Global Non-Military Islamic Jihad and Canada

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

That would actually help the Left out from waking up out of their stupidity. 

 

You can dare to dream but what's plan B?  

Quote

...the burden is on Islam, not the Right.

 

Good luck with that.

[9-18-1]

50 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You can dare to dream but what's plan B?  

Good luck with that.

There is no need for a "plan B"; the Left will eventually realize their stupidity - just sooner than later would be better. In the same way any given Muslim has a degree of insanity each Lefty has his/her own threshold of realizing the problem is with Islam; their only obstacle is all the social jihad transpiring in the Western nations; hence the need to make a stand on Western values such as freedom of speech/expression/assembly/equality which I alluded to earlier. You seem to be opposed to that, which is a sure way toward fascism (as Islam is). I'm almost beginning to believe you're apologetics for Islam is your intention here.

Here is Andrew Scheer bringing the needed attention to the matter of Trudeau visiting Aga Khan creating a major conflict of interest; obviously this all relates back into Islam:

https://ca.yahoo.com/news/trudeau-conflict-interest-part-pattern-231500710.html

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, 9-18-1 said:

There is no need for a "plan B"; the Left will eventually realize their stupidity

Like I said, dare to dream.

My only intent here is to point out your crap...Case in point your sense that I'm opposed to freedom of speech/expression/assembly/equality. Let me guess you heard that on Fox News didn't you? 

In the meantime your contention still stands, shared by many around here, that the left is worse than Islam.  No doubt you're willing to spend trillions to defend your values against Islam but not one penny is dedicated towards doing anything about the left-wing.  How do you explain this wooly headedness?  It's like believing a budget will simply  balance itself.

[9-18-1]

7 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Like I said, dare to dream.

My only intent here is to point out your crap...Case in point your sense that I'm opposed to freedom of speech/expression/assembly/equality. Let me guess you heard that on Fox News didn't you? 

In the meantime your contention still stands, shared by many around here, that the left is worse than Islam.  No doubt you're willing to spend trillions to defend your values against Islam but not one penny is dedicated towards doing anything about the left-wing.  How do you explain this wooly headedness?  It's like believing a budget will simply  balance itself.

What on earth are you talking about? Fox news? What does a sovereign nation which values freedom of speech have to do with Fox news?

I already explained in detail why Islam is more fundamentally the problem than the Left; the Left is not responsible for over 270 000 000 deaths and the delusion of billions who are forced to follow a false doctrine. Neither is it responsible for the internal conflict of Sunni-Shia which is responsible for the death of hundreds of millions more. That would be Islam, not the Left. This is pretty obvious to most, save yourself as you seem to try to equate the Left as being worse than a fascist regime responsible for half a billion dead and billions deluded. How do you justify this "wooly (sic) headedness (sic)"? Islam uses the Left as a political conduit through which to enforce Sharia and non-military jihad. They have been doing it for ever, it's just globally coordinated now due to technology/logistical developments and "help" from people like George Soros. Are you employed by him to post such deflections from reality?

I don't understand your reference to "spend trillions" to defend values. Defending values doesn't cost anything, because those values are intended to be there in the first place. What does in fact cost tremendous amounts of money (taxpayer) is the Islamic jihad doctrine of Jizya: payment to Muslims by Non-Muslims. This is your social handouts that, instead of going back into the country, it goes into the "cause of Allah" which is systematically penetrate political/social/economic/financial institutions and bodies until the "infidel" is subdued.

I'm sorry if you are unable to see the reality of the situation; perhaps it will only sink in when someone close to you is raped by a gang of Muslim men:

http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/protests-rage-in-sweden-after-cops-tell-women-to-stay-inside-to-avoid-gang-rapes/

Oh, and by the way, here is an article for you regarding the need to understand "jihad" since you don't seem to:

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/12/raymond-ibrahim-will-the-return-of-jihad-to-intelligence-trump-decades-of-indoctrination

Excerpt:

President Trump’s new national security strategy is set to return words relevant to understanding Islamic terrorism — such as “jihad” — that had been expunged from the Intelligence and Defense communities’ lexicon, most notably under the Obama administration. According to the new strategy document, “The primary transnational threats Americans face are from jihadist terrorists and transnational criminal organizations”; the document also vows to “pursue threats to their source, so that jihadist terrorists are stopped before they ever reach our borders.”

