Immigration of religious fanatics

[DogOnPorch]

Agreed, AG.

[Rue]

10 hours ago, drummindiver said:

You yourself posted  countries of concern re immigration. Philippines was one if those. They are number one by a mile of who immigrates here.

Ergo......

Obviously people coming from hot beds of Islamic extremism would be of security concern. Your inference makes no logical

sense. How does the fact that there needs to be security screening for people coming from any  extremist Muslim zone including the Philipines

suggest all Fillipinos let alone Christian ones or probably most Muslim ones are terrorist? It means more care has to be taken with screening.

Screening and profiling people from extreme conflict zones including Muslims from those areas is a reality. 

If you or any one else want to use that to push an agenda for or against immigrants  it completely misses the point.

Security and screening issues  do not mean we should not have immigrants, it means we just need screening and security issues.

Don't try drag me into some half assed agenda that suggests I am  anti immigration because I think we need to be realistic in screening,

I again repeat there is a way to intelligently discuss security concerns without stereotyping an entire category of people.

If you need an explanation of what extremist Islamic fanatics have done to parts of the Philippines ask a Fillipino Muslim or Christian.

 

 

Edited December 31, 2016 by Rue

[Argus]

11 minutes ago, Rue said:

Obviously people coming from hot beds of Islamic extremism would be of security concern. Your inference makes no logical

sense. How does the fact that there needs to be security screening for people coming from any  extremist Muslim zone including the Philipines

suggest all Fillipinos let alone Christian ones or probably most Muslim ones are terrorist? It means more care has to be taken with screening.

Your analogy or inference was half assed.

I don't think he was making that suggestion. In fact, the only real discussion here as far as I know is whether we ought to be screening people who apply for immigration for their values and cultural beliefs. Some people seem to feel this would be grossly bigoted, for some reason. Probably because it suggest our values are somehow better than their values, and no lefty would ever want to admit that. Or else because they're so certain that the moment some fundamentalist type gets off the plane from Yemen he'll immediately see the light and start joining intercultural exchanges and going to gay pride parades.

 

[drummindiver]

45 minutes ago, Rue said:

Obviously people coming from hot beds of Islamic extremism would be of security concern. Your inference makes no logical

sense. How does the fact that there needs to be security screening for people coming from any  extremist Muslim zone including the Philipines

suggest all Fillipinos let alone Christian ones or probably most Muslim ones are terrorist? It means more care has to be taken with screening.

Screening and profiling people from extreme conflict zones including Muslims from those areas is a reality. 

If you or any one else want to use that to push an agenda for or against immigrants  it completely misses the point.

Security and screening issues  do not mean we should not have immigrants, it means we just need screening and security issues.

Don't try drag me into some half assed agenda that suggests I am  anti immigration because I think we need to be realistic in screening,

I again repeat there is a way to intelligently discuss security concerns without stereotyping an entire category of people.

If you need an explanation of what extremist Islamic fanatics have done to parts of the Philippines ask a Fillipino Muslim or Christian.

 

c

Do you really believe the tens of thousands just from the Philippines alone are vetted properly? Every  time common sense is asked for there is a huge outcry of racism.

I've never said no immigration,  I've always advocated common sense.

 

Edited December 31, 2016 by drummindiver

[Rue]

On 12/29/2016 at 7:09 PM, Argus said:

I think Islam has always been a political ideology in addition to a religion. That political ideology has had a great deal of influence on countries and cultures where Islam is prevalent in that it contains laws and rules of government behavior, family law, criminal law, commercial law and relationships with non-Muslims. The cultures of those countries cannot be extricated from this influence in terms of judging why they are as they are.

There is no seperation of state from religion and this is why its both, Until two separate as they did in Christianity there will be no democracy in Muslim nations.

Interestingly Israel's religious identity as a state for Jews is not imposed on Muslims or Christians as it is in Muslim nations or once was in Christian nations.

Muslims in Israel have all legal rights Jews do unlike in reverse with Jews in sharia law Muslim nations.

The State of Israel pays rent to Christian churches for the land it built the Knesset on. It recognizes Christian land rights in Jerusalem. Interestingly the PA and Hamas and

Arab League do not.

