PM is distressed

[betsy]

If there is not one common ground to look up and adhere to (such as the foundation of rights and freedom this country is built on), then what will hold us all together?

[BubberMiley]

Do you stand for anything that you do not see as being in your own self interest?

No.

Is avoiding a possible "shitstorm" more important to you than your own freedom?

No

Will you run and hide whenever someone objects your own countrymen exercising their freedom.

No.

I'll ask you again. What about those cartoons shown in the Arab media? What is your opinion of them?

Poorly drawn, but drawn to provoke a reaction.

Do you think the Arab media has a right to be so righteous when they print this kind of stuff?

Do you mean self-righteous? If they were righteous, then they're righteous. I don't presume to understand muslim culture one whit. I think the people who drew the cartoons understand it better than I. They knew they were offensive.

Do I think the radical muslim reaction was justified?

No.

People who will not stand up for another's freedoms, have no right to expect any of their own.

I agree. And Ezra Levant is still free to pick and choose what he publishes. Like I said, I don't think he should be compelled to refrain from printing them. He should make that choice himself. If it was something more important than crappy cartoons and our freedom was truly at risk, then I would say it's in my self-interest to print them. Otherwise, I don't see how we have anything to gain.

[Argus]

We simply cannot keep appeasing to every new immigrant that walks in.

This has nothing to do with multiculturalism or immigration because it isn't Canadian muslims who are burning Danish flags or acting violently. Multiculturalism is an entirely different story that I can only defend when I'm playing devil's advocate.

But those who say we can't publish such cartoons are not using the excuse that foreigners might attack Canadian embassies but that local Muslims would be offended.

[Army Guy]

Wilber:

If Jews were rioting, attacking embassies, foreign nationals and burning down businesses owned by middle eastern companies and individuals, would people be apologizing for their behavior because they had been offended by these? I wonder. I don't belong to either group but as an outside observer the cartoons printed by the Danes look really tame compared to what is printed in the Arab media. If you are going to heap this kind of crap on others, you shouldn't be surprised if a little comes back at you.

I'm curious Wilber what crap would that be. have you even read the posts i've been printing or are you just jumping on someones band wagon.

[Army Guy]

Betsy:

But we have our own culture here that ought to be respected too...or at least understood, by those who had chosen to live in this land.

What are you trying to say that you and the others can not discuss a topic with out showing a little respect or common sense. That you need to insult someone or a group to make a piont. That Canadains are not capable of having a normal conversation or expressing thier ideas without insults. And then try to hide behind freedom of speech.

That is the very root of the problem in Europe I think, and some other parts of the world....that muslims who had chosen to live in western worlds expect and demand that those countries dent their own culture, to the point of tampering with rights and freedom....just so to accomodate a religion.

What are the demanding? other than for us to show them some respect, no more than what is shown other europeans. It was the european muslims that after all that showed restraint and express thier concern and told the press that the cartoons were insulting without violence. And how where they rewarded, we came back and insulted them again, and then told them it was our right to. You want someone to blame , Blame the radicals to the entire religion.

Saying it is one thing. But you aren't just saying it. You're telling others to shut up with their opinions

I've re-read all the posts on this topic, show me were i've told you to shut-up., that i did not want to hear your opinions.

You even went so far as judging and deciding for everyone....you want to eliminate the freedom to choose, along with the freedom of speech and press....just because a group says they find it offensive.

Where do you get all this from, i have never said that i was judging or deciding for everyone. Or for that matter did i ever say i wanted to eliminate any of your freedoms. Perhaps you can show me on any of my posts that your getting this info from.

But going through all these contortions and twisting of reality, justifying why you'd rather see clipping some freedom in your OWN SOIL to MAKE AMEND and KEEP THE HORDES from indulging in more bloodletting....in other words, to PACIFY....well, that is unmistakeably callled, 'appeasing

Those freedoms you keep refering to are already clipped and already have limations, i did not put those limitations there our government did. like it or not it is already written in stone. so stop shooting the messager and do some research yourselfs.

Are you saying that we as Canadains cannot express ourselfs without insulting anyone. that we must now insult everyone to protect our freedoms. That this entire story had to be told, that it had to be told with those cartoons, there was no other way.