This is significant on several levels — the first being as basic as “knowing one’s enemy,” which President Obama had refused to do. In 2011, it was reported that “the Obama administration was pulling back all training materials used for the law enforcement and national security communities, in order to eliminate all references to Islam that some Muslim groups have claimed are offensive.”

I underlined the parts which corroborate my previous claim that former president Barack Obama was/is a political jihadist, because as this article indicates, the Obama administration intentionally removed training materials referencing Islamic jihad tactics. Parallel this with Trudeau refusing to recognize known terrorists as terrorists.

With that, I (and most reading this) can very easily conclude two things:
1. Your head is not even in the game regarding the severity of this issue and/or the true nature of Islamic jihad
2. Everything I have posted in this discourse is accurate and corroborated all over the place

So rather than doubling down on your nonsense rhetoric which is always completely void of substance, why don't you pick up a book. I don't think you are convincing anyone here except yourself.

Now for the whole forum to see; what is your deflection now? Deflect, deflect, deflect... sounds like the same jihad tactics used by these fascists supremacists. Get over yourself, and it, preferably in that order.

[9-18-1]

46 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Like I said, dare to dream.

My only intent here is to point out your crap...Case in point your sense that I'm opposed to freedom of speech/expression/assembly/equality. Let me guess you heard that on Fox News didn't you? 

In the meantime your contention still stands, shared by many around here, that the left is worse than Islam.  No doubt you're willing to spend trillions to defend your values against Islam but not one penny is dedicated towards doing anything about the left-wing.  How do you explain this wooly headedness?  It's like believing a budget will simply  balance itself.

Oh, and here is another:

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/12/ontario-human-rights-tribunal-says-imams-call-to-buy-from-muslims-only-is-not-discriminatory

Excerpt:

In a sermon uploaded to YouTube…Rageah called on Canadian Muslims to unite and translate their demography into a political and economic power which will enable Muslims to implement Sharia Law in their communities and change Canada’s foreign policy.

Do you feel stupid yet? Don't bother; I feel it for you already.

[eyeball]

10 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

What on earth are you talking about? Fox news? What does a sovereign nation which values freedom of speech have to do with Fox news?

Just a comment on the value you place on Fox News / Tucker Carlson etc as a source of the evidence you given for underscoring the destructive seemingly deadly threat we face from the left.  Of course you're free to continue doing so.

Quote

So rather than doubling down on your nonsense rhetoric which is always completely void of substance, why don't you pick up a book. I don't think you are convincing anyone here except yourself.

MY rhetoric, you mean compared to the quintuples of bandwidth you've committed to replying to it?

Quote

Now for the whole forum to see; what is your deflection now? Deflect, deflect, deflect... sounds like the same jihad tactics used by these fascists supremacists. Get over yourself, and it, preferably in that order.

No deflection, just the same question I essentially asked earlier, how the left gets away with being a greater threat than terrorists?  

I guess I really am expected to believe the vast abundance of evil placed at the feet of the left isn't just rhetoric but that you're actually serious. 

Remember now, the whole forum is watching...   

Edited December 22, 2017 by eyeball

[9-18-1]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Just a comment on the value you place on Fox News / Tucker Carlson etc as a source of the evidence you given for underscoring the destructive seemingly deadly threat we face from the left.  Of course you're free to continue doing so.

MY rhetoric, you mean compared to the quintuples of bandwidth you've committed to replying to it?

No deflection, just the same question I essentially asked earlier, how the left gets away with being a greater threat than terrorists?  

I guess I really am expected to believe the vast abundance of evil placed at the feet of the left isn't just rhetoric but that you're actually serious. 

Remember now, the whole forum is watching...   