There is a lot of crap people on this forum have no clue about that goes on in a Muslim nation and how the majority of the Muslim world is still illiterate and dependent n Mullahs and Imams to tell them how to think,

That said while I think some people on this forum are dangerously ignorant and naive of Muslim extremism and how easily it can slip in I also think its not an excuse to h ate all Muslims or fail to separate the issue of screening terrorist Muslims from innocent Muslims.

As for Muslims who come with religious ideas not compatible with Canadian ones but who are not extremist or terrorist that is a touchy subject and I handle it this way. Every immigrant who has come to Canada was described the way some do about Muslims today. True most of those immigrants were Christian but Catholics were considered very poorly by Protestants and they are the majority in Canada. How long ago was it non Protestants were called by Protestant Canadians disparaging names and accused of beng incompatible in lifestyle with Canada?

Hell I am not going to discuss Jews rejected by McKenzie King as vermin and referred to by him as rats or are references to native Canadians and forced assimilation on them,.

Surely though we have learned from such episodes in History,

Maybe just maybe Muslims will assimilate in ways many do  not think they will. Yes I am well aware of no go zones in Europe and the US where non Muslims now do not go into Muslim zones and these zones are opting out of the host nations and becoming self ruled enclaves. At one time they were called ghettos.

Ghettos exist everywhere. Let's please not pretend we only have Muslim Ghettos.

The question is what policies do we pursue where ALL immigrants agree to subordinate certain of their collective values to the greater values of a Canadian vision.

Our problem is we have no collective Canadian vision. The natives have their own collective visions. The British and French who came here merely repeated their home country visions. Then over the years we remained heavily influenced by Britain and France in Quebec until Americanization from the media crept into our society.

We have had many immigrants come and under the name of multi-culturalism a back-lash to the pre WW2 racist-religious discrimination of the day, our non Protestants outside Quebec and Protestants and non Catholics in Quebec were told they could retain their identities and remain Canadian and they could be both at the same time by utting a hyphen in the name.

Then Quebec said, no hyphens and out West they said no hyphens in response to Pierre Trudeau and so on.

This country has always been about hyphenated Canadians, native Canadians, Protestant British and Catholic French and Irish mixing but not in a melting pot where they put the state identity first like in the US.

We have at the present time no Canadian vision. The current Trudeau is an example of this lack of vision. His vision is a Canadian is whatever a Canadian says he or she is.

He thinks nothing of going to extremist Mosques and parroting religious prayers that are inherently segregationist and discriminatory because he's a Canadian and this means tolerating anyone who wants to be anything unless of course it offends whatever his elitist sensibilities are which change depending on his moods.

One day he is a worshipper of Castro in Cuba a week later refusing to go to Castro's funeral. One day he poses with Syrian refugees as props complete with smiles and giggles but a year later when they are unemployed and have not assimilated, well they suddenly are a provincial and municipal problem not his,.

This is a man whose idea of a cross Canada health plan is to impose one with no discussion. This is a man who sheds tears for native Canadians at photo ops but to date not one reform he said he would initiate has been commenced.

Oh he has a vision of equality for gays, lesbians and transgendered peoples, he said so.

Well?

The Tory party? Most of their candidates mimmic Trudeau and a few Trump.

Name one Canadian with the ability to articulate a vision all Canadians understand.

Closest I can think of at times is Don Cherry but I think most new Canadians have no clue who he is.

So who does that leave, oh wait, Celine Dionne? Anne Murray? Alex Trebek?

Right.

See I think until someone can figure out what a Canadian is, worrying about ethnic groups not assimilating is a tad premature.

Kind of hard to assimilate when the concept of being Canadian is mush.

[Rue]

7 minutes ago, drummindiver said:

Do you really believe the tens of thousands just from the Philippines alone are vetted properly? Every  time common sense is asked for there is a huge outcry of racism.

I've never said no immigration,  I've always advocated common sense.

Both of us. Thank you for clarification.

[?Impact]

18 hours ago, Argus said:

Probably because it suggest our values are somehow better than their values, and no lefty would ever want to admit that. =

When is an alt-righty going to express the supposed Canadian values that we can all agree on?

[Argus]

45 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

When is an alt-righty going to express the supposed Canadian values that we can all agree on?

You'll have to ask an alt-rightie if you ever come across one.

[Rue]

On ‎2016‎-‎12‎-‎31 at 2:30 PM, ?Impact said:

When is an alt-righty going to express the supposed Canadian values that we can all agree on?

Can an alt-lefty express supposed Canadian values we can all agree on? Can anyone?