[Wilber]

Wilber:

If Jews were rioting, attacking embassies, foreign nationals and burning down businesses owned by middle eastern companies and individuals, would people be apologizing for their behavior because they had been offended by these? I wonder. I don't belong to either group but as an outside observer the cartoons printed by the Danes look really tame compared to what is printed in the Arab media. If you are going to heap this kind of crap on others, you shouldn't be surprised if a little comes back at you.

I'm curious Wilber what crap would that be. have you even read the posts i've been printing or are you just jumping on someones band wagon.

This Crap

How many times do I have to post the link?

[Wilber]

Do you stand for anything that you do not see as being in your own self interest?

No.

Is avoiding a possible "shitstorm" more important to you than your own freedom?

No

Will you run and hide whenever someone objects your own countrymen exercising their freedom.

No.

So you would not avoid a possible "shitstorm" or not run whenever someone objects to your own countrymen exercising there freedoms, if you see it to be in your own interest to do so. Isn't that what many Canadians love to accuse the US of, not sticking up for others unless it is in their interest?

I'll ask you again. What about those cartoons shown in the Arab media? What is your opinion of them?

Poorly drawn, but drawn to provoke a reaction.

The Arab cartoons were drawn to provoke hatred toward Israel and Jews.

Do you think the Arab media has a right to be so righteous when they print this kind of stuff?

Do you mean self-righteous? If they were righteous, then they're righteous. I don't presume to understand muslim culture one whit. I think the people who drew the cartoons understand it better than I. They knew they were offensive.

Do I think the radical muslim reaction was justified?

No.

OK, self-righteous.

People who will not stand up for another's freedoms, have no right to expect any of their own.

I agree. And Ezra Levant is still free to pick and choose what he publishes. Like I said, I don't think he should be compelled to refrain from printing them. He should make that choice himself. If it was something more important than crappy cartoons and our freedom was truly at risk, then I would say it's in my self-interest to print them. Otherwise, I don't see how we have anything to gain.

Perhaps Levant should have published several of the Danish and Arab cartoons side by side so people could judge for themselves who is the most offensive and the most offended, instead of knuckling under to the group which makes them most noise like the rest of our media and its apologists.

[Army Guy]

Argus:

We have very little. That is why I oppose the frightened people like you who want more, much, much, much more. Who want laws to punish anyone who says or does or writes anything which might offend the scary! people.

Perhaps you should do some research on the topic first, those laws are already in place they are already restricting your freedoms. And when did i ever imply or say i wanted more of these laws. or are you just making this up as you go along.

So if I understand your "logic", because we have laws that allow individuals who have been caused actual harm by lies to sue, and hate laws which ban inciting genocide, we should have many, many more laws to prevent foreigners from being offended somehow. Have I got that right?

We do have many more laws, already here in Canada. and again i am not advocating more laws.

Yeah, well, here's the thing. We don't pay "you" and guys like you, to think.

Lets make something clear, you don't pay me period.... Because if you did, that would make "you" my employer, and "you" would be responsable for ensuring we had the right equipment for the job. and that "you" would have a say in where i was employed. And the government could not call it's army out on it's citizens because "they" would be our employers.

In fact, the reason you do what you do is because it doesn't take much brain power, doesn't take any imagination or education. Any moron can dig a ditch and pull a trigger, and plenty have.

What can i say Argus, your the man, is this your way of proving that Canadians need to insult people to make thier piont. Does this mean your more Canadian than i am, guess so . I must have hit a nerve and pissed in your corn flakes. I can see you have a high opinion of those that serve this country. well it's true that we all do not work at NASA as you do. But as the CDS has said DND is made up of the best this country has to offer. Sorry you did'nt make the cut.

So excuse us for not bowing and scraping because someone who "claims" they went to Afghanistan is here snivelling about us wanting to hang onto something as trivial and unnecessary as freedom of speech.

I have not asked you to bow down before me, and yes i have claimed to have served in Afgan, Sniveling i thought we were discussing something. but then again my opinion differs from yours so i must be sniveling.

Because it's quite clear you lack any acquaintance with the precedents of history or law or the consequences of criminalizing opinions. All you want to do is bow before anyone who threatens you, and to cringe away from anything which smacks of confrontation.

