Minorities and polling stations

[Concerned]

I agree with Melanie here.....Mel, do you think that part of the problem is with our immigration system? It is unfortunate for all minorities when a few bad apples give people like Leafless amunition for racist comments. But it's unfortunate that criminals be allowed to enter this country at all, and/or that deportation is not abrupt when new immigrants contribute to crime, gangs etc. I think the problem may lie with an immigration/ court system that allows criminals to stay in the country. Criminals support criminals after all and if we weeded them out from the start, I think there would be far fewer of them around.

Absolutely the immigration system needs to be held accountable; if someone has come here and committed a violent crime, we have no obligation to allow them to stay; nor do we have an obligation to take in someone who poses a credible risk. The justice system also has to bear some responsibility, as often the criminals you are talking about are not immigrants at all, but people born here in Canada, whether to immigrants or not. All the other factors that may be contributing to crime (poverty, inequality of opportunity, bored affluence, adolescent peer cohesion, real or perceived sense of injustice, etc.) don't excuse the crime. What bothers me is the talk about the "ethnic communities" not condemning the criminal actions enough - to do this would be to imply that these crimes are somehow connected to their ethnicity. Criminals are criminals, regardless of the colour of their skin, and should be tried, convicted, locked up, deported, whatever, based on their actions, not their skin colour.

Good Answer.........Mar, I'd be interested to hear your take on this.

[BubberMiley]

There's an interesting racism test at this link (though I just found it confusing):

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/canada/

[Argus]

Dear Argus,

In fact, you condemn them for both supporting and removing him. And if they'd done nothing at all you would still condemn them for doing nothing at all.

And that is not a defence of US policy it is a condemnation of hypocrisy on the part of those who condemn US policy.

The condemnation of US foriegn policy is based upon their own hypocrisy. As much as they trumpet 'democracy' (while crushing it elsewhere) and freedom, they only act in their own interest. Supporting Saddam or removing him isn't done for 'justice, liberty or freedom', it is done for economic and power interests (that benefit the US) only. To hear them claim it is 'for the Iraqi people' makes me guffaw.

And yet it does benefit the Iraqi people. Certainly the US can be hypocrtical, as can our own government. People would do better to examine our own international record before throwing stones at others.

[geoffrey]

Dear Argus,

In fact, you condemn them for both supporting and removing him. And if they'd done nothing at all you would still condemn them for doing nothing at all.

And that is not a defence of US policy it is a condemnation of hypocrisy on the part of those who condemn US policy.

The condemnation of US foriegn policy is based upon their own hypocrisy. As much as they trumpet 'democracy' (while crushing it elsewhere) and freedom, they only act in their own interest. Supporting Saddam or removing him isn't done for 'justice, liberty or freedom', it is done for economic and power interests (that benefit the US) only. To hear them claim it is 'for the Iraqi people' makes me guffaw.

And yet it does benefit the Iraqi people. Certainly the US can be hypocrtical, as can our own government. People would do better to examine our own international record before throwing stones at others.

In the last 20 years all we've done is sit back and condemn the actions of others. It's easy to look clean when you never actually do anything.

It angered me when Martin condemned the violence in Darfur. We claim its horrible, a human rights crisis. Yet we do nothing. We did nothing in Iraq. I do give credit for Afghanistan, but we should be doing more there to.

When Bono and those other hypocritics get up on stage and applaud us for contributing more as a percentage than the US to world peace or hunger or whatever, its a complete lie. Our military contributions to peacekeeping is behind that of Ghana and Nepal!! We are 32nd in the world, what kind of excuse do we have for that? Where as the US puts it's young men and women on the line for freedom, whether that is the intention or not, the US has had a greater effect on freedom around the world than we ever could try to claim.

Canada has no excuse to not be #1 on that list. It's peacekeepers and peacemakers on the ground that actually improve human rights and human security. Throwing money at a problem has never ever solved anything.

[tml12]

My concern is aggressive foreigners who come to this country with their politcal baggage thinking they have the smarts to dismantle years of hard work achieved by native Canadians to suit their own personal goals and objectives.

My post simply reflects cultural activities that are undoing the goodness of a civilized, organized Canada transforming this established country seen as a no name country up for grabs under the guise of some kind of republic --a Liberal creation.

Leafless, you are imagining all kinds of boogeymen on the streets of Canada, and then generalizing your paranoia to anyone you see who doesn't look like you. Your original post that started this thread was about going to a polling station and seeing people you knew nothing about, noticing that they had a different skin tone than you, and assuming they were in cahoots with every other dark skinned person to take over the country. You can't see that there is inherent racism in that.

I'm not denying that there is crime in our streets, and a disproportionate amount of it is committed by minorities. That doesn't make all minorities responsible for the crimes, any more than you are responsible for the crimes of Paul Bernardo and Clifford Olson, just because they were white.

