Imported Muslim terrorist offs 11 Jews celebrating the first day of Hanukkah.

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You're skipping past my question.

I, for one, didn't know if Muslims were assimilating and maybe suspected they weren't.  Then I met a good source that explained it and I changed my views.

Do you think it's ok for me to stick to my self-created ideas on how things are?  If you cited some source that you know is true, say from your profession, and I said "no, I don't think so because of my experience"... would that be reasonable ?

It's a general question about how people form knowledge...

We've had this discussion. 

I no longer trust our institutions. They have lied too many times and have lost my trust completely. 

I know what I've experienced and trust that.

[Legato]

11 hours ago, herbie said:

Just checking in on the local Nazis touting their racist bullshit as truths.
Still at it, nonstop.

yup, tell your buddies to stop.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, West said:

1. We know that antisemitic violence is on the rise in the west. See the tweet.  Most of the time its someone yelling "Allah Snackbar" as they detonate themselves in a crowd of people, burn down a Synagogue or shoot Jewish people on a beach. 

2. When do we say enough is enough and do not allow these ideologies into our countries in the west? 

3. Before you again make the false equivalency with Christianity, there is nowhere near the level of violence.

4. Just people holding to traditional views of marriage.

5. The line gets crossed at murder and assassination

1. Yes, Islamic violence is a problem not claiming otherwise.
2. We don't allow criminals, we don't allow threats of violence, but we do allow all faiths
3. I am not saying two different cultures are 'equivalent'.  But you can't exclude or dehumanize an entire subgroup due to the actions of the worst people in that group.  There's no principle that makes that work.
4. People cite "attitudes" towards LGBTQ as a problem sometimes.  But we accept that Evangelicals have similar attitudes and we seem to accept that we can work through the politics of that.
5. The idea of excluding Muslims is always based on a qualitative decision that Muslims are, in essence, "bad people".  But you can't separate decisions made that way from prejudice.  I call forward the incident I mentioned before about excluding American blacks from entering Canada based on statistical reasons.  I had a discussion with Argus way back when, and he said he was "ok" with it.  I told him I respected his consistency...

[Michael Hardner]

7 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

1. Woman drivers have a bad reputation because of example...and im sure there's a bit of chauvanism involved.

2. Same goes for Muslims. I know a few who I could work with. But the vast majority are not trust worthy. And yes, im sure there's some discrimination involved...on both sides.

3. But one of my primary directives is to protect MY family and by extension...MY nation.

4. What are your primary directives?

1. If you can accept chauvinism as a factor, I think you should include xenophobia.
2. If you agree that discrimination is involved, then I can accept your attitude even with the inherent bias I see.
3. You should want to do so using hard logic, then.  
4. Same as yours peace and prosperity for Canada.  When a single Afghani refugee murdered someone, there was a political impact to reject wholesale the idea of ANY Afghani refugee (not talking about the Washington DC shooting but an incident in Minnesota).  How are people being protected when the rate of murder by refugees is lower than with homegrown citizens ?

But, yes, I want peace and prosperity for Canada, especially economic because that makes EVERYTHING else work.
 

8 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

We've had this discussion. 

I no longer trust our institutions. They have lied too many times and have lost my trust completely. 

I know what I've experienced and trust that.

You trust SOME institutions.  The press is an institution.

If you only trust personal experiences there will be many issues for which you have no reference at all.

[Legato]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Biased ?  PEW ?  People use it on here to justify anti-Muslim beliefs so .... no.  You seem like the kind of person who waits to read the results then calls "bias" when they don't like it.
2. And yet, there is convincing evidence.  You don't believe because... well, we're not sure.  I do.
3. Ok... and yet another person who runs out of ideas and then needs to insult me... carry on, we are done now.

Seems you're running short of oxygen on that high perch.

Try some down to earth logic for once.

The ignorance of putting people on ignore is outstanding.

[CDN1]

41 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. If you can accept chauvinism as a factor, I think you should include xenophobia.
2. If you agree that discrimination is involved, then I can accept your attitude even with the inherent bias I see.
3. You should want to do so using hard logic, then.  
4. Same as yours peace and prosperity for Canada.  When a single Afghani refugee murdered someone, there was a political impact to reject wholesale the idea of ANY Afghani refugee (not talking about the Washington DC shooting but an incident in Minnesota).  How are people being protected when the rate of murder by refugees is lower than with homegrown citizens ?

But, yes, I want peace and prosperity for Canada, especially economic because that makes EVERYTHING else work.
 

Look at the data across Europe. Afghans are committing sex crimes at obscene per capita rates. No doubt we're seeing similar in Canada, but that information will never be released publicly. They're terrified of transparency on these issues. 

Hard to keep calling people racists & Naziz when the facts are on their side.

Edited December 17, 2025 by CDN1

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I wasn't going to respond and didn't read your post, but glanced at this part.