Fortunately, as I said, you don't make the decisions

Perhaps you can take a few miniutes out of your day and show a moron just were it is printed that you have all these rights that you claim, that they are not restricted as you claim. that you or the media are not accountable for what you or they say. Because i have researched it and have found that they are restricted. but then again i'm just a moron and i could have missed something.

and i thought you said i wanted you to bow before me, I did not suggest bowing before anyone or cringing away from confrontation. but rather picking my battles and using a little common sense.

I don't recall saying i did make any decisions.

[Army Guy]

Argus:

What AG is saying is he doesn't like our behaviour, he feels it makes it more dangerous to protect us. To which the fair comment is "then quit", because we're not going to change our behaviour to make you - or us - safer. Freedom of speech and expression is the bedrock of all other freedoms and of the success of any democracy. Anything which threatens that is extremely dangeorous. Clearly AG doesn't see that. His world view is a very narrow one.

Close, what i said is our freedoms have restrictions and limitations already in law here in Canada. And that we can still discuss any topic without insulting an entire group,race or culture of people by using common sense and still preserve our freedoms.

Perhaps you can show me in print where our freedoms of speech actually quote that we are free to insult or say anything we wish, when ever we wish, and that we are not to be held accountable.

[Army Guy]

Wilber:

How many times do I have to post the link?

You'll have to excuse me wilber, i'm a moron, with little education. I've read your site and yes those pictures are insulting. but then again that is what you expected me to say was it not. And if we were on the play ground where trading names or insults was exceptable then i could see your piont. However we are not, we are supposed to be responsible adults. Do you think we are justified to sink to thier level and start trading insults in our media...what next do we start burning buildings ,killing people.

Perhaps we as a nation could respond to those moderates in such a way that is not insulting. So that they may try to take action to get thier extremist under control. or atleast distance themselfs from thier actions. Instead we have chosen to insult them all ensuring that further violence happens or driving the moderates into thinking that "we" the west are no better, and perhaps violence is the right way to solve this.

[JerrySeinfeld]

It seems to me that any editor that willingly publishes the cartoon that have already caused riots and property damage by outraged muslims, should be dealt with using the very charter rights that he is using to say he is free to do so. He already knows ahead of time that publishing these cartoon will cause actions that will breach the public peace. So he should be charged accordingly and any damage or injury that is caused because of this, should fall on the Magazine to pay for.

The editors freedom to speak does not allow him to do things knowing in axdvance that there is a likely reaction to it, that could cause property damage, injury and possible death. He chose to publish it, knowing fully well, what the reactions have been so far. This should override his freedom of the press and charges should be laid.

It is time for people to grow up and use their heads for something other then seperating their ears.

so threatening violence is basically the solution to anything we don't like? if I don't like porn I can threaten violence. then anyone distributing porn should be charged for inciting violence? if I don't like marijuana then anyone distributing marijuana can be charged with inciting violence?

what a joke your excuse for logic is. if we take your route, we give in to intimidation and the extremist muslims have conquered us as is their intention.

[Argus]

We have very little. That is why I oppose the frightened people like you who want more, much, much, much more. Who want laws to punish anyone who says or does or writes anything which might offend the scary! people.

Perhaps you should do some research on the topic first, those laws are already in place they are already restricting your freedoms. And when did i ever imply or say i wanted more of these laws. or are you just making this up as you go along.

Perhaps you'd like to post a link to these laws which further restrict our freedom. And yes, it is very clear you are advocating for restrictions on what we can and cannot publish and say so as to not offend Muslims.

In fact, the reason you do what you do is because it doesn't take much brain power, doesn't take any imagination or education. Any moron can dig a ditch and pull a trigger, and plenty have.

What can i say Argus, your the man, is this your way of proving that Canadians need to insult people to make thier piont. Does this mean your more Canadian than i am, guess so . I must have hit a nerve and pissed in your corn flakes. I can see you have a high opinion of those that serve this country.

Depends. I know too many people in the military to have a blanket respect for anything they do, certainly not their intelligence or worldliness. Granted, most of them are HQ people, many of whom were self-serving imbeciles imho, but I've known and heard enough about the infantry to believe almost anything.

I do respect the military, but generally speaking let's say the infantry is not made up of the most sophisticated or educated people in the country. I respect them very much for what they do, but I wouldn't put a lot of faith in their broad world view. Then again, I don't think much of most people in their twenties anyway.

