Trudeau hires some lefty loon to combat "Islamophobia" (whatever that means)

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You're underestimating the depth of the problem with islamophobia - there's no such thing as islamophobia. It's every bit as bad as advertised.

We all know that Nazis were bad. We all know how bad it is to support Naziism (unless of course it's in the Ukrainian army for some reason).

If people wear swastikas we say "They're supporting Naziism, and that's bad!", right? And what is wearing the hijab if not supporting misogyny, violent religious bigotry, and systemic genocidal rape, etc? 

Wearing a hijab is showing support for the Iranian gov't whipping women and jailing them for decades. It's showing support for the taliban shooting at girls on their way to school. It's showing support for islamic state's butchery in Iraq and Syria. It's standing in solidarity with the Pakistani militias who carried out their duty to rape women who weren't muslim. At least 300,000 of them in 1971 alone. FYI those aren't "I said he could go to 3rd base but he stole home" rapes, those are "door kicked in, raped by a bunch of violent bigots in your own home, in front of your family" rapes. People convert to a different religion or flee their country after those rapes.

The absence of a hijab is a really great way to pick out important rape victims in Pakistan and a lot of other places. Today. Hundreds of millions of women woke up today knowing know that they will be harassed, beaten, raped, or jailed if they don't wear the hijab. It's so evil that it makes the swastika look like a child's toy. 

If wearing a hijab was mainly an act of faith, and it was rarely a tool for systemic genocidal rape and all of those other things, then I'd feel like it was just a reflection of one's own religious conscience, but it's not that at all. All across the ME and far east the hijab is primarily a tool for religious discrimination. 

You'll get no argument about what the hijab represents from me.  Same with any kind of enforced covering.

That said, wearing the hijab is, for some, a  genuine expression of faith.  It is also, for some, a (misguided) fashion statement. 

So, I agree with you about the hijab.  The people in my example don't, or don't care, or are trolling us.  What do you suggest we do about it?  As someone who decries the forced wearing of garments, I'm not about to force someone not to wear a garment.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

You're underestimating the depth of the problem with islamophobia - there's no such thing as islamophobia. It's every bit as bad as advertised.

 

As to your point about Islamophobia, which I missed when  I was responding to the hijab question.

In a previous post I described what I saw as Islamophobia and it's no different from any other discrimination.  That being, the application of the discrimination indiscriminantly.  Without even knowing the person to whom your applying it.

If it's the name that bothers you, then call it something else. 

You don't have to tell me that Islam is "every bit as bad as advertised".  Have you ever read any of my posts on the subject?

The phobia comes in believing that all Muslims are the same.  Is that your belief?  All 1.5 billion of them believe the same thing when it comes to the more egregious aspects of the religion?  Every single one of them would shoot up the Charlie Hebdo offices and hack a Bangladeshi blogger to death if they were offered the chance?  Even if you limit yourself to the oppression of women in Canada you would still have to know the facts before you decided on an individual. 

Well, I would. 

Is it the same with Christians?  Are they all evildoers who would deny women's and gay rights? (albeit to a lesser extent, of course)

Those I know are not.  Granted, I don't know many.

[I am Groot]

On 2/9/2023 at 4:58 PM, Contrarian said:

I think the immigration system in Canada is pretty well put in, as strict as in America in my view, in terms of checks and vetting purposes. 

We do not vet immigrants other than giving a cursory look at their educational credentials and checking their names against terrorism watch lists. We do not interview them nor ask them any questions about what they think or believe. Including whether they despise certain types of people or certain practices which might be common in Canada.

Once here, the test for citizenship takes about 20 minutes and consists of true or false and multiple choice questions.

[blackbird]

In the last 30 days 465 people have been killed and 559 injured.  List of Islamic Terror Attacks (thereligionofpeace.com)

In last five days:

2023.02.10	Israel	Ramot	2	5	A Palestinian driver plows into a bus stop, killing a 6-yearold and a newly-married seminary student.
2023.02.08	Afghanistan	Kabul	1	0	A psychologist is tortured to death by the Taliban.
2023.02.08	Cameroon	Lake Chad	8	0	Eight fishermen are murdered in cold blood by Boko Haram.
2023.02.08	Burkina Faso	Bekoure	6	0	Six are killed when Jihadists attack a village.
2023.02.08	Pakistan	Swabi	1	1	Militants throw a grenade into a home, killing one.
2023.02.08	Burkina Faso	Boucle du Mouhoun	2	0	Two employees with Doctors without Borders are shot dead by Islamists.
2023.02.07	Yemen	alBouqaira	6	0	An al-Qaeda bomb blast claime six souls.
2023.02.07	Mali	Nara	3	0	Three security personnel succumb following an Islamist attack.
2023.02.07	Iraq	Qayyarah	1	0	A civilian is found assassinated in the former ISIS stronghold.
2023.02.07	Afghanistan	Lashkar Gah	1	0	The Taliban arrest and execute a former judge.
2023.02.06	Syria	Palmyra	1	0	ISIS snipers pick off a young man in the fog.
2023.02.06	Iraq	Baghdad	1	0	The female victim of a suspected honor-killing is found abandoned.