 

How is that possible? I'm on ignore!!  And you don't read my posts but you somehow read my post  

Don't know what to tell you mike  

[Nationalist]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. If you can accept chauvinism as a factor, I think you should include xenophobia.
2. If you agree that discrimination is involved, then I can accept your attitude even with the inherent bias I see.
3. You should want to do so using hard logic, then.  
4. Same as yours peace and prosperity for Canada.  When a single Afghani refugee murdered someone, there was a political impact to reject wholesale the idea of ANY Afghani refugee (not talking about the Washington DC shooting but an incident in Minnesota).  How are people being protected when the rate of murder by refugees is lower than with homegrown citizens ?

But, yes, I want peace and prosperity for Canada, especially economic because that makes EVERYTHING else work.
 

You trust SOME institutions.  The press is an institution.

If you only trust personal experiences there will be many issues for which you have no reference at all.

1 and 2. Good. Now let's not get silly tying to argue that discrimination is not a survival instinct we all have.

3. My personal experience is hard logic.

4. Importing murderers is not a good idea. As you've noted, we have our own to deal with.

5. Just how do you propose to achieve economic prosperity when our government continues to import abrasive influences and stamping down our main sources of prosperity?

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Legato said:

Seems you're running short of oxygen on that high perch.

Try some down to earth logic for once.

The ignorance of putting people on ignore is outstanding.

I don't have to engage with people who insult me.  You understand that right?

My logic on the use of PEW has been explained.  Do you want to respond?  Or just keep calling me ignorant?  Or saying that I'm running out of oxygen? 

I'm fine with moving on if you're done responding to my points.

[User]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No I don't think so.  I don't remember discussions with you from the top of my mind, but we did have discussions and I don't remember you being insulting.  I vaguely recall getting mired in semantic discussions that stopped progress.  

"not engage earnestly" goes both ways.  I would be more generous and say that we couldn't agree on the terms of the discussion.  I respect that you wanted to continue but for me there are limits.  I wouldn't have "run away".

Sure… sure… no, I try not to be insulting and we had a deal to avoid it as well, but that doesn’t change your obfuscation tactics here or how you routinely “run away” when your posts start getting any real challenge. 
 

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, CDN1 said:

1. Look at the data across Europe. Afghans are committing sex crimes at obscene per capita rates.

2. No doubt we're seeing similar in Canada, but that information will never be released publicly. They're terrified of transparency on these issues. 

3. Hard to keep calling people racists & Naziz when the facts are on their side.

1. Ok please post the data.

2. It's a conspiracy then.  Well there is data available from elsewhere.  American studies show the opposite of what you are trying to say.

3. I'm ASKING for facts.  And the only person I see being called names in my discussions is me.

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

How is that possible? I'm on ignore!!  And you don't read my posts but you somehow read my post  

Don't know what to tell you mike  

Touché.  I do peek sometimes but I will admit that. 💗

Edited December 17, 2025 by Michael Hardner

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, User said:

Sure… sure… no, I try not to be insulting and we had a deal to avoid it as well, but that doesn’t change your obfuscation tactics here or how you routinely “run away” when your posts start getting any real challenge. 
 

 

Yes I don't remember you being insulting.

I'm challenged on this thread.  Have I run away?  I ignore people who insult me, but that's because I hold discussion on here to a higher standard, not because I am afraid.

[Legato]

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't have to engage with people who insult me.  You understand that right?

My logic on the use of PEW has been explained.  Do you want to respond?  Or just keep calling me ignorant?  Or saying that I'm running out of oxygen? 

I'm fine with moving on if you're done responding to my points.

You don't engage with anyone. You make assertions and when challenged wander off into word games and obfuscation.

The chud has spoken.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

1 and 2. Good. Now let's not get silly tying to argue that discrimination is not a survival instinct we all have.

3. My personal experience is hard logic.

4. Importing murderers is not a good idea. As you've noted, we have our own to deal with.

5. Just how do you propose to achieve economic prosperity when our government continues to import abrasive influences and stamping down our main sources of prosperity?

1. 2. This is part of "Fast Thinking" as Daniel Kahneman explained in his famous book.  Yes it's important.  This board is or should be, about Slow Thinking.

3. By definition, experiences are different than logic.  You can draw subjective conclusions from them but they might not make sense.

4. But does it make sense to expect to stop every bad person in a system that includes immigration?  Is that tenable?

5. Growth.  That would seem to say that we can import people with a controllable expectation of negative traits.  

Direct question: Should we stop allowing American Blacks in Canada even as tourists?

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Legato said:

1. You don't engage with anyone.

2.:You make assertions and when challenged wander off into word games and obfuscation.

3. The chud has spoken.

1. Uh... Have you LOOKED at this thread?  I'm engaging with half a dozen people.

2. I pointed out that PEW has data that supports arguments that Muslims aren't good candidates for immigration.   You haven't answered.

Who's playing games?

You aren't being a fair discussion partner here if you accuse me of gamesmanship but don't follow the discussion.

3. Like I said, I haven't called anyone a chud.  If you want to insult me, I'm done.

I'll ask you to retract, and then when you refuse I'll stop responding.

Then you can wrap yourself in that cozy blanket of saying that I play games and refuse to engage.

 

[Nationalist]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. 2. This is part of "Fast Thinking" as Daniel Kahneman explained in his famous book.  Yes it's important.  This board is or should be, about Slow Thinking.