And quite frankly I found your accusation that anyone who believes in freedom is a redneck breathtaking in its stupidity. First of all infantry are the ultimate rednecks and always have been. What you're doing is effectively sneering at the people you claim to be a part of. Second, it's not "rednecks" who demand freedom of speech. They're more likely to be in favour of restrictions on freedom of speech.

well it's true that we all do not work at NASA as you do. But as the CDS has said DND is made up of the best this country has to offer. Sorry you did'nt make the cut.

Uh, well, he pretty much has to say that, doesn't he? Frankly, the military hasn't had the best of much in many, many years. The officer corps is made up of paper pushing careerists who, by and large, only care about themselves, and who are judged not on their leadership skills by their bilingualism and sucking up. Much of the NCOs are settled clerks who would rather resign than move to a post, and the lower ranks are people with poor educations who couldn't find anything better with a few gung ho types (rednecks to you) mixed in. How could it be otherwise after decades of neglect and jokes about the rusting, third rate equipment and lack of political respect?

[Wilber]

Wilber:

How many times do I have to post the link?

You'll have to excuse me wilber, i'm a moron, with little education. I've read your site and yes those pictures are insulting. but then again that is what you expected me to say was it not. And if we were on the play ground where trading names or insults was exceptable then i could see your piont. However we are not, we are supposed to be responsible adults. Do you think we are justified to sink to thier level and start trading insults in our media...what next do we start burning buildings ,killing people.

Perhaps we as a nation could respond to those moderates in such a way that is not insulting. So that they may try to take action to get thier extremist under control. or atleast distance themselfs from thier actions. Instead we have chosen to insult them all ensuring that further violence happens or driving the moderates into thinking that "we" the west are no better, and perhaps violence is the right way to solve this.

No I don't think we are justified in sinking to their level by burning buildings and killing people and neither are they. That is the whole point. That is why cartoons like the Danish ones get printed. To point out that burning, killing and bombing people who do not share your faith or even your interpretation of a faith is not justifiable.

I'll say it again, the Arab media has a colossal amount of gall to be critical of that Danish paper when you look at the vicious crap they print. If you have a problem with someone pointing that out with what was really a very mild example of their own kind of garbage, that's tough.

Anyone who considers themselves a moderate would have no trouble understanding that. You are not talking about moderates, you are talking about people looking for an excuse to get pissed off.

I do think I am entitled to know what they consider insulting. Especially when some people are trying to tell me it threatens my country. I don't think I should just have to take your word for it. As JS has said, if all it takes to get a whole country to shut up is to threaten it with violence, our so called democracy doesn't mean very much.

When I am in someone else's country, I take care not to offend them and to obey their laws. When I am in my own country, I reserve the right to say whatever I dam well please as long as it is within our laws. That is what my father and my grandfather fought for in two world wars. My old man is pushing 90 and just loves writing letters to editors. While he doesn't indulge in personal insults, he doesn't worry about offending people when he believes he is right.

Radical Islam has already decided violence is the right way to solve this. That is why we are where we are.

[betsy]

Betsy:

But we have our own culture here that ought to be respected too...or at least understood, by those who had chosen to live in this land.

What are you trying to say that you and the others can not discuss a topic with out showing a little respect or common sense. That you need to insult someone or a group to make a piont. That Canadains are not capable of having a normal conversation or expressing thier ideas without insults. And then try to hide behind freedom of speech.

What I'm trying to say is pretty clear! Why do you insist on twisting my meaning?

Didn't the soldier you quoted say this?

"When we as soldiers move into another country, whether to keep or enforce the peace, we respect the fact that the host country is unique in its beliefs and culture. We try to leave the country (at some point) with minimal cultural impact.

We respect their holidays and events; we go so far as to try not to eat or drink in front of Muslims during Ramadan out of respect for their culture, even while in our own camp. "

So, why shouldn't we expect and get the same courtesy and respect for our own culture from those who come to our country?

Your blind insistence on these insults as reason enough to tweak and modify our own system leaves me to question whether you are truly a military guy or not....and if you are, I do hope you are not an officer!