I agree with Melanie here.....Mel, do you think that part of the problem is with our immigration system? It is unfortunate for all minorities when a few bad apples give people like Leafless amunition for racist comments. But it's unfortunate that criminals be allowed to enter this country at all, and/or that deportation is not abrupt when new immigrants contribute to crime, gangs etc. I think the problem may lie with an immigration/ court system that allows criminals to stay in the country. Criminals support criminals after all and if we weeded them out from the start, I think there would be far fewer of them around.

What is sad is that so called "native Canadians" (now there's a good one coming from a caucasion male)...can dwell on the few problems we actually have in this country relating to gangs etc. and who do not embrace cultural diversity and its benefits to Canadian society.

Concerned,

Well the sky may have fallen, because I actually back you 100% on this one ( ).

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Argus,

And yet it does benefit the Iraqi people.

Coincidentally, it does indeed.

Certainly the US can be hypocrtical, as can our own government.

I agree, and certainly our record of interventions isn't stellar. The genocide in Rwanda, for example. However, to be fair, we were one of the few countries that even tried.

Support in Iraq, and other areas, should not be given to the US, for they are actions designed to solely benefit the US. In fact, if Canada does bolster it's military to intervene against despotic and totalitarian regimes, we may find ourselves fighting against US supported and armed forces.

[BubberMiley]

How does getting bombed and having their country turn into a lawless wasteland benefit the Iraqi people. If they really wanted to get rid of Sadaam, they could have done it themselves. It's called revolution. At least in that process, they would have a strategy to deal with the country once he was gone.

[tml12]

How does getting bombed and having their country turn into a lawless wasteland benefit the Iraqi people. If they really wanted to get rid of Sadaam, they could have done it themselves. It's called revolution. At least in that process, they would have a strategy to deal with the country once he was gone.

They are getting there, Bubber, and over here our job is to support the troops of Iraq, the U.S., the U.K., and our own troops who were covertly sent there, in order to protect the Iraqi people.

[Argus]

Dear Argus,

And yet it does benefit the Iraqi people.

Coincidentally, it does indeed.

Certainly the US can be hypocrtical, as can our own government.

I agree, and certainly our record of interventions isn't stellar. The genocide in Rwanda, for example. However, to be fair, we were one of the few countries that even tried.

Support in Iraq, and other areas, should not be given to the US, for they are actions designed to solely benefit the US.

You just admitted above that the Iraqis will benefit from the US intervention, did you not? So why would we not intervene in Iraq? Because the US intervened for its own benefit? Isn't that somewhat churlish?

In fact, if Canada does bolster it's military to intervene against despotic and totalitarian regimes, we may find ourselves fighting against US supported and armed forces.

Pretty unlikely. I'm aware of no regimes the US is supporting with any kind of military aid, be it money or advisors, other than a few in the middle east and a couple of drug countries in the south. And, btw, we support those same governments, at least with our words, if not our deeds.

[tml12]

"And, btw, we support those same governments, at least with our words, if not our deeds."

Good point Argus but be careful...you don't want to shake up the "proud Canadian left."

[BubberMiley]

They are getting there, Bubber, and over here our job is to support the troops of Iraq, the U.S., the U.K., and our own troops who were covertly sent there, in order to protect the Iraqi people.

Supporting them by watching them get bombed too?

[I Miss Trudeau]

I'd like to take this oppurtunity to apologize for the statements and attitudes of Argus, Geoffrey and Leafless. Their beliefs are not in line with the majority of the white community, and I wish to make this clear to all that such attitudes are not tolerated by the majority of the white community. Thus, I hereby excommunicate Argus, Geoffrey, and Leafless from white society in the hopes that their attitudes never be mistaken for the attitudes of regular white folk.

Thank you.

[geoffrey]

I'd like to take this oppurtunity to apologize for the statements and attitudes of Argus, Geoffrey and Leafless. Their beliefs are not in line with the majority of the white community, and I wish to make this clear to all that such attitudes are not tolerated by the majority of the white community. Thus, I hereby excommunicate Argus, Geoffrey, and Leafless from white society in the hopes that their attitudes never be mistaken for the attitudes of regular white folk.

Thank you.

Hey hey, none of that. I made myself very clear my position was simply no reverse discrimination. That and my concerns over hijacked riding associations. If we want to be equal, the rules need to apply to the majority too. I think most people regardless of colour would agree to that.

[tml12]

They are getting there, Bubber, and over here our job is to support the troops of Iraq, the U.S., the U.K., and our own troops who were covertly sent there, in order to protect the Iraqi people.

Supporting them by watching them get bombed too?

Supporting them by rooting them on and hoping they'll get their mission accomplished safely...

[Argus]

I'd like to take this oppurtunity to apologize for the statements and attitudes of Argus, Geoffrey and Leafless. Their beliefs are not in line with the majority of the white community, and I wish to make this clear to all that such attitudes are not tolerated by the majority of the white community. Thus, I hereby excommunicate Argus, Geoffrey, and Leafless from white society in the hopes that their attitudes never be mistaken for the attitudes of regular white folk.