3. By definition, experiences are different than logic.  You can draw subjective conclusions from them but they might not make sense.

4. But does it make sense to expect to stop every bad person in a system that includes immigration?  Is that tenable?

5. Growth.  That would seem to say that we can import people with a controllable expectation of negative traits.  

Direct question: Should we stop allowing American Blacks in Canada even as tourists?

1-2. Fast thinking? I've watched this going on for years.

3. Again...I cannot trust any of the institutions. You shouldn't either.

4. We have to at least try. Make it clear to all that if you're here fcking over our society, your time here will be limited.

5. I disagree. Growth can be achieved by increasing prosperity. We dont need to import anyone for that.

Answer: No. But I would add to that, both the USA and Canada must revamp our welfare systems to force able bodied people to work. Change the expectation and promote family actively. The rest will take care of itself. 

[Legato]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Uh... Have you LOOKED at this thread?  I'm engaging with half a dozen people.

2. I pointed out that PEW has data that supports arguments that Muslims aren't good candidates for immigration.   You haven't answered.

Who's playing games?

You aren't being a fair discussion partner here if you accuse me of gamesmanship but don't follow the discussion.

3. Like I said, I haven't called anyone a chud.  If you want to insult me, I'm done.

I'll ask you to retract, and then when you refuse I'll stop responding.

Then you can wrap yourself in that cozy blanket of saying that I play games and refuse to engage.

 

More obfuscation, more assertions, more word games.

Bottom line, attacks by Islamists are happening daily and a thousand PEW articles won't change that fact.

Only a fraction of the total occur in the West but don't offer that fact as solace to the victims.

Taliban, Islamic State (and affiliates), Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, Al Qaeda are all currently active. Their main goal is to further the Islamic faith and eliminate anyone who is not.

 

[West]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Yes, Islamic violence is a problem not claiming otherwise.
2. We don't allow criminals, we don't allow threats of violence, but we do allow all faiths
3. I am not saying two different cultures are 'equivalent'.  But you can't exclude or dehumanize an entire subgroup due to the actions of the worst people in that group.  There's no principle that makes that work.
4. People cite "attitudes" towards LGBTQ as a problem sometimes.  But we accept that Evangelicals have similar attitudes and we seem to accept that we can work through the politics of that.
5. The idea of excluding Muslims is always based on a qualitative decision that Muslims are, in essence, "bad people".  But you can't separate decisions made that way from prejudice.  I call forward the incident I mentioned before about excluding American blacks from entering Canada based on statistical reasons.  I had a discussion with Argus way back when, and he said he was "ok" with it.  I told him I respected his consistency...

5.

Maybe some do, but thats not my position. I am more of a "risk/reward" type guy on the situation. I see very little in reward by bringing in people who may want to murder a bunch of your citizens. Many people, specially Liberals and NDP, and Democrat party types do not want to have that discussion, however

[Deluge]

15 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Yup. Seen similar. I interviewed an East Indian ans realized quickly he had lied on his resume.

Their resumes always look perfect, so it's not a surprise to catch some of them lying. 

[Goddess]

55 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Ok please post the data.

Are you for real?

You're completely unaware of what's been going on in Europe?  UK grooming gangs doesn't ring a bell?

For gawd's sake, wake up.

Do you think it might be because these countries are importing masses of men from countries that view women as subhuman?

Notice Starmer doesn't want to PREVENT rapes - people in the UK know exactly why rapes have skyrocketed.  They've been screaming for help for 2 decades now.

 

Edited December 17, 2025 by Goddess

[User]

59 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes I don't remember you being insulting.

I'm challenged on this thread.  Have I run away?  I ignore people who insult me, but that's because I hold discussion on here to a higher standard, not because I am afraid.

No, you are hyper focused on one tiny point about a poll you have, but when it comes down to it in May other threads, where you can’t grasp on to something like that, you quickly turn the discussion into obfuscation and do “run away”

[Goddess]

[Goddess]

That's just a small fraction of the comments on Starmer's recent post.

Are you saying that the women of Europe don't know WHO IS RAPING THEM?  that they are mistaken?  Lying?

I'll take the word of the women of Europe over your stupid Pew poll.

[Nationalist]

28 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Are you for real?

You're completely unaware of what's been going on in Europe?  UK grooming gangs doesn't ring a bell?

For gawd's sake, wake up.

Do you think it might be because these countries are importing masses of men from countries that view women as subhuman?

Notice Starmer doesn't want to PREVENT rapes - people in the UK know exactly why rapes have skyrocketed.  They've been screaming for help for 2 decades now.

 

Indeed they have. Now they're ready to fight.

 

Gee...That's a lot of angry Brits. I understand this goes on every weekend now. I've not even seen FOX report on this. They most certainly should.

 

[Goddess]

8 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I understand this goes on every weekend now.

Yup. Every weekend, all across the UK.  For a year now.

And the MSM won't touch it with a ten-foot pole.

It really started in earnest when this happened in Jan, last year:

Teenager who murdered three children at Southport dance class pleads guilty | The Crown Prosecution Service