1. If you are so moved as to audit sources rather than the information they contain (including the veracity of such) you are deflecting.
2. Yes; I actually produce substance, whereas you produce rhetoric, and were reported for doing so. You add nothing to the discourse but rhetoric. I provide analysis and corroborating sources; and I could not care less about your discrediting them, as I have provided many.
3. Deflection; anything which enables/empowers fascist regimes are dangerous.
4. This is rather serious (say hello to covert Sharia/Anti-Blasphemy as alluded to in the first post):
https://www.thestar.com/amp/news/canada/2017/12/21/board-member-of-anti-racism-agency-fired-amid-accusations-of-islamophobic-commentary.html
5. They are; and they have been provided with multiple analysis and sources, whereas you only use rhetoric. I trust their judgment on such matters much more than I would expect them to treat your rhetoric as anything but disingenuous and frankly rather base; devoid of any meaningful substance.

In the meantime; feel free to continue your rhetoric, as that seems to be your sole modus operandi. I will take the advice of the kind moderator who was well to advise me (upon reporting your posts as being without substance and mere rhetoric) "just ignore him". I shall do so, and those who read this discourse would likely be well-advised to follow suit. As I imagine it, most individuals have already taken this step without need of prompt.

[Michael Hardner]

9-18, we have had anti-Muslim posts on here many times before, quoting (multiple sources...) sites like 'Jihad watch'.  It's not real, but part of a tradition of anti-religion and xenophobic arguments that constantly warn of impending doom that never comes.  Again this happened in 2017 with the warning that the Trudeau government was bringing in 'Sharia Law'.  Quote nonymous and credible sources, otherwise just move on to another site please.

It's a big yawn that becomes a joke after awhile, like the shoeless beggar who stands on the street corner with a sign saying 'THE END IS NEAR'

Adults audit sources, otherwise you would believe every falsehood that crosses your transom.  

[9-18-1]

35 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

9-18, we have had anti-Muslim posts on here many times before, quoting (multiple sources...) sites like 'Jihad watch'.  It's not real, but part of a tradition of anti-religion and xenophobic arguments that constantly warn of impending doom that never comes.  Again this happened in 2017 with the warning that the Trudeau government was bringing in 'Sharia Law'.  Quote nonymous and credible sources, otherwise just move on to another site please.

It's a big yawn that becomes a joke after awhile, like the shoeless beggar who stands on the street corner with a sign saying 'THE END IS NEAR'

Adults audit sources, otherwise you would believe every falsehood that crosses your transom.  

My post is not anti-Muslim; Muslims are people. My posts and references are regarding political Islam and the various forms it takes. It is very real.

Regarding Sharia Law, you don't seem to understand what it is. I'll clarify once again:
1. You can not criticize the Qur'an
2. You can not criticize Muhammad
3. You can not criticize Islam.
...the rest of Sharia follows from these, but the first step is to engage these three.

M-103 is exactly this; empower the Left to call people "Islamophobes" to dilute and eventually eradicate criticisms of Islam; very similar to how you are dismissing this as anti-religion/xenophobic, which is nonsense. These tactics are intentional and have a desired and calculated efficacy.

If anything, the joke is on you for not realizing just how deep all of this runs. Do you understand the connection Huma Abedin had to the MB? The connection H. Clinton had to the Sauds? The recent eradication of all the social networking share-holding Saudi princes? How George Soros has taken over for them in continuing the civilizational jihad? Do you see the connection between Soros and Trudeau? Trudeau and Aga Khan? Have you read the biography of Muhammad? Have you read the Qur'an? Have you studied Sharia as taught by Islamic scholars? Do you recognize how the NWO creeps are trying to use Islam to sow discord in nations? Have you looked at Sweden lately? Britain? Germany? Do you know raping non-Muslim women is a form of jihad? Do you know collecting jizya from Non-Muslims can take many forms, including social assistance? Why are the vast majority of the migrants Muslims? Where are the Christians who are being persecuted and constantly having their churches suicide bombed? Where was the recent sex trafficking ring sourced back to? Would that be Saudi Arabia? Why would Trump suggest the Muslim immigration is a "Trojan Horse"? Why did he immediately move to ban immigration from Muslim-majority countries? Why didn't H. Clinton give a concession speech upon Trump's victory? Why did B. Obama send billions to Iran in cash/wire the last 90 days of his presidency? Suppose the pay-to-play donors who "were assured" that H. Clinton would win required their respective refunds? Why would B. Obama push the Iran nuke deal? If you can't draw these simple things together, your head is not even in the game and frankly you have no business posting such dismissive rhetoric.