And if I am a soldier and stationed along with you.....I'll most probably be "dead meat." For if we ever get ambushed you'll most likely convince me to drop my gun and instead, try to initiate a group hug session!

I'm sorry ...but I'm just starting to find our endlessly looping argument silly...and funny. Obviously your sympathy and understanding lies more to the other group which you are convinced, have been maligned and terribly insulted....so much so that you feel that is reason enough to modify our own culture so it would meet their approval. Your determined refusal to consider the root of this problem says a lot.

Coming from one of our allegedly own soldier...it sounds surreal.

[BubberMiley]

So, why shouldn't we expect and get the same courtesy and respect for our own culture from those who come to our country?

Yeah, insulting people to try and see if you can incite them to violence is our culture, and they should just respect that.

[geoffrey]

So, why shouldn't we expect and get the same courtesy and respect for our own culture from those who come to our country?

Yeah, insulting people to try and see if you can incite them to violence is our culture, and they should just respect that.

So I am somewhat justified in declaring a fatwah on Brown, the writer of the Da Vinci code because it violates my religious views? I mean, he's doing it to incite debate, he's even said so.

Where are the American flags, gasoline and violence inciting placards?

[Hicksey]

So, why shouldn't we expect and get the same courtesy and respect for our own culture from those who come to our country?

Yeah, insulting people to try and see if you can incite them to violence is our culture, and they should just respect that.

No, our culture is about diplomacy and non-violent dispute resolution. We don't get violent because we're more civilized than that here.

[betsy]

So, why shouldn't we expect and get the same courtesy and respect for our own culture from those who come to our country?

Yeah, insulting people to try and see if you can incite them to violence is our culture, and they should just respect that.

If that is what our culture is, according to you of course....the answer is still the same!

We still expect the same courtesy and respect for it from those who had CHOSEN to come to our country.

After all, didn't our soldiers respect the culture of others when they go to those countries...a culture that even includes degrading and butchery of human life as part of its daily routine?

[Army Guy]

Perhaps you'd like to post a link to these laws which further restrict our freedom. And yes, it is very clear you are advocating for restrictions on what we can and cannot publish and say so as to not offend Muslims.

Below are a few links that show some restrictions to our current freedoms, there are plenty more but "you" can research them. I do not not know which over ride what as i'm not a lawyer. Once again i'm am not advocating anything just informing you that your freedoms are not as broad as you seem to think.

My Webpage

12. It is a discriminatory practice to publish or display before the public or to cause to be published or displayed before the public any notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that

(a) expresses or implies discrimination or an intention to discriminate, or

( incites or is calculated to incite others to discriminate

if the discrimination expressed or implied, intended to be expressed or implied or incited or calculated to be incited would otherwise, if engaged in, be a discriminatory practice described in any of sections 5 to 11 or in section 14.

Depends. I know too many people in the military to have a blanket respect for anything they do, certainly not their intelligence or worldliness. Granted, most of them are HQ people, many of whom were self-serving imbeciles imho, but I've known and heard enough about the infantry to believe almost anything.

1976-77, c. 33, s. 12; 1980-81-82-83, c. 143, s. 6.

Hate messages

13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

Interpretation

(2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies in respect of a matter that is communicated by means of a computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication, but does not apply in respect of a matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking.

Interpretation

(3) For the purposes of this section, no owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking communicates or causes to be communicated any matter described in subsection (1) by reason only that the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking owned or operated by that person are used by other persons for the transmission of that matter.

DND's definition of harassment.

1.3 Definitions

Harassment is any improper conduct by an individual that is directed at and offensive to another person or persons and which the individual knew or ought reasonably to have known would cause offence or harm. It comprises any objectionable act, comment or display that demeans, belittles or causes personal humiliation or embarrassment, or any act of intimidation or threat. It includes harassment within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA).

My Webpage

Criminal Code s. 181 181. Every one who wilfully publishes a statement, tale or news that he knows is false and that causes or is likely to cause injury or mischief to a public interest is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

Freedom of Expression and Violence:

Separating Form from Content

Expression can include words, acts, gestures, and pictures. Section 2( of the charter, a guarantee of freedom of expression, protects all communications which convey or attempt to convey meaning including, it appears, violent meaning. But when the physical form by which the communication is made is violent, it is not protected by section 2(. For instance, advocating violence against Country X in a newspaper article would be protected. But throwing a rock through the window of Country X's embassy would not be protected. Both actions convey similar meaning, but the actual form of the second communication is violent.