I said in another response we don't at this time have a unified Canadian vision.

That's part of the very problem with this topic.

We have had a history of racism, religious discrimination and other isms associates with immigration policies over the years as the morals of the day have changed.

Yes we have legacies in regards to Chinese, Indians, Jews, etc. O.k. so now what,.

How do we define what our values are?  All I know is we should agree we are against polygamy, church and state being one and the same, women or gays defined as inferior, values that say women are to be cloaked and covered and subordinate to men, values that demand people conform to  one thought pattern only and not question.

We've worked hard to get where we are. I don't want it going backwords where we give up all the democracy we've achieved in the name of tolerating those who want to undo these values and bring us back to a time where we did not have the choices we have now.

I do not want this country tolerating and saying its ok to tolerate fundamentalism and practices  that are inherently intolerant and based on an ignorance of science.

No I am not anti Muslim. Yes I am anti Muslim or anything else when its extremist fundamentalist.

I also think our immigration screening process is a work in progress. None of us know the extent of efficiency or inefficiency that is built into it tese days. No one. Such info is kept secret from us.

Me personally I think Justin Trudeau is a sheltered, elitist rich boy who has zero clue what a terrorist is and would be the first to pose for a photo op with one.For me he is that stupid and ignorant. I had much more confidence in Harper in that respect and for that matter Chretien or Martin or Mulroney and if Garneau was PM I would not have this concern.

Does one man, the PM have any real control over such security issues? I do not know but from the pathetic photo ops of McCallum and Trudeau  using refugees as a prop, I have zero confidence. The fact Trudeau's brother is a strong advocate for the current Iranian regime does not promote confidence in me as to this PM. The fact he is so desperate to have Canada be security council member shows me a degree of naivite. The UN is a corrupt, useless, apologuist for terrorism, human rights violators and kickbacks. The UN is an antiquated joke and the fact Trudeau wants to be a panting puppy dog for it makes me want to  puke.

Excuse me but Trudeau claiming he's tough on Putin while already making sucking and gulping noises in Trump's direction does not convince me he is a world leader. For me Trudeau is the late  George Michael of politics- he's a pretty boy who does questionable things in public places.

 

 

 

Edited January 1, 2017 by Rue

[Army Guy]

On ‎12‎/‎31‎/‎2016 at 3:30 PM, ?Impact said:

When is an alt-righty going to express the supposed Canadian values that we can all agree on?

Really you can't think of one single Canadian value our nation could be looking for in other immigrants.

[Rue]

19 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Really you can't think of one single Canadian value our nation could be looking for in other immigrants.

Let me take a stab:

1- the Habs are the only team in hockey anyone should support;

2-hockey is the only state religion practiced;

3-CFL rules for football are fine;

4-KD Lang is not Wayne Newton;

5- the belief that Canada needs a navy, air force, army and this will require we spend money on underwear, boots, jets, boats and a way some ay to transport soldiers not to mention helicopters that can fly;

6-politicians should not be allowed to do selfies;

7-politicians should not use refugees as photo props;

8-all elected politicians be forced to go one month living on the monthly welfare allotted in their riding  and living on the streets for that month;

9-all Canadians be tested in the winter for their driver's license;

10-all Canadians talk with a war vet a minimum of 4 hours.

11-all new Canadians be required to do a workshop with the Trailer Park Boys on Canadian culture.

 

 

Edited January 1, 2017 by Rue

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Rue said:

Can an alt-lefty express supposed Canadian values we can all agree on? Can anyone?

How do we define what our values are?

 

Well, you'd know what you'd have done unto you right?

C'mon, how hard can this be? It's not rocket science.

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, Rue said:

11-all new Canadians be required to do a workshop with the Trailer Park Boys on Canadian culture.

I so don't like this show.  Shall I be deported?   

[?Impact]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

Me personally I think Justin Trudeau is a sheltered, elitist rich boy who has zero clue what a terrorist is and would be the first to pose for a photo op with one.For me he is that stupid and ignorant.

Based on what? The kid had a $20k/year trust fund, big friggen whoopee-dee-doo, that is below the poverty line. I know the alt right media likes to hammer on that topic, all the while ignoring that Trump had over $300k/year trust fund, plus millions from daddy to start his business, and hundreds of millions more in loan guarantees. Your buddy Harper was far more an elitist rich boy thanks to his VP of Imperial Oil daddy. Wake up.