Your ignorance on the scope of the matter is actually insulting to the people who have/are suffering as a result of political Islam; and rest assured, that number is in the hundreds of millions.

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

How George Soros has taken over for them...

Yes, adding George Soros into the mix is the definitive marker that we are not dealing with real information.  Find us a professional news organization that ties Soros to this, I dare you.

[OftenWrong]

9 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

My post is not anti-Muslim; Muslims are people. My posts and references are regarding political Islam and the various forms it takes. It is very real.

Ever sing "Oh Canada"?

[bush_cheney2004]

Justin Trudeau and imam Aga Khan are far more relevant to Canada than George Soros, Clintons, or Obama in another country:

 

Quote

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau issued the following statement on Imamat Day:

“Shia Ismaili Muslims gather today in Canada and around the world to celebrate the diamond jubilee of their 49th hereditary Imam and spiritual leader, His Highness Prince Karim Aga Khan IV.

https://www.straight.com/news/935056/prime-minister-justin-trudeau-commemorates-aga-khans-diamond-jubilee

 

[9-18-1]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes, adding George Soros into the mix is the definitive marker that we are not dealing with real information.  Find us a professional news organization that ties Soros to this, I dare you.

Problem #1: Trusting any "professional news organization"
Problem #2: You don't know the black market George Soros - ANTIFA is a domestic terrorism organization funded by Soros. He makes money by creating domestic chaos.
Recommend:

https://anonfile.com/ddp2p6d2b5/Q_s_posts_-_CBTS_-_3.9.1.pdf

 

1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Justin Trudeau and imam Aga Khan are far more relevant to Canada than George Soros, Clintons, or Obama in another country:

 

 

See the link above. The connections are all spelled out.

Some excerpts:
https://imgur.com/a/nSWjf

Why did Soros transfer his bulk public funds to a NP? Note this doesn’t include massive slush funds that are pulled by several high ups.
Why did Soros’ son have several meetings with Canadian PM and how is that related to Clinton’s?
What happens if Soros funded operations get violent and engage in domestic terrorism?
Realize Soros, Clintons, Obama, Putin, etc. are all controlled by 3 families (the 4th was removed post Trump's victory).
How does Soros, Obama, Clinton, Holder, Lynch, etc all net many millions of dollars (normally within a single tax year).
Where did the $18b from Soros go?
...etc.

Some articles alluding to the type of business Soros is really in:
http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/20/george-soros-illegally-bankrolling-campaign-to-amend-irelands-constitution-government-watchdog-says/

Excerpt:

Soros uses a network of nonprofits and partner organizations across Europe to try and affect the outcomes of elections in foreign countries, leaked documents show. (RELATED: Leaked Docs Show How Soros Spends Big To Keep Populists Out Of Power In Europe)

Soros uses his billions of dollars to support candidates who favor his open-borders worldview and oppose populist candidates around the world.

As first reported by The Daily Caller, Soros secretly paid the salaries of Moldovan government officials, including the prime minister’s chief of staff, between 2013 and 2015. Those payments were funneled through a German non-profit in order to skirt laws preventing Soros from directly paying the officials. (RELATED: Soros Secretly Paid Foreign Government Officials)

The 87-year-old Soros transferred $18 billion to OSF in October, ensuring his organization will continue advancing his far-left worldview around the globe long after he passes away. Soros’ son, Alex Soros, has stepped up his own political activities in recent years as his father has gotten older.

Other articles that allude to his meddling:
https://www.trunews.com/article/irish-government-watchdog-sees-soros-shenanigans
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/the-latest-polish-president-says-critics-are-lying/Z2hew5TwAx4fKGDOdt1thP/
http://humanevents.com/2011/04/02/top-10-reasons-george-soros-is-dangerous/
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/332387-soros-putin-russia-threat-migrants/

When we are talking about Soros, he has been doing this a long time - he hides his behind-the-scenes work really well, but it's all starting to bubble out.

