Entitled refugees

[Michael Hardner]

13 minutes ago, eyeball said:

So 1/4 of the Earth's population just randomly decided one day to attack the planet right out of the blue with no rhyme or reason why.

The myth of rational analysis: let's start with an assumption that religion is the cause, and we'll bury that assumption by assertion an impartial analysis based on some factors...

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The myth of rational analysis: let's start with an assumption that religion is the cause, and we'll bury that assumption by assertion an impartial analysis based on some factors...

There's nothing wrong with rational analysis but its bound to be pretty useless if you deliberately ignore other factors like elephants and donkeys in this case.

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

There's nothing wrong with rational analysis but its bound to be pretty useless if you deliberately ignore other factors like elephants and donkeys in this case.

Or values.  The Nazis were fantastic rationalists.  

[Michael Hardner]

This thread is now pre Godwinned.

 

So 5% of new immigrants being refugees doesn't seem like much to me, given our wealth and the hand that we and our friends have had in causing misery, regardless of intention.

 

Let's actually be the Christian nation that the xenophobes and war-on-Christmas people claim we are.

[WestCanMan]

4 hours ago, Rue said:

 

Fourth, the vast majority of Muslims oppose violent extremism and terrorism, and

I’m not trying to insult you or your post, I just don’t have time to reply to it all.

The vast majority of Muslims live in countries with laws that are extremely bigoted towards people of minority religions. Bigoted to the point where minorities are afraid for their wives and children if they don’t convert. Bigoted to the point where women are forced to wear islamic head coverings or they face harassment, violence, rape, or jail time. The simple fact of the matter is if you wanna live in a Muslim majority country you’re not safe unless you’re a Muslim yourself. If the vast majority of the people there opposed this type of behaviour then it wouldn’t really be a thing.

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Rue said:

Here is other info for your interest on this topic:

 We can also say that Islamist terrorist attacks account for 18.8% of all attacks worldwide, 

18.8% lol. The point-eight makes it look soooo official and accurate. We've seen this kind of stat trotted out before by apologist groups. They count things like graffiti on the side of a church as a terrorist attack. Sorry but that's not terrorism it's just idiocy.

Apologists don't get to create their own watered-down definition of what a terrorist attack is and then use it to build a false narrative. We know what actual terrorist attacks are. Terrorist attacks, like the ones in the list on wiki which you neglected to comment on (elephant in the room again), are committed by people who have the intent to maim or kill to further a religious/political cause.  

It's the same as the definition of rape (now sexual assault). If a girl on a date gets naked but she doesn't want to be touched on the vagina, and she gets touched on the vagina, it's called sexual assault, just like it's called sexual assault if a group of guys breaks into a girl's apartment and pin her down, beat her, and force themselves on her. They're clearly not the same thing, but they fit neatly into the same statistical category so idiots can now say "xx.x% of the girls on Yyyyyy Campus get sexually assaulted every year". It's great for activists but it diminishes the seriousness of actual rape, which is it's own type of heinous, violent criminal activity. Broadening the definition of something to the point where it no longer accurately describes anything isn't a positive evolution of the language.

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

So 1/4 of the Earth's population just randomly decided one day to attack the planet right out of the blue with no rhyme or reason why.

Yes I'd say there's definitely an elephant in the room but did you notice there's also a donkey?

You're spouting the exact type of ignorance that justifies the next wave of terrorist attacks.

Islamic terrorist attacks didn't just start in 1947, or 1914. Look at what happened in southern Europe for centuries before the crusades started, or what happened in India once Europe was no longer a soft target.

Google Banu Qurayza for a glimpse of what can be "justified". Compare that to anything that big, bad Donald Trump has ever done. And for that matter, can you tell me what's the worst thing that Trump has ever done? Trump inherited a lot of enormous messes, with bodies piling up everywhere. What's Trump's body count eyeball? And don't count the people killed by Iranian missiles, only a small percentage of people on the planet are stupid enough to believe that. 

[Moonlight Graham]

12 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

So why aren't you suggesting kicking out the riff-raff born in the country as well, seeing as being stupid and unskilled is not protected by the Charter? Why are you only applying your logic to the foreign born while claiming it's about being stupid and unskilled?

