Trudeau test drives his smear campaign

[DogOnPorch]

15 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

That's why I said that I don't see how it can be predicted either way. 

I suppose at some we would just have to get angry, wouldn't we?  At least then, all those who think abhorrence of the idea is racist would have to get angry too. 

Let's face it, it's not as though a religious war would be a first. 

 

I think Islam's track record in the West/Dar al-Harb speaks for itself. Where has Islam gone and not stirred-up the very Fitnah it seeks to eliminate by force in Dar-al-Islam?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divisions_of_the_world_in_Islam

If you can understand one thing about Islam, this is a good one. Another is that causing Fitnah (literally trouble or strife) in Dar-al-Islam is worse than anything else and is punishable by death under Sharia. There is no Thou Shalt Not Kill in the Quran...

Edited April 14, 2019 by DogOnPorch

[Argus]

39 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ah, well that's a relief.

2. Not really, no.  But this is our world now.  The pro-Scheer people circulate pictures of Trudeau in a turban and say he secretly converted.  This is the way elections used to be, by the way, and we went back there.

So  you equate actions by the party leader to what someone on the internet does? If I curse out Trudeau it's okay for Trudeau to curse out Scheer?

Your belief that 'this is our world' is coming from a place of raw terror that hordes of white supremacists are about to take over the world. Crawl out from under your bed and look around. They're not there. There's a few hundred guys on the internet and that's about it.

[Guest]

Just now, Argus said:

Your belief that 'this is our world' is coming from a place of raw terror that hordes of white supremacists are about to take over the world.

Hey, racist paranoia!

[Argus]

Just now, bcsapper said:

Hey, racist paranoia!

More like paranoia about racism.

[Michael Hardner]

44 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 If you think being afraid of Sharia Law is racist paranoia that's your view, but disagreeing with you is not derailing the thread.

You said that it was about not liking Sharia Law.  I don't like Sharia Law either, but I'm not so paranoid as to think it's coming here.  

I strongly feel we should prioritize on problems that could actually happen.

[Michael Hardner]

15 minutes ago, Argus said:

1. So  you equate actions by the party leader to what someone on the internet does? If I curse out Trudeau it's okay for Trudeau to curse out Scheer?

2. Your belief that 'this is our world' is coming from a place of raw terror that hordes of white supremacists are about to take over the world.

3. Crawl out from under your bed and look around. They're not there. There's a few hundred guys on the internet and that's about it.

1. Not exactly but Scheer seems ok with keeping the crazy people close to him, and so here we are...  I would much rather he distance himself from the wingnuts.

2. No, that's not true.  Our world is one where bullshit has overtaken facts.  Actually, bullshit has overtaken unimportant pap - which is what we used to discuss.  Facts and problems were discussed more in the past.

3. That's what people say about so-called Islamist terrorists too.  A few hundred terrorists is not a good number, FYI.

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You said that it was about not liking Sharia Law.  I don't like Sharia Law either, but I'm not so paranoid as to think it's coming here.  

I strongly feel we should prioritize on problems that could actually happen.

Well, like I said, we have no way of predicting what might happen.  At what point would you object to it?  Would you support any kind of Islamic dispute arbitration?  How would you know all those involved were willing participants?  Also like I said, those against it seem to be mainly female. 

Do you really think that a Conservative government after the next election would see us overrun with Klansmen?  Is that what we should be concentrating on?

Edited April 14, 2019 by bcsapper

[Argus]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1. Not exactly but Scheer seems ok with keeping the crazy people close to him, and so here we are...  I would much rather he distance himself from the wingnuts.

Such as whom? Name names. And do the other party leaders need to do the same?

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

2. No, that's not true.  Our world is one where bullshit has overtaken facts.  Actually, bullshit has overtaken unimportant pap - which is what we used to discuss.  Facts and problems were discussed more in the past.

The fact is that white supremacy is no more a popular choice now than it was twenty, thirty, or forty years ago. The fact is if there are any such groups they've got a handful of members. The fact is the media and the government are sensationalizing this for political gain.

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

3. That's what people say about so-called Islamist terrorists too.  A few hundred terrorists is not a good number, FYI.

I don't complain much about terrorists. I complain about the growing size of a population (soon to be the largest minority group in Canada) which has religiously based values hostile to our own. In fact, hostile to US.