 

[eyeball]

12 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

My post is not anti-Muslim; Muslims are people.

Your posts are anti-left. Lefties are people that you think are worse than terrorists.  It's completely moronic but lest you think you're setting some new standard for right-wing intellectualism around here you're actually pretty middle of the road.

You make it easier to understand why some lefties feel the need to purge their societies of right-wingers.  Even Pinochet would gag on the shit you spew around here.

[blackbird]

6 hours ago, eyeball said:

Your posts are anti-left. Lefties are people that you think are worse than terrorists.  It's completely moronic but lest you think you're setting some new standard for right-wing intellectualism around here you're actually pretty middle of the road.

You make it easier to understand why some lefties feel the need to purge their societies of right-wingers.  Even Pinochet would gag on the shit you spew around here.

Politics is getting to be more and more the devil's game.  Democracy is a questionable system, but it is probably better than a dictatorship as much of the world has.  Politics seems to be boiling down to whoever can come across with the

 

On 12/22/2017 at 12:39 AM, 9-18-1 said:

1. If you are so moved as to audit sources rather than the information they contain (including the veracity of such) you are deflecting.
2. Yes; I actually produce substance, whereas you produce rhetoric, and were reported for doing so. You add nothing to the discourse but rhetoric. I provide analysis and corroborating sources; and I could not care less about your discrediting them, as I have provided many.
3. Deflection; anything which enables/empowers fascist regimes are dangerous.
4. This is rather serious (say hello to covert Sharia/Anti-Blasphemy as alluded to in the first post):
https://www.thestar.com/amp/news/canada/2017/12/21/board-member-of-anti-racism-agency-fired-amid-accusations-of-islamophobic-commentary.html
5. They are; and they have been provided with multiple analysis and sources, whereas you only use rhetoric. I trust their judgment on such matters much more than I would expect them to treat your rhetoric as anything but disingenuous and frankly rather base; devoid of any meaningful substance.

In the meantime; feel free to continue your rhetoric, as that seems to be your sole modus operandi. I will take the advice of the kind moderator who was well to advise me (upon reporting your posts as being without substance and mere rhetoric) "just ignore him". I shall do so, and those who read this discourse would likely be well-advised to follow suit. As I imagine it, most individuals have already taken this step without need of prompt.

 

On 12/22/2017 at 12:39 AM, 9-18-1 said:

1. If you are so moved as to audit sources rather than the information they contain (including the veracity of such) you are deflecting.
2. Yes; I actually produce substance, whereas you produce rhetoric, and were reported for doing so. You add nothing to the discourse but rhetoric. I provide analysis and corroborating sources; and I could not care less about your discrediting them, as I have provided many.
3. Deflection; anything which enables/empowers fascist regimes are dangerous.
4. This is rather serious (say hello to covert Sharia/Anti-Blasphemy as alluded to in the first post):
https://www.thestar.com/amp/news/canada/2017/12/21/board-member-of-anti-racism-agency-fired-amid-accusations-of-islamophobic-commentary.html
5. They are; and they have been provided with multiple analysis and sources, whereas you only use rhetoric. I trust their judgment on such matters much more than I would expect them to treat your rhetoric as anything but disingenuous and frankly rather base; devoid of any meaningful substance.

In the meantime; feel free to continue your rhetoric, as that seems to be your sole modus operandi. I will take the advice of the kind moderator who was well to advise me (upon reporting your posts as being without substance and mere rhetoric) "just ignore him". I shall do so, and those who read this discourse would likely be well-advised to follow suit. As I imagine it, most individuals have already taken this step without need of prompt.

The French government is continuing it's battle against nativity scenes in France.   Check The Rebel Media website for info on this.  The people we need to watch out for are the lefty secularists.

https://www.therebel.media/top_10_french_government_war_on_nativity_scenes_continues    

Edited December 23, 2017 by blackbird

[cannuck]

9 hours ago, eyeball said:

Your posts are anti-left. Lefties are people that you think are worse than terrorists.  It's completely moronic but lest you think you're setting some new standard for right-wing intellectualism around here you're actually pretty middle of the road.