My Webpage

In fact, the reason you do what you do is because it doesn't take much brain power, doesn't take any imagination or education. Any moron can dig a ditch and pull a trigger, and plenty have.

What can i say Argus, your the man, is this your way of proving that Canadians need to insult people to make thier piont. Does this mean your more Canadian than i am, guess so . I must have hit a nerve and pissed in your corn flakes. I can see you have a high opinion of those that serve this country.

Depends. I know too many people in the military to have a blanket respect for anything they do, certainly not their intelligence or worldliness. Granted, most of them are HQ people, many of whom were self-serving imbeciles imho, but I've known and heard enough about the infantry to believe almost anything.

So your basing your judgement on a entire group, because you know a few people. Let me ask you this have you served in the Military, have you study the current military, do you have anything to do with the military, wait a minute your not a ex liberal defense minister are you. So really what you are saying is your basing your opinion on "you know a few people" and here say. And what is it that you do that allows you to sit in your perch and pass judgement on entire groups, "other than work for NASA" and what kind of educational back ground do you have that puts you above the grade. Why don't you post some facts or a few links backing up your claim.

I do respect the military, but generally speaking let's say the infantry is not made up of the most sophisticated or educated people in the country. I respect them very much for what they do, but I wouldn't put a lot of faith in their broad world view. Then again, I don't think much of most people in their twenties anyway.

Ya you've convinced me, i always start out with comments like yours, and then end it with i do respect the military. Give me a break, But then again we could say the same about most trades, jobs, or postions within this country could we not. Thier views on the world may not be up to your lofty standards, but those kids have seen war and it's effects first hand, and i would value there opinons on those topics more than a self proclaimed armchair critic. But then again i don't judge entire groups on the actions of a few.

And quite frankly I found your accusation that anyone who believes in freedom is a redneck breathtaking in its stupidity. First of all infantry are the ultimate rednecks and always have been. What you're doing is effectively sneering at the people you claim to be a part of. Second, it's not "rednecks" who demand freedom of speech. They're more likely to be in favour of restrictions on freedom of speech.

Perhaps you can show me just where in the post below did i indicate "anyone" who believes in freedom of speech is a redneck. "First of all infantry are the ultimate rednecks and always have been," you basing this one what actual experiance or just here say.

The is always a red neck in the crowd who firmly believes it is his or her god given right to say what ever comes to mind without consquence and to hide behind "it is our freedom of speech" it's always these people who demand these freedoms be defended at the cost of someone elses life. "defend me or get another job"

Like i told betsy get down to the recruiting centers they got lots of boots your size

Uh, well, he pretty much has to say that, doesn't he? Frankly, the military hasn't had the best of much in many, many years. The officer corps is made up of paper pushing careerists who, by and large, only care about themselves, and who are judged not on their leadership skills by their bilingualism and sucking up. Much of the NCOs are settled clerks who would rather resign than move to a post, and the lower ranks are people with poor educations who couldn't find anything better with a few gung ho types (rednecks to you) mixed in. How could it be otherwise after decades of neglect and jokes about the rusting, third rate equipment and lack of political respect?

I think you've been reading to much of Scott Taylor's material, perhaps you could produce a link or two to back up your claim.

[Hicksey]

How about this then.

We'll make laws prevent anyone from saying, printing, or broadcasting anything about any religion that is deemed to be insulting?

[Army Guy]

Betsy:

But we have our own culture here that ought to be respected too...or at least understood, by those who had chosen to live in this land.

What are you trying to say that you and the others can not discuss a topic with out showing a little respect or common sense. That you need to insult someone or a group to make a piont. That Canadains are not capable of having a normal conversation or expressing thier ideas without insults. And then try to hide behind freedom of speech.

What I'm trying to say is pretty clear! Why do you insist on twisting my meaning?

Didn't the soldier you quoted say this?

"When we as soldiers move into another country, whether to keep or enforce the peace, we respect the fact that the host country is unique in its beliefs and culture. We try to leave the country (at some point) with minimal cultural impact.

