Trudeau's immigration minister Marc Miller announces that he is quintupling the number of refugees Canada is taking from Gaza from 1,000 to 5,000.

[Venandi]

15 hours ago, eyeball said:

Like any other politician on the planet I'd be concerned about any massive influx of refugees whether they were forced or voluntary.  Wouldn't you?

Put yourself in the same shoes just like Canada did 75 years or so ago.  Was our concern justified?

For Egypt (and others), this is not (as you seem to be implying) just any old "mass influx of refugees" with the  standard (meaning routine) security concerns that attend such things. There are some specific considerations here.

The only parallel with Canada's rejection of Jews 75 years ago is that it was Jews fleeing and I'm guessing that's your underlying point.... the shoe is on the other foot now (so to speak). If so, I'd submit that the circumstances, events leading up to them, and the reasons behind decisions made along the way were completely different then.

I simply used Egypt as aid to understanding your thought process and the effect of racism on current events.... essentially isolating a specific threat to a specific country and attempting to show that in this case, acceptance of refugees comes with an identifiable and specific threat worthy of sober consideration.

And, (big AND here) that those considerations have, had, and will almost certainly continue to have, absolutely NOTHING to do with racism. 

As I said earlier, Egypt has said no to accepting refugees for two reasons, the main one being concerns about Hamas extremists (assisted by other bad actors) attacking Israel from Egyptian territory in the Sinai thus triggering Israeli defensive strikes within Egypt.

Hamas wants to continue this fight and they would love to draw Egypt into the fray. Egypt doesn't want any part of that. Egypt's concerns are valid and they have nothing to do with racism.

As to what happened or didn't happen 75 years ago, unless you've finished that time machine and are willing to go on an extended vacation, historical events are largely irrelevant in terms of the available options today.

So, if you want to do this, stay in the "here and now" and at least do the damn thing properly.

 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/palestinians-gaza-canada-support-struggling-1.7224646

This weak sister effort by virtue signalling liberals reminds me of the plight of single mothers from Somalia. Doing it right comes with a cost, so does doing it wrong... you just pay for it later. And BTW, objecting to doing it wrong isn't racism, I call it common sense.

This may not be racism in the strict sense of the word but it sure smells of hypocrisy and incompetence. If you want to be annoyed about something happening right now and within our realm of control, that should qualify IMO.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 6, 2024 by Venandi

[CITIZEN_2015]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You couldn't pass a racist law and survive a constitutional challenge, is the point.  

II am no lawyer but  I think if a government is elected based on that platform this means the majority of citizens have voted for that white-only immigration law so the majority government elected can also change the constitution and override the Charter. That said I don't think in practice this will ever happen. 

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You couldn't pass a racist law and survive a constitutional challenge, is the point.  

You CAN in fact, and it's happened numerous times. But it's not easy and i'm not sure he'd survive the political fall out. Most Conservatives Wouldn't back a 'whites only' policy.  The left definitely wouldn't. It would be death.

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

II am no lawyer but  I think if a government is elected based on that platform this means the majority of citizens have voted for that white-only immigration law so the majority government elected can also change the constitution and override the Charter. That said I don't think in practice this will ever happen

These things are well described in our legal system. There are lots of examples of the courts overruling the government, including the current Trudeau government. 

The notwithstanding clause is turning into a Bugaboo because government s are starting to use it more liberally. 

 I don't support Trudeau unilaterally banning religions or making them pay taxes or what not for example.

[CITIZEN_2015]

I think we need an amended Charter to protect the majority as well. I think white heterosexual men have become new category with less rights these days.

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

I think we need an amended Charter to protect the majority as well. I think white heterosexual men have become new category with less rights these days.

I take this to mean that you understand my points then.

[taxme]

22 hours ago, Black Dog said:

I wasn't even talking to you here you retarded mutt.

Oh huffy-puffy, Princess. Hey, for once, i have to agree with you that i make boo-boo. Screw off anyway. LOL.

[Black Dog]

3 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

I think we need an amended Charter to protect the majority as well. I think white heterosexual men have become new category with less rights these days.