Because you can't legally kick out Canadian citizens who were born here.  Yes there are a lot of Canadian-born riff-raff in Canada.  With immigration, we have the ability to pick and choose who can come here or not.  Bring the best.

Go into the worst parts of any major city in Canada and you will find it dominated by impoverished, poorly educated, unskilled immigrants.  Go for a drive right now and tell me what you find.  The only exception might be in the prairies where you may find aboriginals there too, unfortunately.

It's not about race or ethnicity, it's about education & poverty.  If you come to this country, even seeking refuge, and you have no hope of securing a decent income and are going to help turn major parts of our cities into run-down crime infested third-world crap-holes, you should be shipped off to a third-world country where you'll fit in just fine.  If you can pull your weight, you can stay.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Moonlight Graham

[Dougie93]

12 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Muslims coming into this country is not a big problem.  Stupid, unskilled people being allowed to stay in this country are.  They're the ones who live in community housing , live off welfare, who cause crime, raise kids who get knocked up as a teen etc.  Being stupid and unskilled is not protected by the Charter fortunately.  Keep out the riff-raff.

Bring it on,  like I say, the only way to constrain government is for the government to go broke.

And no, raising taxes won't save them, they actually take in less revenue as they expand the confiscation.

[Argus]

19 hours ago, Rue said:

I also have argued I think your conclusions ignore good Muslims. I think your conclusions ignore moderate Muslims who are against extremism and terrorism and could positively contribute to Canada. I argue  your conclusions and  generalized negative assumptions about all Muslims  wrongfully stereotypes law abiding, good, hard working, anti terrorist, peaceful Muslims.

Ya know, I've often argued most Germans were good people in the 1930s and 40s. I mean, only a small hard core were Nazis. It was horribly unfair of us to be bombing Germans and killing them the way we did when we should have paid more attention to the fact most of them were just peaceful people and not Nazis at all.

[Argus]

12 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

So why aren't you suggesting kicking out the riff-raff born in the country

Because that would be stupid and impossible. We do the possible. Just because we have child molesters in this country does not suggest we're being unfair by not importing more.

[eyeball]

17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You're spouting the exact type of ignorance that justifies the next wave of terrorist attacks.

I aim to please.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

So 1/4 of the Earth's population just randomly decided one day to attack the planet right out of the blue with no rhyme or reason why.

Yes I'd say there's definitely an elephant in the room but did you notice there's also a donkey?

Muslims have been attacking all non-Muslim neighbours since Islam was founded. Ask the Hindus of northern India - now called Pakistan. Ask the Egyptians and Syrians and Lebanese and Turks, who are now Muslims but who used to be Christians. Ask Northern Africans taken in the thousand year old slave trades.

Muslim nations stopped attacking their non-Muslim neighbors only when they lost the military ability to do so.

And if, tomorrow there was some kind of plague which killed off much of the population of Europe (and America) and rendered their civilizations helpless, but somehow missed the Muslim world, you can be damned sure they'd be invading the next day. The whole point and purpose of Islam is to take over the world by any means necessary. That's the driving force behind the religion. There is the land of peace - ie, Muslim controlled countries, and the lands of war - ie, non-Muslim controlled countries. And there will be struggle everlasting until the latter becomes the former.

Edited January 18, 2020 by Argus

[kactus]

13 minutes ago, Argus said:

Muslims have been attacking all non-Muslim neighbours since Islam was founded. Ask the Hindus of northern India - now called Pakistan. Ask the Egyptians and Syrians and Lebanese and Turks, who are now Muslims but who used to be Christians. Ask Northern Africans taken in the thousand year old slave trades.

Muslim nations stopped attacking their non-Muslim neighbors only when they lost the military ability to do so.

And if, tomorrow there was some kind of plague which killed off much of the population of Europe (and America) and rendered their civilizations helpless, but somehow missed the Muslim world, you can be damned sure they'd be invading the next day. The whole point and purpose of Islam is to take over the world. That's the driving force behind the religion.

....Malaysia is a muslim country....I don’t see them taking over the world.

This whole notion that one religion is superior to another is absurd and futile argument down the spiral. Ask the Vatican and their influence to bring Christianity in African countries...