[taxme]

23 hours ago, jacee said:

We're going to have an election about white supremacists.

I think they're circling the bottom of the barrel now.

 

Maybe it is time to put a few "white nationalists" in parliament. It would add to the mixture that we have in there already like socialists, communists, environmentalists, and of course the lying lieberals. Come on, the more the merrier. They may even be able to do something for a change that could benefit all Canadians for the good. Hey, you never know if you do not try. 

[taxme]

25 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Not exactly but Scheer seems ok with keeping the crazy people close to him, and so here we are...  I would much rather he distance himself from the wingnuts.

2. No, that's not true.  Our world is one where bullshit has overtaken facts.  Actually, bullshit has overtaken unimportant pap - which is what we used to discuss.  Facts and problems were discussed more in the past.

3. That's what people say about so-called Islamist terrorists too.  A few hundred terrorists is not a good number, FYI.

 

1. I can say the same thing also that Trudeau has aligned himself with a bunch of crazy wingnuts like butt head. I wonder how many more wing nuts are in the lieberal party? I would much rather Canadians stop aligning themselves with any of the wingnut Canadian political party's because all of them have been very bad for our Canadian health and well being. 

2. You got that right. Liberalism and socialism have replaced facts with fiction in Canada today. Common sense and logic are off the books in Canada now. Only emotion and foolish talk and political correctness will be the norm for the day. The past is long gone now and real discussion and debate has been replaced with sheer stupidity brainwashing. 

3. Another hundred thousand or more of new Muslims should get this country a rocking with terrorist activity in the near future. It has to happen if this country keeps bringing in new immigrants who refuse to assimilate and who thinks that anyone who is not a Muslim is an infidel. Great new neighbors, eh? The enemy is here now and they are no doubt starting to prepare and to get their plan of action going. I say another ten years should do it. 

[jacee]

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I don't like Sharia Law.  I would suggest that doesn't make me a racist.

It doesn't make you anything. Shariah law is only for Muslims. Like Canon law is for Catholics, Halakha is Jewish law, etc. 

[jacee]

6 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Calling Faith Goldy a Nazi makes light of real ones...both historical and the few idiots that still actually cling to the Third Reich.

It's not known how far she'd go, and her smitten minions. I believe she's married to an anti-semite. Not to be dismissed. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, jacee said:

It doesn't make you anything. Shariah law is only for Muslims. Like Canon law is for Catholics, Halakha is Jewish law, etc. 

I don't know about that.  The new stoning laws in Brunei apply to all men, apparently.  And if I remember correctly, Asia Bibi is a Christian.

Edited April 15, 2019 by bcsapper

[DogOnPorch]

7 hours ago, jacee said:

It doesn't make you anything. Shariah law is only for Muslims. Like Canon law is for Catholics, Halakha is Jewish law, etc. 

 

Sharia applies to all living in a Sharia controlled society...Muslim and Non-Muslim alike.

[DogOnPorch]

7 hours ago, jacee said:

It's not known how far she'd go, and her smitten minions. I believe she's married to an anti-semite. Not to be dismissed. 

 

To you, everything not in agreement with you world view = Nazi.

[Michael Hardner]

11 hours ago, bcsapper said:

1. Well, like I said, we have no way of predicting what might happen. 

2. At what point would you object to it?  Would you support any kind of Islamic dispute arbitration?  How would you know all those involved were willing participants?  Also like I said, those against it seem to be mainly female. 

3. Do you really think that a Conservative government after the next election would see us overrun with Klansmen?  Is that what we should be concentrating on?

1. You have just rationalized saying anything you want during a campaign, including Trudeau's campaign.

2. Start another thread on Sharia Law in Canada.  Better yet find one, I'm sure there are many.

3. Weird.  In point 1 you say "anything" could happen.  And here you are concerned with what we "should" be concentrating on.  Seems like a contradiction to me.  Anyway, as I said I would rather the Conservatives stick to their forté which is reasonable economic ideas and the Liberals not tar everyone as being racist.  But I'd also like a new hat and that's not going to happen either.

[Michael Hardner]

10 hours ago, jacee said:

It's not known how far she'd go, and her smitten minions. I believe she's married to an anti-semite. Not to be dismissed. 

Oh, we all know how far she'd go to "protect" the "white" "race".

