Nationalist Groups in Canada

[taxme]

On 8/24/2017 at 6:38 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Ok, great.  Case closed then.  The Muslim who sits beside me at work, and his kids are Nazis.  Got it.

You know, at a certain point bad logic becomes so transparent that it's really just deception.

For example, our resident white pride guy who soils the forum with lies about peaceful Nazis and just doesn't respond when asked about his affinity for Hitler.

It's a discussion forum, not a shit festival.  Although I am getting dragged into it, despite myself.

Both dispised Rothchild Zionism. Case closed.

If common sense and logic were a part of your vocabulary you would make a lot more sense. But all you appear to want to do is always go looking for the bogeyman racists and bigots and Nazis where in most cases it is not even there. You are fake news. Just saying. 

Well again, as I have asked you so many times already as to where is your proof that I have said that I am a Nazi and that I support Nazism you conveniently enjoy ignoring the question. You have no credibility here, and thus maybe it should be you who should stop posting here. If you are going to continue lying about people then try being a man about it for a change and be able to back up your accusations. Just for everyone here, because I call myself a pro white activist does not have to mean that I am a Nazi, KKK or a white racist. This is just all bull that some pro zionist here who enjoys labeling anyone names whom they do not like or will agree with. I wonder as to who that could be? Just wondering. 

Indeed, it is a discussion forum but it is you who does not want to discuss and debate but would much prefer to attack and mock anyone whom you disagree with. I have never said anything racist here nor tried in anyway to promote racism here. It is just you and your hatred towards me and anyone else here who wishes only to say that they are proud of who they are, and thus they must be racists and bigots. Some here will believe your lies about me here but some don't, and I thank them for that. You have zero credibility with me MH. 

I challenge anyone here to show me as to where I have ever promoted Nazism or racism here. If one can than go ahead, make your day.  I know that MH cannot and will not be able to produce anything.  Over to anyone. 

PS: It would appear to me as though you want to make it a "shit festival" party. May I suggest that if you do not want to get dragged into anything, than do not reply to anything. So short, sweet and simple. Bye-bye.

Edited September 3, 2017 by taxme

[Michael Hardner]

Pro white activist.  Got it.  And I am Catholic.

[taxme]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Pro white activist.  Got it.  And I am Catholic.

Pro white activist, yes. Proud of it too. Glad you got it. There are gay activists, Black activists, Muslim activists, Mexican, Jewish activists and there are catholic activists. So, are they all just a bunch of racists and bigots than?  

I am Protestant. So, what's your point?  

Still trying to avoid the question that I have asked of you, eh?  If you want to save your credibility here than you better reply and show me the beef?   

[Michael Hardner]

I thought you were asking me about my religion?  Is this what you mean by nationalism'?

[dialamah]

Del

Edited September 3, 2017 by dialamah

[taxme]

55 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I thought you were asking me about my religion?  Is this what you mean by nationalism'?

I know what your religion is alright. From now on I am going to stop calling you snowflake and instead start calling you the avoider.  Works for me.

You have no clue as to what true patriotic nationalism is all about or what it really means. Just saying. 

[Argus]

4 hours ago, GostHacked said:

How can one be a Christian without following the bible to the letter? Same notion. I know many who claim to be of a certain religion but that goes as far as saying they believe in a God and that's about it. Non practicing Christians I think would be the term.

If you're not practicing, ie, you're not following the rules of the religion mostly because, let's face it, you don't really believe in them, then you're not really a Christian as far as I'm concerned. However, if you are Baptized, you are considered a Christian. There is no such religious ceremony of initiation into Islam. You are considered to be a Muslim if you belief. Those who are not 'religious' clearly don't really believe.

 

[Argus]

3 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I've drank beer with Muslims and consoled divorced Catholics.  I suppose the Pope and the closest Imam would say neither were what they claim, but if they claim it, I'm with them.

I can claim anything I want, but if I don't believe it it's not true. The Catholics don't consider that divorced Catholics are no longer Catholics. They can't have communion, though.

[TTM]

18 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

There is no such verse forbidding murder.

There is, however, verse 5:32 of the Quran which states....

Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

https://quran.com/5/32

As we can see, there is a condition(s) where killing is permitted. Revenge....a soul for a soul. Or for causing fitnah upon the land (mischief, corruption)...which under Sharia is going against Islam in any form. Ask the dead poets...

Deuteronomy 13:6-10 (KJV)

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

Of course this is Old Testament, which is apparently only still part of the Christian faith where convenient, the remainder of the passages being there for ... historical colour?  Of course the Jewish religion has no such additional Testament, so this kind of reflects rather poorly on them.

The New Testamement is not cut and dry on the subject, but does include Matthew 18:6:

6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

Note:

In the active voice σκανδαλίζω [skandalizō] means "cause someone to fall away from (or reject) faith," as in the saying of Jesus about the person who "causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin [stumble]" (Wikipedia)

We also have well over a milenium of the historical treatment of apostasy and heresy by Christians.

