentalist religious Muslims decked head to toe in religious grab when they come in. He won't be there when the disabled, the elderly, the sickly, the unkempt, the visibly deranged limp in or make scenes at the airport.

He's the damn bigot. He chose certain refugees like trained monkeys for photo ops and to make himself and his knee jerk liberal supporters feel good about themselves with the trendy feel good cause of the day.

.Where are all you liberal go gooders with other refugees hmmmm?

I argue do gooder liberals are using Syrian refugees as a masking agen to block out and discriminate against the rest of the world.

Where are the same trendy liberals who were once all caught up about Haiti or the tsunami in Sri Lanka and Thailand? Hmmmm? Haiti remember that? How about the Christians in Sudan hmmmm? What about the thousands of people being massaceredin Congo, Rwanda, Malawi, Mali hmmmm?

Harper never photo op'd with refugees and used them like the patronizing bigot Trudeau is.

Whose is more bigoted Trump or Trudeau?

Now finally for the individuals on this thread who continue to complain about people for engaging in negative generalizations about an entire people, particularly Black Dog, Hudson Jones and Big Guy, read back your own posts.

I am the son of a refugee and my grandparents were refugees. Don't patronize me please. Don't patronize refugees with stupid photo ops and stories as if Syrian refugees are the first people to come to ever come to Canada.

Edited December 12, 2015 by Rue

[ReeferMadness]

Recent events. If one goes back forever, I think the numbers would probably even out, not counting world wars which had nothing to do with religion. I would be talking about people killed because the killer reckoned their God wanted them to kill them.

Ah. Now we get to the nub of the issue. Your focus is on people killed "because the killer reckoned their God wanted them to kill them." And so immediately you discount the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died because their commander-in-chief wanted the soldiers to kill them. I'll let you explain how one is better than the other.

More to the point is how you determine the motives of people. Even ISIS is not the homogeneous group of religious fanatics you and the Muslim hating community would like them to be. The fighters are drawn from around the world and their stories and motivations are diverse. I was listening to an episode of CBC's The Current a few days ago and they interviewed someone who had gone to Iraq and spoken to captured ISIS fighters who were on the Iraqi equivalent of death row. As the American armed forces are employers of last resort in the US, ISIS is an employer of last resort in Iraq and Syria. The other thing that came out was this guy's anger at the west in general and America in particular for the destruction in Iraq and the mess that the country has become.

[Michael Hardner]

I will say in response to Michael Harder I find your opinion stated on this thread about thread drift inappropriate.

I saw a few side topics developing, ie. the relative histories of various religions, and discussions of holy books. I don't see how it's inappropriate to branch those off onto a different topic, or why it's so upsetting to you.

PM me if you want to elaborate, or let's take it to the moderation thread, thanks.

[ReeferMadness]

When I look at religion, I see a large majority who can interpret the religious teachings in a relatively peaceful way and a minority who will interpret them in a way that tells them to subvert and kill people. This is true for all religions. I see a parallel between those who claim that the religion is responsible for violence to be people who claim that alcohol is responsible for violence. Happy people who drink turn into happy drunks. Angry people who drink turn into angry drunks. The alcohol doesn't cause the issue, it just provides a way for it to come out. Same with religion. All religions.

For those who argue that Muslim states are inherently violent or repressive, I agree.So are Christian theocracies, historically. So are socialist and right wing dictatorships. If you compare Saddam Hussein's regime (he was not an Islamist, the Baathists were socialist Arab nationalists) with Saudi Arabia with right wing dictatorships in Central America (which were not so long ago propped up by the CIA), the similarities are remarkable. You have repressive dictatorships who use violence and division to rule the population.

the

[dialamah]

The fighters are drawn from around the world and their stories and motivations are diverse. I was listening to an episode of CBC's The Current a few days ago and they interviewed someone who had gone to Iraq and spoken to captured ISIS fighters who were on the Iraqi equivalent of death row. As the American armed forces are employers of last resort in the US, ISIS is an employer of last resort in Iraq and Syria. The other thing that came out was this guy's anger at the west in general and America in particular for the destruction in Iraq and the mess that the country has become.