Look at history - they can convince themselves that "others" are to blame for all the problems.  And look at the nuts like Bisonette who pick up on it.  And look at the mainstream and alt-right Conservatives who come to the defence of her "free speech".

Enough of this - she's a hate mongerer and a criminal.  That's the extent to which we should cover her.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You have just rationalized saying anything you want during a campaign, including Trudeau's campaign.

2. Start another thread on Sharia Law in Canada.  Better yet find one, I'm sure there are many.

3. Weird.  In point 1 you say "anything" could happen.  And here you are concerned with what we "should" be concentrating on.  Seems like a contradiction to me.  Anyway, as I said I would rather the Conservatives stick to their forté which is reasonable economic ideas and the Liberals not tar everyone as being racist.  But I'd also like a new hat and that's not going to happen either.

1) Anyone who did say that would be honest.  It would certainly be refreshing to hear during a campaign.

2) Like I said, you brought it up, not me.

3) Fair point.  It does apply to anything.  I apologise for suggesting you should be concentrating on anything other than what concerns you.

[Argus]

6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Oh, we all know how far she'd go to "protect" the "white" "race".

Look at history - they can convince themselves that "others" are to blame for all the problems.  And look at the nuts like Bisonette who pick up on it.  And look at the mainstream and alt-right Conservatives who come to the defence of her "free speech".

Enough of this - she's a hate mongerer and a criminal.  That's the extent to which we should cover her.

More and more you seem to me to be moving towards the extreme Left, frothing at the mouth at those who say 'bad things' and demanding government action against them. If you think Goldy has broken the law then report her. Stating that she's a criminal when she's never even been charged with anything is entering the realms of the grand high inquisitor who decides guilt before trials.

And accusing everyone concerned about freedom of speech as 'alt-right' is just total bullshit.

And you wonder why no one wants to trust the Left to decide on what gets on the internet.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

1. If you think Goldy has broken the law then report her. Stating that she's a criminal when she's never even been charged with anything is entering the realms of the grand high inquisitor who decides guilt before trials.

2. And you wonder why no one wants to trust the Left to decide on what gets on the internet.

1. I'm not surprised that the legal accuracy of my post is less of a concern to you than someone who espouses racist theory of white replacement.

2. I don't want that either, but you enjoy lying about my opinions so... 

[Argus]

44 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I'm not surprised that the legal accuracy of my post is less of a concern to you than someone who espouses racist theory of white replacement.

Why would I give a damn about someone espousing racist theories about white replacement? Why would YOU?  You must think very little of Canadians to think this is going to have much impact. What is going to decide Canadians is their daily experiences and lived lives, not what some chick on the internet says.

44 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. I don't want that either, but you enjoy lying about my opinions so... 

Maybe you just enjoy lying to yourself.

[Michael Hardner]

43 minutes ago, Argus said:

1. Why would I give a damn about someone espousing racist theories about white replacement?

2. Why would YOU? 

3. You must think very little of Canadians to think this is going to have much impact.

4. What is going to decide Canadians is their daily experiences and lived lives, not what some chick on the internet says.

5. Maybe you just enjoy lying to yourself.

1.  I'm not sure.  It seems to ruffle you if I call it out though.

2.  I care about my community.  I'm sure you do too but your concern manifests itself... um... differently.

3.  I guess if one guy believes this stuff and shoots 6 Muslims that's 'not much impact' ?

4.  I'm not as concerned with the guy who reads the racist posts as with the people he shoots.

5  I'm sure we all do this to an extent.  If you ever figure my lies out, I will be appreciative if you tell me.

 

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1.  I'm not sure.  It seems to ruffle you if I call it out though.

Is that what you're attempting to do? I honestly don't understand this anguish among the Left for people saying bad things on the internet. Say bad things back. There. Done.

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

2.  I care about my community.  I'm sure you do too but your concern manifests itself... um... differently.

I care about freedom. You seem not to. You seem to want the government to throw a smothering blanket over everyone in case anyone might say something bad. This is not unlike snowflake college students who need safe spaces and trigger warnings and rush to the administration whenever a professor or student says something that offends them.

We've had Nazis since WW2. They've been marching around with their stupid little mustaches since then and it hasn't done a damn thing.