We respect their holidays and events; we go so far as to try not to eat or drink in front of Muslims during Ramadan out of respect for their culture, even while in our own camp. "

So, why shouldn't we expect and get the same courtesy and respect for our own culture from those who come to our country?

Are you now saying that the all Muslims within Canada are not doing this. Because some of them are not, and have threaten violence, but have not acted on it as of yet. But then again this is not really about those living here is it.

Your blind insistence on these insults as reason enough to tweak and modify our own system leaves me to question whether you are truly a military guy or not....and if you are, I do hope you are not an officer!

And if I am a soldier and stationed along with you.....I'll most probably be "dead meat." For if we ever get ambushed you'll most likely convince me to drop my gun and instead, try to initiate a group hug session!

Betsy before you pass judgement on me read those links i've provided, Again i am not NOT asking anyone to tweak or modify any of our current freedoms. And then tell me if you still think that your current freedoms as broad as you think they are. That your freedom of speech allows you to say what ever you want when ever you want.

I'm sorry ...but I'm just starting to find our endlessly looping argument silly...and funny. Obviously your sympathy and understanding lies more to the other group which you are convinced, have been maligned and terribly insulted....so much so that you feel that is reason enough to modify our own culture so it would meet their approval. Your determined refusal to consider the root of this problem says a lot.

Coming from one of our allegedly own soldier...it sounds surreal.

As am I, but my sympathy lies in what is right or wrong, not with "the other group" and yes i believe they think "Moderate muslims" have been terribly insulted. And i am not calling for any of your freedoms to be modifed to met anyones approval. We do have laws in existance now that limit our freedoms, and they are not as broad as you or argus believe they are "to which you've not proven yet". So educate me prove to me that our basic freedoms have no limitations to them

The root of the problem is that the radical muslims who represent a small portion of the muslim population have pissed all of us off, and now we are punishing or blaming all the muslim population for thier actions.

That is what i find wrong, that cartoon could have said every thing we wanted to say if it had depicted bin laden. But i guess i'm the only one that sees that.

[Argus]

Perhaps you'd like to post a link to these laws which further restrict our freedom. And yes, it is very clear you are advocating for restrictions on what we can and cannot publish and say so as to not offend Muslims.

Below are a few links that show some restrictions to our current freedoms, there are plenty more

No, there aren't, or you'd have posted them. I don't, frankly, know why you've even posted these. Yes, indeed, it is illegal to deliberately publish lies which damage people, and the hate laws do indeed make it mildly criminal to publish hate speech. I think that was acknowledged earlier. So what? Your argument still seems to be that because there are a very few restrictions on freedom of speech it's okay to impose more.

No on has said free speech is absolute, only that it is a basic freedom which should never be infringed upon lightly, and certainly not because of an unreasonable degree of offence felt by a tiny religious minority.

Depends. I know too many people in the military to have a blanket respect for anything they do, certainly not their intelligence or worldliness. Granted, most of them are HQ people, many of whom were self-serving imbeciles imho, but I've known and heard enough about the infantry to believe almost anything.

So your basing your judgement on a entire group, because you know a few people. Let me ask you this have you served in the Military, have you study the current military, do you have anything to do with the military,

I know sufficient to make that judgement, yes, and to trust the judgement of others who have so pronounced.

I do respect the military, but generally speaking let's say the infantry is not made up of the most sophisticated or educated people in the country. I respect them very much for what they do, but I wouldn't put a lot of faith in their broad world view. Then again, I don't think much of most people in their twenties anyway.

Ya you've convinced me, i always start out with comments like yours, and then end it with i do respect the military. Give me a break,

Let me explain it a different way. I respect the job my electrician did on putting in new lights. The guy is a political idiot, but I respect him as an electrician.

But then again we could say the same about most trades, jobs, or postions within this country could we not. Thier views on the world may not be up to your lofty standards

Yes, quite true. Not many can meet my high standards. Only those who try.

, but those kids have seen war and it's effects first hand, and i would value there opinons on those topics more than a self proclaimed armchair critic.

Seeing war gives one a certain perspective, but not necessarily the right perspective, nor the long term, broad, world view necessary to avoid war. Some of those who had seen war in WW1 for example, did everything they could to appease the Nazis in order to avoid a war - anything to avoid war, they thought. And in doing so they merely brought about an even larger conflict.