I do find myself strangely in agreement with some of the views of rue on this topic. How could this be?

Edited January 18, 2020 by kactus

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

So 5% of new immigrants being refugees doesn't seem like much to me, given our wealth and the hand that we and our friends have had in causing misery, regardless of intention.

The Left is ever generous with other people's money.

And it's not 5%. We're getting 50k asylum claims a year vs 320k immigrants. Except the way it works is that some portion of that 320k are actually refugees. Also the ones whose claims are turned down just stay anyway. So it's likely something around 15% or more.

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, kactus said:

....Malaysia is a muslim country....I don’t see them taking over the world.

Nor do they have the ability to do so.

 

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, Argus said:

Muslims have been attacking all non-Muslim neighbours since Islam was founded.

 I know it's just so unfair. Especially knowing that every other human society on the [planet has been like poor innocent Hobbits that never harmed a fly.

Ever.

Why it's almost like Muslims are a different species or something. 

[eyeball]

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

The Left is ever generous with other people's money.

And the right is ever greedy about other people's money.

Maybe non-muslims are the oddball species that can't fit in.

Edited January 18, 2020 by eyeball

[dialamah]

21 minutes ago, Argus said:

And if, tomorrow there was some kind of plague which killed off much of the population of Europe (and America) and rendered their civilizations helpless, but somehow missed the Muslim world, you can be damned sure they'd be invading the next day. 

If there was a plague that decimated the ME, Africa, India and China, would Europe/North America hesitate to invade?  Not likely; they're not even hesitating now in the ME.  Of course,  apologists for Western military action pretend they're offering "democracy" or something, but its pretty much horseshit. 

The more the West "helps", the more instabilty there is and the more we have refugees fleeing that instability, even coming to our country. 

You can tell yourself all you want that Islam is the aggressor, but to do so you have to close your eyes to where the "Christian" nations are putting their armies.

Edited January 18, 2020 by dialamah

[Teena]

24 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 

Why it's almost like Muslims are a different species or something. 

Because there is a difference. 

 

 

[Argus]

49 minutes ago, dialamah said:

You can tell yourself all you want that Islam is the aggressor,

Because it has been throughout history.

49 minutes ago, dialamah said:

but to do so you have to close your eyes to where the "Christian" nations are putting their armies.

At home. Christian nations have virtually no troops in the middle east.

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Or values.  The Nazis were fantastic rationalists.  

You can tell how evil people are by what kinds of things they (eyeball) can justify.

[dialamah]

34 minutes ago, Argus said:

Because it has been throughout history.

I've been watching historical documentaries of late.  Europeans have been aggressively waging war for centuries, only apparently giving it up in the last century or so.  There was often no provocation for these wars, other than imposing some form of Christianity throughout Europe and later, to gain territory and impose Christianity on any "barbarians" they ran across.  

40 minutes ago, Argus said:

At home. Christian nations have virtually no troops in the middle east.

So tell me, exactly how many US, Western allied troops haven't been somewhere in the Middle East over the last 60 years.  

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

If there was a plague that decimated the ME, Africa, India and China, would Europe/North America hesitate to invade?  Not likely; they're not even hesitating now in the ME.  Of course,  apologists for Western military action pretend they're offering "democracy" or something, but its pretty much horseshit. 

The more the West "helps", the more instabilty there is and the more we have refugees fleeing that instability, even coming to our country. 

You can tell yourself all you want that Islam is the aggressor, but to do so you have to close your eyes to where the "Christian" nations are putting their armies.

1)That's idiocy. You saw how easily the US wiped out the Iraqi army. You don't think that Europe and NA could squash the ME countries if they wanted to?

2)If islam isn't a problem, then why is it that as soon as there's any instability over there they all just start stabbing each other? It's like a real-life version of the movie The Purge. 

3)There's a problem with religion in general, Islam is just the worst of a bad lot. 

[WestCanMan]

5 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I've been watching historical documentaries of late.  Europeans have been aggressively waging war for centuries, only apparently giving it up in the last century or so.  There was often no provocation for these wars, other than imposing some form of Christianity throughout Europe and later, to gain territory and impose Christianity on any "barbarians" they ran across.   

Wow, so that's what it's like for a religion/culture to progress.