Edited February 11, 2023 by blackbird

[WestCanMan]

5 hours ago, bcsapper said:

You'll get no argument about what the hijab represents from me.  Same with any kind of enforced covering.

That said, wearing the hijab is, for some, a  genuine expression of faith.  It is also, for some, a (misguided) fashion statement. 

So, I agree with you about the hijab.  The people in my example don't, or don't care, or are trolling us.  What do you suggest we do about it?  As someone who decries the forced wearing of garments, I'm not about to force someone not to wear a garment.

I don't think there's anything we can do about it, but I'm just not a fan of the general attitude that it's a beautiful thing. 

[I am Groot]

12 hours ago, Contrarian said:

List your direct experiences with the immigration system, and sponsorship, do you know people that work there or in organizations related to immigration? What exactly gives weight to the above message, your direct CV with immigration aside from the grievances? 

As a matter of fact I do know a director there. But anyone who has kept track of ordinary news here in the last decade knows very well what I said was fact. I remind you, presuming you're old enough, that during the Tory leadership convention which elected Andrew Scheer one candidate dared to propose we interview prospective immigrants and give them a 'values test'. This outraged the entire mainstream media, other candidates, and of course, other parties. Apparently because the outrageous implication was that our own values were somehow better than that of some of the people in Pakistan or Afghanistan.

During that certain information came out, some of it quoted from a pro-immigration book written by a professor who had studied the system, which showed almost no one got interviews and that visa officers had only minutes to go through a file before approving or disapproving the application. 

The facts about the 'test' for immigration are readily available online. It's 20 true or false/multiple choice questions.

This media report is a few years old but is from the former head of Immigration Canada, and sets out some of the issues. AFAIK nothing has changed with regard to what he's written here.

[I am Groot]

Just now, Contrarian said:

Will read it, thanks for responding reasonably. 

Now, I am curious. What kind of tests instead of the citenzenship tests would you put in place? I am not talking about the vetting which even though some might slip, no system is perfect, we disagree, but I highly doubt at any sign of criminality the law eventually catches up even with those that slip.

How would you run the vetting process and citenzenship tests?

First of all the citizenship test is a different topic from the proposed 'values test' for prospective immigrants. The Citizenship test is for landed immigrants who have been here several years. I would stiffen it, for one thing. Twenty multiple choice/true or false questions? Seriously!? That's it!? I guess we don't value our citizenship very much if that's all you need to do to get it!

But the test the candidate (whose name eludes me) proposed for prospective immigrants was an interview where they would be asked questions designed to reveal their tolerance level for things like female equality, female education, gay rights, freedom of speech that offends, respect for other religious groups, etc. They have such tests in Western Europe included with their citizenship tests, and it's not hard to fail them. There have been a few examples of people being refused citizenship for refusing to touch members of the opposite sex (ie, shake the hand of the interviewer). Prospective citizens there are also asked to demonstrate their command of the language and local politics, what they've done since arrival to begin to integrate, to name friends they've made not from their ethnic group, clubs or sports teams they've joined/followed, etc. I don't think that's a bad idea myself.

[I am Groot]

3 hours ago, Contrarian said:

1. Yes, I know, as I have been through the process, this is why me and you disagree. You know a director, I have done the process.

Which means you filled out some forms, yes? This tells you nothing about how those forms are dealt with on the other end, the amount of time visa officers have to go over them, or what they might or might not be doing to vet those applications. 

3 hours ago, Contrarian said:

Also, not sure how the modern tests are, but if we were to do a test here, and test all the born-here Canadians, are you kidding me? You think people will score perfectly?

There are lots of test examples online for people to practice with. I doubt it's difficult. Especially since there's no real writing involved. No essays. Just checking boxes. 

3 hours ago, Contrarian said:

2. Is not realistic, what is stopping someone from saying they hold western values to get in and then acting the opposite?

That's not how these tests work. They don't simply ask "Do you think gay people should be killed?" or something equally obvious. Have you ever had a personality test for a job application? They tend to ask a series of psychological questions to garner you're likely attitudes. And yes, you can cheat at any test if you put enough effort in, but we still have tests for everything, now don't we? You might need to pass a two or three hour test to get a job so why is there no test to pass to become a permanent resident of Canada and a simple 20 question checkbox test to become a citizen?