But then again i don't judge entire groups on the actions of a few.

Really? What do you think of contracters?

And quite frankly I found your accusation that anyone who believes in freedom is a redneck breathtaking in its stupidity. First of all infantry are the ultimate rednecks and always have been. What you're doing is effectively sneering at the people you claim to be a part of. Second, it's not "rednecks" who demand freedom of speech. They're more likely to be in favour of restrictions on freedom of speech.

Perhaps you can show me just where in the post below did i indicate "anyone" who believes in freedom of speech is a redneck. "First of all infantry are the ultimate rednecks and always have been," you basing this one what actual experiance or just here say.

Do you even know what the term means? Do you know its origins? Have you ever met any soldiers? Yeah, yeah, I know. You're Sergeant Rock and you've done ten tours of Afghanistan hunting terrorists in the hills.

Uh, well, he pretty much has to say that, doesn't he? Frankly, the military hasn't had the best of much in many, many years. The officer corps is made up of paper pushing careerists who, by and large, only care about themselves, and who are judged not on their leadership skills by their bilingualism and sucking up. Much of the NCOs are settled clerks who would rather resign than move to a post, and the lower ranks are people with poor educations who couldn't find anything better with a few gung ho types (rednecks to you) mixed in. How could it be otherwise after decades of neglect and jokes about the rusting, third rate equipment and lack of political respect?

I think you've been reading to much of Scott Taylor's material, perhaps you could produce a link or two to back up your claim.

If you really are a soldier you shouldn't need one.

[Argus]

The root of the problem is that the radical muslims who represent a small portion of the muslim population have pissed all of us off, and now we are punishing or blaming all the muslim population for thier actions.

That is what i find wrong, that cartoon could have said every thing we wanted to say if it had depicted bin laden. But i guess i'm the only one that sees that.

Yes, the only one. The cartoon was meant to depect how the West is coming to see Islam. Btw, when you say "small portion" what percentage is that? I mean, given tha others on this thread have described "western" Muslims as the more sophisticated and educated, and given a recent UK poll showed 40% of UK Muslims wanted Sharia law put in place in majority Muslim areas, I'm finding it a little difficult to figure out just what you consider a "moderate" is. If someone wants to live under Sharia law, is that person a moderate?

[betsy]

Betsy:

But we have our own culture here that ought to be respected too...or at least understood, by those who had chosen to live in this land.

What are you trying to say that you and the others can not discuss a topic with out showing a little respect or common sense. That you need to insult someone or a group to make a piont. That Canadains are not capable of having a normal conversation or expressing thier ideas without insults. And then try to hide behind freedom of speech.

What I'm trying to say is pretty clear! Why do you insist on twisting my meaning?

Didn't the soldier you quoted say this?

"When we as soldiers move into another country, whether to keep or enforce the peace, we respect the fact that the host country is unique in its beliefs and culture. We try to leave the country (at some point) with minimal cultural impact.

We respect their holidays and events; we go so far as to try not to eat or drink in front of Muslims during Ramadan out of respect for their culture, even while in our own camp. "

So, why shouldn't we expect and get the same courtesy and respect for our own culture from those who come to our country?

Are you now saying that the all Muslims within Canada are not doing this. Because some of them are not, and have threaten violence, but have not acted on it as of yet. But then again this is not really about those living here is it.

Well, this was not really about those living here....but with as you said "some have threatened violence but have not acted on it as of yet"., then maybe now, yes, it is also about those living here that had made those threats! For them to make threats just because we have practiced what is part of our culture does not constitute courtesy and respect. I interpret that as them IMPOSING their demand for us to change our ways!

And you're ignoring that fact deliberately!

[betsy]

Betsy before you pass judgement on me read those links i've provided,

You have passed judgement on us! By calling us "rednecks!"

Just because we do not think the way you do...that we place a great deal of value in what we have and would want to see them preserved...and not chipped off and squandered like bargaining chips by some who obviously view this situation in a very shallow and superficial way!

As I've said before, fighting for and protecting a nation's freedom does NOT rest SOLELY on the backs of soldiers! Citizens of a nation have that duty and responsibility, to aid in everyway possible to protect our way of life, our culture and our nation!