A Muslim friend from the Middle East told me about the experience of a countryman he'd spoken to a trip back to the ME last year. This guy had been approached in a cafe by someone promising a very well paying job, out of country The recruiter was cagey about exactly what the job entailed, but over the course of several days persuaded this man to join up. After arriving at the "job site", he discovered that it was in fact, ISIS. By this time, however, he was under guard and was told he could fight or die. He chose to fight, while watching for an opportunity to escape. He was able to do so eventually, but saw others who tried killed. He was indeed paid well, apparently, and knew of others who were happy to stay and keep fighting even though they didn't necessarily believe the ideology. It seems this method of recruitment is not uncommon across the ME.

And yes, there is much anger in the region against the West and America.

[bush_cheney2004]

There is so much anger against the West and Canada that many thousands have chosen to emigrate there, and not just as refugees.

[Guest]

Ah. Now we get to the nub of the issue. Your focus is on people killed "because the killer reckoned their God wanted them to kill them." And so immediately you discount the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died because their commander-in-chief wanted the soldiers to kill them. I'll let you explain how one is better than the other.

More to the point is how you determine the motives of people. Even ISIS is not the homogeneous group of religious fanatics you and the Muslim hating community would like them to be. The fighters are drawn from around the world and their stories and motivations are diverse. I was listening to an episode of CBC's The Current a few days ago and they interviewed someone who had gone to Iraq and spoken to captured ISIS fighters who were on the Iraqi equivalent of death row. As the American armed forces are employers of last resort in the US, ISIS is an employer of last resort in Iraq and Syria. The other thing that came out was this guy's anger at the west in general and America in particular for the destruction in Iraq and the mess that the country has become.

This thread is titled "Islamophobia in Canada". It is concerned with those would call out Islamic people who do bad things in the name of their religion and whether or not their reasons for doing so involve Islamophobia, or are a perfectly reasonable disgust at and abhorrence of barbarism in the name of religion.

I personally think anyone who says their God, or their religion, is the reason for their actions should be taken at their word. No rubbish about "Religions of Peace". That's for people of the same religion who don't do such stuff.

That's why my focus is on people killed "because the killer reckoned their God wanted them to kill them. That's what this thread is about. I don't just discount the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died because their commander-in-chief wanted the soldiers to kill them, I discount anyone who is killed in any part of any conflict anywhere in the world where religion is not the reason for their killer's actions.

Is my disgust at barbaric Islamic excesses an indication of my disgust at barbaric religious excesses, generally, of which Islam seems to create the lion's share these days, or is it an indication of my unreasonable fear of Muslims, even those who are part of the much larger group of people from all religions who don't want to kill anyone for their God, and my desire to brand them all as barbarians?

Edited December 12, 2015 by bcsapper

[The_Squid]

Well, they are, aren't they? Death to cartoonists, for instance, isn't something you learn at Sunday School

What about death to abortion doctors?

Currently, Islam seems to have the more violent followers coming from countries where fundementalism is a way of life. But to compare which holy book is worse is a fool's game. It also ignores the fact that the vast majority of its followers aren't committing violence.

[Guest]

What about death to abortion doctors?

Currently, Islam seems to have the more violent followers coming from countries where fundementalism is a way of life. But to compare which holy book is worse is a fool's game. It also ignores the fact that the vast majority of its followers aren't committing violence.

Death to abortion doctors is as disgusting as death to cartoonists. No argument.

And no argument to the rest of your post. None at all. It seems to jibe perfectly with my views.

Edited December 12, 2015 by bcsapper

[Smoke]

Thinking a religion is a joke does not a phobia make. Attempting to strip people who do follow a religion of their rights, because of some sort of irrational fear you may have, does.

Can you please show me where I did that. Oh wait....I didn't.

[On Guard for Thee]

Can you please show me where I did that. Oh wait....I didn't.

There are those who would prevent people from immigrating solely based on their religious beliefs. That's a phobia.

[Argus]

When you fire a hellfire missile at a car because you think there is someone in it that's on your hit list, the other pax. in the vehicle you kill are homicides.

Not actually true in a war zone. In all likelihood the other people in the car are also combatants.

[Argus]

There are those who would prevent people from immigrating solely based on their religious beliefs. That's a phobia.

Not if the potential immigrant's religious beliefs include a deep hostility towards things those people cherish.

[On Guard for Thee]

Not actually true in a war zone. In all likelihood the other people in the car are also combatants.

Actually it is, the legal term is extrajudicial killing.