You make it easier to understand why some lefties feel the need to purge their societies of right-wingers.  Even Pinochet would gag on the shit you spew around here.

Not to wander too far sideways, but those from the left side of the spectrum need to take a look at reality.   Spend some time in Maduro's Venezuela, Mao's China or any of the successive North Korean left wing paradises, or more to the point the National Socialist Worker's party in Germany, and you can see that simply leaning left is no guarantee of anything good at all.  You bring up Pinochet, a genuine Fascist, and a philosophy that WAS genuinely from the "right" and that didn't go so well (did for the economy, not for the people).   If we extract just the substance, the range of labels from Left to Right GENERALLY start out with Marxist/Lenninst Communism at the left end, with ALL of the means of production belonging to the state, with Socialism in the middle, where the state allows private ownership, but imposes a certain measure of public ownership and control "for the greater good" (I chuckle at THAT one!!) and the "extreme right" being a Picochet.  I would argue that this is total BS.   Pinochet was IMHO the definitive fascist, but as to being from the right end of the spectrum, misses the mark by a country mile.   While ownership in such a regime is not public, it is very much EXACTLY in effect what we have in Putin's Russia - ownership is granted only to those privileged to be rewarded by the leaders of the state.  This is why I believe Hitler's Germany was really a fascist state, NOT a socialist one.

Now, I can see why the Left would like to conveniently lump everything that is easy target as "the Right", but Fascism in no way allows what I believe to be the ONLY factor that defines a political and economic "right" - and that is freedom for individuals, companies and marketplaces to operate FRE,ELY under private ownership.   NO classical "right wing" form of government meets that condition, as you need a dictator (Pinochet, Hitler, Putin) to rule with absolute authority to dispense privilege of access to resources, and that is NOT "right wing" political philosophy, that is fascist dictatorship (even when hidden behind the veil of supposed democracy).

Today, outside of NoKo, I don't think there is ANY sovereign state that is truly communistic (some do come close), there are scores that are in practice facist, but there are NONE AT ALL that embrace genuinely "right wing" freedoms (which amount to economic and fiscal anarchy - the kind that Wall Street alone pretty much has).  EVERY developed nation is IMHO a socialist state - as they have considerble elements of state ownership, state monopoly and effective state control over vast sectors of the economy - particularly those that provide genuine social services and in many cases utilities.   Before the Yanks start poo-pooing that statement: consider that 2/3 of the US is covered by some kind of government sick care insurance, utilities such as the TVA own power generation and distribution outrigtht, only the state can work on waterways (Corps of Engineers) and vast areas of land belong outright to the state under BLM control.  Socialist state, just like most of the rest.

We need to stop the political expedience of simply saying "Left" and "Right" and look at each and every policy and strategy as being good for ALL people (at least the vast majority) or good only for those granted the privilege to benefit from (note that pendulum swings very much on the "left" and "right" side).   As a life long political/policy junkie, I have come to believe that the ONLY thing that defines good legislation is that it NOT dispense special privilege to any one person, group, class, race, religion, etc., but that it is equally available to ANYONE who cares to qualify.

SORRY for what turned out to be a rather large diversion, but NOW look at what the current administration here is going regarding political correctness and granting the privlege to dominate policy for the rest of Canada framed in the special advantages given to muslim immigrants, aboriginal candians, etc.

[Michael Hardner]

12 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

Problem #1: Trusting any "professional news organization"

It's better to put some trust, tempered with skepticism, into an organization with named contributors who are known and have professional reputations than to trust made-up shit from internet randos like your sources.  I have the Globe and Mail, Fox News and the National Post as part of my media diet and they check their own sources and adhere to an understood and agreed-upon method for presenting information.  I don't trust it 100% because it's subject to error and subversion as any human process is.

It's another thing to post something from a basement rando and live my life by that.

----

The analogy is for someone to say "Loblaws did a recall last year of salmonella in some products therefore I shall eat whatever I find on the sidewalk"

Enjoy your media diet.  I won't be eating it.

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, eyeball said:

  Even Pinochet would gag on the shit you spew around here.