Which rights do white heterosexual men not have, specifically.

Edited June 6, 2024 by Black Dog

[taxme]

21 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

In a democracy an elected government decides on policies based on their platforms during the election. I think that Liberals did make it clear that they are pro-immigration especially those from middle east. They were elected with about one-third of the votes and they are carrying out their platform. I did vote for them even though I didn't agree with them on immigration and a few other policies but this is democracy.

Form a party and state your platform as ending immigration for 7 years and accepting white immigrants only and if you win then of course you can form the government and carry out those policies and you have the right to do so again because this is democracy based on majority will not an individual's wish.  Hell, I may even vote for you.

All political party's say the same thing. They are all pro-immigration. But they never mention any numbers. But what we get from the dictator in Ottawa is more than what anyone asked for. in the past four years, Canada has received approx. 4-5 million new immigrants/refugees and approx. 90% of them are all non-white. There truly is a conspiracy to try and make white people become a minority in their own  or so the story goes. 

I do not have the time, effort or the finances to start up a new political party. But the party that i do support is the People's Party of Canada that has said that they want to slow down or stop all of this massive immigration. Another 7 more years of this massive third world immigration, and Canada will start to look like downtown New Delhi. If that is what white folk want here in Canada, then keep voting for the leftists liberals or the NDP communists. They both are anti-white political party's. Just my opinion. 😇

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Which rights do white heterosexual men not have, specifically.

Freedom of speech looks rather sketchy right now, albeit still intact on paper.

[Black Dog]

3 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Freedom of speech looks rather sketchy right now, albeit still intact on paper.

In other words white heterosexual males haven't lost any rights.

[CdnFox]

24 minutes ago, Black Dog said:

Which rights do white heterosexual men not have, specifically.

How about the right not to be denied work based on the colour of their skin or sex or sexual preference? There are numerous ads for employment in ontario right now that have been posted here which refuse to allow white heterosexual men to apply. That's racism, sexism and heterphobia. Most people are protected against that kind of thing but not white hetero males. 

how about the right to have violence directed against them due to religion, race or sexual preference declared hate crimes where indicated?  Right now if a non white person beats a white person screaming that they hate whites it's not a hate crime (real case.) 

How about some protection from hate speech? I don't gp a day on the internet and few days in public without hearing derogatory and insulting falsehoods and slurs against white males. we invented slavery you know? We're all stupid.  Can't call someone a n*gger or a chug, but calling them a settler or a colonist is fine. 

All people should have the same rights and responsibilities. That is not currently the case.

1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

In other words white heterosexual males haven't lost any rights.

A right that isn't applied isn't a right. 

[herbie]

OMG stretch things so far they break and think that supports your argument?

Jobs that wouldn't be there otherwise is discrimination?
White man beating up a white man is a hate crime?

FFS

Old Bald Conservative Christian White Man wanted to fill
Chair of Women's Studies.
Native Rights CoOrdinator
Handicap Access Advisor

They get a Grant to make the boardroom more equitable and shouldn't use it because it should be made less equitable....

 

[Michael Hardner]

35 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

How about the right not to be denied work based on the colour of their skin or sex or sexual preference?  

You're talking about what used to be called affirmative action and no one is exempt from quotas.  If you want to be a teacher and you're male, go to the front of the line.

A thing we do know is that the stereotype about women shrieking in a higher tone than white men has been proven very wrong.

 

At this point I implore you to better yourself.  Cheers. 

[CITIZEN_2015]

3 hours ago, Black Dog said:

Which rights do white heterosexual men not have, specifically.

The right to defend themselves against those with a different preference without being accused of hate crime. They are recent laws to protect people with different preferences however, a tiny minority abuse them by victimizing themselves to demand even more rights. 

[Black Dog]

6 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

The right to defend themselves against those with a different preference without being accused of hate crime. They are recent laws to protect people with different preferences however, a tiny minority abuse them by victimizing themselves to demand even more rights. 

WTF are you talking about.