It is not the particulars of the religion that is an issue, but the mindset of the culture towards it: fundamentalism, extremism, etc. Arguing about which flavour of fairy tales is inherently more harmful misses the point entirely.

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, taxme said:

I know what your religion is alright. From now on I am going to stop calling you snowflake and instead start calling you the avoider.  Works for me.

But... why ?  

[DogOnPorch]

5 hours ago, TTM said:

Deuteronomy 13:6-10 (KJV)

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

Of course this is Old Testament, which is apparently only still part of the Christian faith where convenient, the remainder of the passages being there for ... historical colour?  Of course the Jewish religion has no such additional Testament, so this kind of reflects rather poorly on them.

The New Testamement is not cut and dry on the subject, but does include Matthew 18:6:

6 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.

Note:

In the active voice σκανδαλίζω [skandalizō] means "cause someone to fall away from (or reject) faith," as in the saying of Jesus about the person who "causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin [stumble]" (Wikipedia)

We also have well over a milenium of the historical treatment of apostasy and heresy by Christians.

It is not the particulars of the religion that is an issue, but the mindset of the culture towards it: fundamentalism, extremism, etc. Arguing about which flavour of fairy tales is inherently more harmful misses the point entirely.

 

Ah yes...the two wrongs make a right defense and dialamah liked it...sweet.

How many people did Jesus murder historically?

 

Edited September 4, 2017 by DogOnPorch

[Guest]

3 hours ago, TTM said:

It is not the particulars of the religion that is an issue, but the mindset of the culture towards it: fundamentalism, extremism, etc. Arguing about which flavour of fairy tales is inherently more harmful misses the point entirely.

Actually it does not.  That would be the only point that matters.

[DogOnPorch]

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Actually it does not.  That would be the only point that matters.

 

What's a little Jihad next to the wonders of Middle Eastern cooking?

[jacee]

9 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

In your hypothetical scenario, the supposed Muslim woman would have to have become an apostate in order to flirt with a male not a family member in a bar. Islam forbids it. Haram.

Muslims practice Islam. If you don't practice Islam...you're not a Muslim. Islam is from the Quran and Hadiths. No other source is needed. 

Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all from the same desert in the Middle East. Skin colour has no actual bearing to joining the cult of Islam. You confuse it with a race due to many countries being near 100% Muslim in faith. This due to Islam's absolute intolerance to other faiths...or towards atheism for that matter. All others are suppressed or driven out.

DoP this thread is not about extremism in Islamic countries that 'drive others out'.

It's about antiMuslim 'Nationalists' in Canada.

Tty to be relevant.

[DogOnPorch]

2 minutes ago, jacee said:

DoP this thread is not about extremism in Islamic countries that 'drive others out'.

It's about antiMuslim 'Nationalists' in Canada.

Tty to be relevant.

 

You're free to defend Islam...as you do. I'm free to oppose it.

Oh that's right...fascism doesn't allow for the free speech. 

Me forget...

[jacee]

23 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

You're free to defend Islam...as you do. I'm free to oppose it.

Oh that's right...fascism doesn't allow for the free speech. 

Me forget...

You're free to oppose extremists of any or no religious persuasion.

You are not free to incite hatred against all Canadian Muslims by lumping them all with terrorists.

Edited September 4, 2017 by jacee

[DogOnPorch]

3 minutes ago, jacee said:

You're free to oppose extremists of any or no religious persuasion.

You are not free to incite hatred against Canadian Muslims by lumping them all with terrorists.

 

Islam is a religion and is not free from criticism...no matter your desire for blasphemy laws to protect it above my personal freedom. 

[TTM]

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Ah yes...the two wrongs make a right defense and dialamah liked it...sweet.

 

Actually (at least) three wrongs, and none of them add up to a right. You can't seem to see the forest for one particular tree. 

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, TTM said:

Actually (at least) three wrongs, and none of them add up to a right. You can't seem to see the forest for one particular tree. 

 

So how many people did Jesus murder again?

[TTM]

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Actually it does not.  That would be the only point that matters.

So the current and historical crimes of committed in the names of other religions are OK because their religious texts are slightly nicer?

[TTM]

1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

So how many people did Jesus murder again?

Why does this matter? Plenty were in his name

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, TTM said:

So the current and historical crimes of committed in the names of other religions are OK because their religious texts are slightly nicer?

 

Cats and dogs living together...mass hysteria.

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, TTM said:

Why does this matter? Plenty were in his name

 

Well? How many?

[TTM]

Just now, DogOnPorch said:

 

Cats and dogs living together...mass hysteria.

I ain't afraid of no ghosts

[TTM]

Just now, DogOnPorch said:

 

Well? How many?

Thousands? Millions? Couldn't say, I'm not a historian.