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

3.  I guess if one guy believes this stuff and shoots 6 Muslims that's 'not much impact' ?

My impression of you is you'd go to the wall to ensure Muslim immigration continued no matter how many people died in no matter how many terrorist events. But one incident against Muslims and two years later you're still traumatized and ready to throw out the constitution and submit all words, thoughts and deeds to government oversight. Which is stupid on multiple levels. First, it's far more dangerous to this country than the crazy people, and second because it won't work. You want to wipe away social media posts in the absurd hope that will mean no one will hate Muslims any more. Seriously? Do you intend to get rid of all mainstream media which inundates us with weakly videos and stories of Muslim terrorism too? And by the way, has the intense criminalization of pedophiles on the internet done a damned thing about child abuse in real life? Is that not happening any more?

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

4.  I'm not as concerned with the guy who reads the racist posts as with the people he shoots.

And I'm concerned with the freedom of the country, and not willing to sacrifice it because some timid people are afraid a crazy man will read something and react violently. John Hinkley tried to kill a president because of a movie star. The Son of Sam murdered people because his dog told him to. Charlie manson tried to start a race war because of a Beatles song. You cannot prevent crazy people from finding a reason to act out their craziness, and it's even crazier to smother our society in a bubble wrap in a desperate effort to try.

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

5  I'm sure we all do this to an extent.  If you ever figure my lies out, I will be appreciative if you tell me.

You seem to be under the illusion you're a centrist and a moderate. Why, is beyond me.

[Michael Hardner]

11 hours ago, Argus said:

1. I honestly don't understand this anguish among the Left for people saying bad things on the internet. Say bad things back. There. Done.

2. I care about freedom.

3. This is not unlike snowflake college students ...

4. We've had Nazis since WW2. They've been marching around with their stupid little mustaches since then and it hasn't done a damn thing.

5. My impression of you is you'd go to the wall to ensure Muslim immigration continued no matter how many people died in no matter how many terrorist events.

6. But one incident against Muslims and two years later you're still traumatized and ready to throw out the constitution and submit all words, thoughts and deeds to government oversight.

7. You cannot prevent crazy people from finding a reason to act out their craziness, and it's even crazier to smother our society in a bubble wrap in a desperate effort to try.

8. You seem to be under the illusion you're a centrist and a moderate. Why, is beyond me.

1. Yes that makes sense as long as you ignore the terrorism part, which you like to do.

2. Except when it comes to denying Muslims the right to worship and to pursue freedom in Canada it seems.

3. The real snowflakes are the ones who recoil in offense when they are called racist... for saying racist things.

4. True.  6 dead Muslims in a mosque is less of a concern than WW2.

5. That's wrong.

6. So-called Islamist terror and so-called alt-right terror are both fuelled by hate mongers.  I am against all of this - hateful immams and hateful blonde bimbos who work for The Rebel.  You are most concerned about the freedom of expression used to compel mentally ill people to kill Muslims.

7. You can stop hate-mongering.  The reason why the government needs to do it is because people like you are so casual and are irresponsible and neglectful of your civic duties to speak out.  You are a bad citizen.

8.  No - you clearly are because you want to ensure that far-right terrorists continue to murder innocent people.

[jacee]

All out against PEGIDA, May 5, Toronto:

https://www.facebook.com/events/637727846679804/?ti=cl

There's a white supremacist rally in Toronto about every other month.

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/03/24/news/hundreds-blocked-small-far-right-crowd-spreading-hateful-message-toronto

https://nowtoronto.com/news/canada-islamophobic-groups/

Interesting piece on the "white nationalist poster girl" Faith Goldy: In short, an orthodox Catholic traumatised by an abusive father, loss of wealth and status when her mother divorced him, then the death of her mother, the private school and UT grad who adores the spotlight found her audience in the white supremacist world, and recently married a virulent ant-Semite, horrifying her Jewish godmother ... 

https://www.thecut.com/2018/11/faith-goldy-toronto-white-nationalist-poster-girl.html

There is good reason to be concerned about white supremacists in Canada, anti-Muslim being the current popular focus of hate groups. However, Trudeau is just using it as a propaganda campaign against Scheer, and I don't believe we should be having a mud-slinging federal election campaign focused on that issue. The two major parties are wallowing in their own corruption and white supremacy as election platforms. 

Time to stop the seesaw?

Edited April 16, 2019 by jacee