[Argus]

4 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Really you can't think of one single Canadian value our nation could be looking for in other immigrants.

“There are shared values — openness, respect, compassion, willingness to work hard, to be there for each other, to search for equality and justice."

[drummindiver]

650% increase in number of terrorist atracks. Not as many deaths. Sort of a good news/bad news.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/12/this-map-shows-the-full-impact-of-terrorism?utm_content=buffercf7df&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[GostHacked]

On 12/30/2016 at 3:04 PM, Army Guy said:

No, not all Germans were Nazi's, In fact history has shown us thousands of examples of Germans, being sent to prison or concentration camps or escaping to other countries for speaking out, or refusing to take part in Nazi Ideology. History has also shown us that a far larger number took part in Nazi activities out of fear, fear of being sent to prison, the front, or concentration camps if they did not take part.

Nah, I think DoP has the right idea of slandering over a billion people. They are all bad, all Muslims are bad, all Nazis are bad, heck even all communists too!

[GostHacked]

3 hours ago, dialamah said:

I so don't like this show.  Shall I be deported?   

Letterkenny is the show you want to watch.

[GostHacked]

5 hours ago, Rue said:

Let me take a stab:

1- the Habs are the only team in hockey anyone should support;

2-hockey is the only state religion practiced;

3-CFL rules for football are fine;

4-KD Lang is not Wayne Newton;

5- the belief that Canada needs a navy, air force, army and this will require we spend money on underwear, boots, jets, boats and a way some ay to transport soldiers not to mention helicopters that can fly;

6-politicians should not be allowed to do selfies;

7-politicians should not use refugees as photo props;

8-all elected politicians be forced to go one month living on the monthly welfare allotted in their riding  and living on the streets for that month;

9-all Canadians be tested in the winter for their driver's license;

10-all Canadians talk with a war vet a minimum of 4 hours.

11-all new Canadians be required to do a workshop with the Trailer Park Boys on Canadian culture.

 

 

What a garbage list. Could you not even attempt to give us some real examples?

[Michael Hardner]

17 hours ago, Rue said:

Can an alt-lefty express supposed Canadian values we can all agree on? Can anyone? 

Tolerance is maybe a broad descriptor of a unique Canadian value.

But before the rightys get all offended, let me point out that 'tolerance' means tolerating stuff, which means 'putting up with sh**'.  We all have to do that.  We have to put up with weather, with bull****, and each other.

Tolerance.

[DogOnPorch]

Tolerance doesn't mean tolerating intolerance.

Are we just supposed to get used to Islam's outlook on homosexuality?...for example.

[GostHacked]

3 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Tolerance doesn't mean tolerating intolerance.

Are we just supposed to get used to Islam's outlook on homosexuality?...for example.

What part of his post is confusing to you?

[dialamah]

38 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Tolerance doesn't mean tolerating intolerance.

Are we just supposed to get used to Islam's outlook on homosexuality?...for example.

We're used to it from fundamentalist Christians, already, not to mention the Muslims who already live here.  They are exhibiting the Canadian value of tolerance already, putting up with stuff they don't approve of.   

[DogOnPorch]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

We're used to it from fundamentalist Christians, already, not to mention the Muslims who already live here.  They are exhibiting the Canadian value of tolerance already, putting up with stuff they don't approve of.   

Christians aren't throwing homosexuals from rooftops. That would be from Islam...the cult you defend.

How about when Islam has enough political push to change Canadian laws? What then? Sudden liberalism on Muslim's part?

I don't want to live in an Islamic Theocracy even if folks like yourself do.

 

[Argus]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Tolerance is maybe a broad descriptor of a unique Canadian value.

It's hardly uniquely Canadian. But certainly tolerance is a Canadian value, along with compromise, and commitments to various freedoms like speech, assembly, and religion (irony noted). I would also say a determination to contribute, to take care of yourself and your family, and to be fair with others you deal with would be included. A respect for law and and order would also be a must.

I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation of how bringing in hundreds of thousands of people who oppose many of those ideals is a good idea, particularly when Canada's own immigration department has identified the Middle East as one of the areas in the world which produce the least economically successful immigrants to Canada. 

Europe, on the other hand, produces the MOST economically successful immigrants to Canada, and also is home to broad support for most of the same values as we hold in Canada.