Thank you.

The sophisticate said - from his mom's basement, before turning back to his comic book.

Get lost, boy. Grownups are talking.

[I Miss Trudeau]

Get lost, boy. Grownups are talking.

Indeed they are. Sadly, you're not one of them.

[seabee]

Why do I get the impression that Parizeau's remark on the "ethnic vote" is now a preoccupation within English-speaking Canada?

[Leafless]

seabee

You wrote- " Why do I get the impression that Parizeau's remark on the "ethnic vote" is now a preoccupation within English Canada."

Well, Mr. Pariseau was not in the positon to make that statement initially as Quebecer's themselves are considered a minority in Canada with Quebec being a province in Canada. The ethnic vote can be seen as another minority vote.

This cleary demonstrates the dysfunctionality concerning the state of Canadian politics and shows the immediate need to improve democracy through electoral reform.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Argus,

We are somewhat off-topic here, but...

You just admitted above that the Iraqis will benefit from the US intervention, did you not? So why would we not intervene in Iraq? Because the US intervened for its own benefit? Isn't that somewhat churlish?

Well, what I am saying is that the removal of someone like Saddam can be a good thing for the people under a dictator. However, this was not the reason the US went in, and, like the invasion of Panama, was a 'flagrant violation of international law'.

QUOTE

In fact, if Canada does bolster it's military to intervene against despotic and totalitarian regimes, we may find ourselves fighting against US supported and armed forces.

Pretty unlikely. I'm aware of no regimes the US is supporting with any kind of military aid, be it money or advisors, other than a few in the middle east and a couple of drug countries in the south. And, btw, we support those same governments, at least with our words, if not our deeds.

Sadly, with this last sentence, you are correct. I agree with you that relations with countries that have dismal human rights records, such as China, should be reassessed and linked to trade.

Regarding 'regimes' that the US supports, there are several. For example, the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, and also support for anti-western muslim extremists' such as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2701547.stm

The US decided to fund the Northern Alliance to help overthrow the Taliban, somehow forgetting that people like Hekmatyar (dubbed 'Mr. Blowback'), and Bin Laden, are far more loyal to their causes than to their bankers. Countries such as Liberia, Angola, etc. have suffered unheard of atrocities for years at the hands of US-backed regimes. Most of it doesn't make the news, mind you. When Bosnia was 'all the rage', few people were told that the heaviest fighting and largest casualty rates in the world were in Huambo, Angola, at the very same time.

Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, for example, have brutal governments, and their peoples would both do well without their 'regimes', which enjoy tremendous support from the US.

[Argus]

Why do I get the impression that Parizeau's remark on the "ethnic vote" is now a preoccupation within English-speaking Canada?

Parizeau's remark, as politically incorrect as it was - was entirely correct. The majority of "Quebecois" voted to leave - and would vote to leave today, official bilingualism and forty years of sucking up to Quebec notwithstanding.

[Argus]

Get lost, boy. Grownups are talking.

Indeed they are. Sadly, you're not one of them.

IMT, the only function you serve on this site is to provide comfort to the most incapable and incompetent of participants that at least the're a few notches better than someone.

[BubberMiley]

And Argus' main function is to be curmugeonly so as to back up otherwise weak arguments (except the point about pure laine quebecois being consistently in the majority for sovereignty--that's definitely true).

[I Miss Trudeau]

IMT, the only function you serve on this site is to provide comfort to the most incapable and incompetent of participants that at least the're a few notches better than someone.

Ironic that you've taken such offense at me doing precisely what you and others demand that minority groups do. Seems like their damned if they do and damned if they don't. But then, what can you really expect from racists who start threads like "Is gang rape a part of Islamic culture?"

[Argus]

IMT, the only function you serve on this site is to provide comfort to the most incapable and incompetent of participants that at least the're a few notches better than someone.

Ironic that you've taken such offense at me doing precisely what you and others demand that minority groups do. Seems like their damned if they do and damned if they don't. But then, what can you really expect from racists who start threads like "Is gang rape a part of Islamic culture?"

I really expected some of the stick-up-the-ass leftist morons to yell about that one. But I didn't get a single person who could counter all the cites I put up about Muslims commiting rape in Europe. Clearly, you felt incapable of countering me as well. One of the few times you recognized your limitations.

But it is typical of you that the lack of any ability to counter an argument doesn't stop you from throwing puerile insults.

[I Miss Trudeau]

I really expected some of the stick-up-the-ass leftist morons to yell about that one. But I didn't get a single person who could counter all the cites I put up about Muslims commiting rape in Europe. Clearly, you felt incapable of countering me as well. One of the few times you recognized your limitations.

What about all of the Europeans commiting rape in Europe? Clearly, western culture includes gang rape.