Pinochet, at least, had to run a country.  Therefore he had to understand reality to a degree.  Basement internet randos write whatever shit they like, and if they find other naifs to follow their crazy thoughts they are a success.

[Michael Hardner]

15 minutes ago, cannuck said:

1. Not to wander too far sideways, but those from the left side of the spectrum need to take a look at reality.   Spend some time in Maduro's Venezuela, Mao's China or any of the successive North Korean left wing paradises, or more to the point the National Socialist Worker's party in Germany, and you can see that simply leaning left is no guarantee of anything good at all. 

2.  I can see why the Left would like to conveniently lump everything that is easy target as "the Right", 

3.  EVERY developed nation is IMHO a socialist state - as they have considerble elements of state ownership, state monopoly and effective state control over vast sectors of the economy - particularly those that provide genuine social services and in many cases utilities.  

4. We need to stop the political expedience of simply saying "Left" and "Right"

5. the current administration here is going regarding political correctness and granting the privlege to dominate policy for the rest of Canada framed in the special advantages given to muslim immigrants, aboriginal candians, etc.

1. Later on in the same post you condemn easy characterizations of left/right and yet you start out the post doing just that.  

2. Right... Left...

3. And a capitalist one too, except for "NoKo" I thinnk.

4. I agree with you, although you and I both still do it.

5. The current administration hasn't done anything much at all, and surely hasn't given minority groups the chance to 'dominate' policy.  Despite all the arguing, policy is almost exactly the same for these things as under Harper.  

[cannuck]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Later on in the same post you condemn easy characterizations of left/right and yet you start out the post doing just that.  

2. Right... Left...

3. And a capitalist one too, except for "NoKo" I thinnk.

4. I agree with you, although you and I both still do it.

5. The current administration hasn't done anything much at all, and surely hasn't given minority groups the chance to 'dominate' policy.  Despite all the arguing, policy is almost exactly the same for these things as under Harper.  

1.2.3.4.   I think you caught my drift.   Yes, we DO fall to the easy charactarizations of "left" and "right", but those tend to get framed in what is expedient for the agenda of the writer.  I find that counterproductive, as it eliminates the ability to discuss rationally the benefits of policy of any kind since it came from "the other side".

5.  I can see your point, but I never considered the Harper governments to have shifted Canada very far from where things were when he started.  What the Libs HAVE done is expanded political correctness to an extreme, added the bogus "refugee" nonsense into the mix and racked up a shit load of debt - for no good reason except to try to buy votes from identifiable minorities.   I was dissappointed by Harper.   I am disgusted with Trudeau (and his handlers, as I don't think he really has the intellectual power or maturity to be much of anything other than a high school teacher).

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, cannuck said:

1.What the Libs HAVE done is expanded political correctness to an extreme, added the bogus "refugee" nonsense into the mix and racked up a shit load of debt - for no good reason except to try to buy votes from identifiable minorities.   

1. It's thread drift but I don't think he has done much except offering cheap apologies.  Start a new thread.  He isn't managing the deficit, I agree with that.

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, blackbird said:

The people we need to watch out for are the lefty secularists.  

Yeah I think so too but if you people think we're going to go away on our own you're dreaming.  You will have to become very very un-Christian if you ever expect the left to stop destroying your world.

So how long you going to wait to save yourselves or were you just planning on praying for your stupid god to come and save you?

Edited December 23, 2017 by eyeball

[Michael Hardner]

46 minutes ago, eyeball said:

...your stupid god to come and save you?

Too few people ask if God is stupid.

[eyeball]

39 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Too few people ask if God is stupid.

Like begets like is my guess.

[blackbird]

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

Yeah I think so too but if you people think we're going to go away on our own you're dreaming.  You will have to become very very un-Christian if you ever expect the left to stop destroying your world.

So how long you going to wait to save yourselves or were you just planning on praying for your stupid god to come and save you?

"wisdom is too high for a fool"  Proverbs 24:7  KJV

"foolishness of God is wiser than men"  1 Corinthians 1:25

"Understanding is a wellspring of life unto him that hath it: but the instruction of fools is folly. " Proverbs 16:22