[On Guard for Thee]

Not if the potential immigrant's religious beliefs include a deep hostility towards things those people cherish.

And concluding that that "if" is true of all people who ascribe to a certain religion, is clearly a phobia.

[Argus]

Are you talking about drone attacks or bombings in general ? Do you have a cite ?

Last year the UN attributes 72% of the civilian casualties to insurgents and 14% to government forces.

The international forces are, according to the UN, responsible for only 2% of civilian casualties. Of the 101 people killed by foreign forces, five them died in a drone strike in Parwan in December, along with 12 insurgents.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/18/afghan-civilian-deaths-record-high

In an annual report, the United Nations said 2010 marked the most lethal year for noncombatants in the nearly decade-old war, with a 15 percent increase in the number of civilians killed to 2,777 -- continuing a steady rise over the past four years.

Insurgents were responsible for 75 percent of those deaths.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-civilians-idUSTRE7224WJ20110309#4wulbCJbaQwPcsl4.97

For just drones

Bureau found that the two forces (UK/US) had carried out over 1,000 drone strikes in the country in the previous five years.

Unama identifies 19 separate incidents in which civilians were killed

Nineteen out of one thousand drone strikes...

After a decline in civilian deaths in 2012, last year they rose again to approach 2011’s record highs. Nearly 3,000 non-combatants were killed, including 1,300 women and children.

Three quarters of the deaths were caused by the Taliban and other insurgents, with improvised explosive devices alone killing almost 1,000 civilians. International air operations represented 2% of all civilian deaths, and declined by 10% compared to 2012.

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/02/08/civilian-drone-deaths-triple-in-afghanistan-un-agency-finds/

[Argus]

And concluding that that "if" is true of all people who ascribe to a certain religion, is clearly a phobia.

Who has claimed "it" is true of ALL people who ascribe to Islam?

On the other hand, it's hard to be a Catholic if you don't believe in the Virgin Mary. Likewise, it's hard to be a Muslim if you don't believe in the major tenets of that religion.

Edited December 12, 2015 by Argus

[Argus]

del

Edited December 12, 2015 by Argus

[Argus]

Actually it is, the legal term is extrajudicial killing.

Try to keep in mind that the law in the United States or UK or Canada does not apply in Afghanistan or Iraq. The law in those countries is up to the locals, and may meet with your disapproval in may respects.

[Argus]

What I understand very clearly is that you and others around here have some pathological need for Christianity to be somehow morally superior to other religions.

What I understand clearly is you and others around here have some pathological need to defend and excuse even the most vile behaviour of Islamists and the most backward social values of Muslims.

[On Guard for Thee]

Who has claimed "it" is true of ALL people who ascribe to Islam?

On the other hand, it's hard to be a Catholic if you don't believe in the Virgin Mary. Likewise, it's hard to be a Muslim if you don't believe in the major tenets of that religion.

The people who suffer from Islamophobia. Remember, the title of this thread?

[Argus]

The people who suffer from Islamophobia. Remember, the title of this thread?

You don't seem to have found any yet.

[dialamah]

What I understand clearly is you and others around here have some pathological need to defend and excuse even the most vile behaviour of Islamists and the most backward social values of Muslims.

Except, there isn't anyone here defending or excusing vile behavior; some just choose not to blame people for behavior that they neither indulge in or condone. If you were on trial for murder, I bet you'd rather have me hearing your case than someone who assumed all people named 'Argus' were homicidal by nature. I'd listen to the evidence that was specific to *YOU*, instead of assuming that because your name was Argus, you must be guilty. Wouldn't mean I think murder is ok.

[On Guard for Thee]

You don't seem to have found any yet.

I wouldn't be so sure.

[ReeferMadness]

What I understand clearly is you and others around here have some pathological need to defend and excuse even the most vile behaviour of Islamists and the most backward social values of Muslims.

I haven't defended any behaviour.

What I have pointed out is that the vile behaviour isn't entirely on the part of the Islamists. And I continue to point out the inherent bigotry and blatant double standards in play when people who are OK with the US and other western nations obliterating entire countries suddenly find their moral outrage when it's Muslims doing the killing.

Nobody in Canada would accept police firing machine guns into a crowd in order to kill mobsters, no matter what those people had done Yet, some people here seem to think it's OK for us to drop bombs on third world countries.