[CITIZEN_2015]

Just now, Black Dog said:

WTF are you talking about.

I responded in a PM.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, herbie said:

OMG stretch things so far they break and think that supports your argument?

 

OMG lie and deny simple facts and pretend that somehow makes real concerns vanish?

The jobs would be there otherwise. But they're perfectly normal jobs for white people to do. Computer sciences for example, that's one of the ones that was posted here. Are you saying white people can't do computer sciences?

You are dishonest and bullshit reply is exactly why white supremacy groups are thriving and growing. You lie and pretend that it's okay to be prejudice and bigoted if the person is a heterosexual white male. That's your argument. And people hear that and get angry and they look around for groups that will support their belief that it's okay to be white and it's okay to be male and it's okay to be heterosexual

And the white nationalist and white supremacist groups will snatch them up. And Far left zombies like you say how could this possibly happen when you actually created the problem in the first place. 

If you have one set of rules for everybody then nobody feels discriminated against. If you have different rules for every different group than people start to resent each other. The left has done more to promote bigotry, hatred, homophobia, transphobia, and all of the other bad things than any other group in history and always have. I hope you're proud of yourself sexist

[CITIZEN_2015]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

How about the right not to be denied work based on the colour of their skin or sex or sexual preference? There are numerous ads for employment in ontario right now that have been posted here which refuse to allow white heterosexual men to apply. That's racism, sexism and heterphobia. Most people are protected against that kind of thing but not white hetero males. 

If a straight man fights back in self defense it is likely a hate crime by the straight man. If a gay man attacks a straight man it is also likely a hate crime by the straight man.

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

If a straight man fights back in self defense it is likely a hate crime by the straight man. If a gay man attacks a straight man it is also likely a hate crime by the straight man.

I had 3 bunch of gay friends get jumped by some guys on Bloor St.  The police came and said it was mutual combat, no charges.

Every anecdote has... an anecdote.

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I had 3 bunch of gay friends get jumped by some guys on Bloor St.  The police came and said it was mutual combat, no charges.

Every anecdote has... an anecdote.

But yours was irrelevant. People do get into fights all the time. You are so stunningly bigoted that you feel that the only reason that straight guys might fight gay guys is because they're gay. You can't possibly accept that there's any other reason why two people might fight. You offered zero reason to think it WAS a hate crime. 

However mine wasn't an anecdote. A native woman specifically beat the crap out of a white woman screaming the whole time about how she hates white people. Judge ruled not a hate crime.

Yelling ‘I hate white people’ and punching one isn’t a hate crime, Canadian judge rules - The Washington Post (archive.ph)

Unlike your story that actually happened, and it happens a fair bit.

But of course you can't address that, you can't deal with the fact that there is a real situation and address it and talk about it, you have to come up with some sort of bullshit story that probably never happened to try and avoid the issue

I guess that's your way of saying you know I'm right without actually saying it.

Edited June 6, 2024 by CdnFox

[CITIZEN_2015]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

I had 3 bunch of gay friends get jumped by some guys on Bloor St.  The police came and said it was mutual combat, no charges.

Every anecdote has... an anecdote.

It is equally bad. The law says that the guys should have been arrested for assault and if it was proven that your friends were attacked because of their orientation then they should have charged with committing a crime out of hate which carries more severe punishment. The law enforcement did not do their job and your friends should have reported them.

 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Black Dog said:

In other words white heterosexual males haven't lost any rights.

Except that its socially acceptable to be racist towards them.

Its socially acceptable to deliberately hire someone less qualified under guise of equality.

Maybe not a right per se, so you're onto something.

[CdnFox]

20 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

 

Maybe not a right per se, so you're onto something.

How soon can we get off of it?

I'm kind of sick of being the source of everything bad that's ever happened anywhere ever at any time and ever will

Edited June 7, 2024 by CdnFox

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Its socially acceptable to deliberately hire someone less qualified under guise of equality.

It's probably safe to assume allowance has been made for on the job training to make someone more qualified if need be. It happens all the time in the labour market.