Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

dialamah

Members
  • Content Count

    5,339
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

dialamah last won the day on September 27 2019

dialamah had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

576 Excellent

2 Followers

About dialamah

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

21,398 profile views
  1. Why would you assume that because she's Muslim, it would be wrong to shake her hand? Why made you think she was uncomfortable? My neighbor wears an hijab because her husband likes her to. I asked her one day how strict he was about other things and she said .. "not strict at all, I can shake hands with men, talk to them, its ok. It's just the hijab he likes". My partner has been over on a couple ocassions when her fire alarm malfunctioned when her husband wasn't home. Other than putting a scarf over her hair, she was perfectly comfortable, and her husband didn't bat an eye when he got home and my partner was still there.
  2. Some places lack real grocery stores within walking distance of a community and people in that community don't have money for busses, or gas or cars. There are, however convenience stores and fast food places nearby, so thats their food source. People can actually be simultaneously obese and malnourished. Creators of processed and convenience foods do tons of research to find out what will make the brain hooked on their food - needs just the right amount of fat, sugar and salt, crunchiness or meltiness. Real science, actual addiction. Certainly in many cases people do know better, and could do better. But its not the only factor that is contributing to the rise in obesity in Western countries.
  3. I don't think there's a way to do that - even if an interview was designed by experts, people determined to do so would figure out how to answer the questions so as not to get 'caught'. I think the solution to identifying terrorists has more to do with identifying the risk factors and then examining the person's environment to find out if any of those factors exist. And it would have to be extended beyond the immigration system; a terrorist planning an attack could just as easily enter the country on a visitor visa or a student visa. But then, there are home-grown terrorists; I think this is more common than people who come here to be terrorists. Even if we were successful at identifying people at the border who are (or would become) terrorists, how do we do the same for people who are born here? And in Canada, which is the greater threat to Canadians - terrorists or cancer? Terrorists or wife-beaters? Terrorists or gang-members? Terrorists or illegal border-crossers? Should a large amount of tax money and government effort go into preventing a relatively rare phenomena or could that money be better spent on programs that would save more lives and have a better chance of success?
  4. I wonder of that will always be true, or if it matters in the long run. Crop failures, drought, conflict over water, starvation and disease will make the UN definition of 'refugee' irrelevant to the people that have the ability to find a place that may allow them and their families to stay alive. I won't be around to see it, about which I'm both disappointed and relieved, but I personally do not think Canada will survive as a separate country, and I don't think there's much we can do about that. I think the immediate move of the States will be to simply take us over, as a 'friendly' invader, or not, because in some ways we are best placed to offer survival to humans and having our resources would allow the States to maintain power in the world. I don't know what will happen in Europe, but given their proximity to the places which will suffer the most, I don't think it will be pretty. I believe that the world will look very, very different in 200 years time. Of course, I may be 100% wrong - I hope I am. If I'm not, I hope the lessons we could learn stay with humans and that we do create a better, more humane society and a sustainable world. Saw a comment the other day about what to call the generation being born now - a suggestion was "Generation Fucked".
  5. A child should absolutely be permitted to leave or change their religion, and at any age - though I'd assume they'd have to old enough to get to their preferred place of worship, or stay home alone. In my opinion, forcing a child to adhere to a particular religion will create unneeded drama and ill-will between parent and child, and runs the risk of permanently alienating the child from the parent's preferred religion. Allowing them the freedom to choose or to explore other options keeps communication open and makes it easier for the child to return to the parent's religion. If God truly knows what is in a person's heart, attendance or non-attendance at a particular religion should be irrelevant.. A non-believer attending because they're 'forced' to do so isn't going to save them from God's judgement, and a believer exploring their relationship with God through various avenues isn't going to consign them to hell. Forced 'religion' isn't for God's benefit, in my opinion. It's for the benefit of the man-made institution of religion, which requires membership for purposes of wealth and power, as opposed to the saving of souls.
  6. I'm only talking about people's initial decision to start moving in search of a place to live. In the case of climate refugees, they'll decide when the place they're at becomes too inhospitable, and they'll decide when to start looking for other places. That is something we have no control over, nor do our governments. We only have control over what we do if/when they get to our borders. Ain't it funny how often people try to do just that though.
  7. Yet, you dismissed that part of the Environics survey in which Muslims confirmed that was exactly their mind set, becuse some of them went to Mosque more.
  8. Don't be silly, then. Thanks, I missed that in the Islam thread. I suppose you think I haunt that thread, eh? I'm only here so much lately cause I'm home sick, lack energy to do much and have time to spare. Well, I don't see "moderate Westerners" all over the world declare against the war on Islam statements of Trump, the leader of one of the world's superpowers. Some do, for sure - and some support him while the vast majority are just silent. I imagine that the same can be said of this Imam. And if you yourself aren't willing to stand up against those who counsel war with Islam, why should you expect any Muslim to stand up against people counseling war with the West? Anyway, I condemn this guy just as much as I condemn anyone who chooses to use propaganda to foment hate against an entire group of people. If I had my way, I'd have him arrested and rehabilitated - but I guess that's up to Jerusalem authorities.
  9. Indeed it is. This sounds reasonable to me, but I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to matter of law. It also sounds time-consuming and expensive, and given that terrorists are relatively rare, is it going to be a priority for the government? Quite often, we can't get government action on things that are of much more immediate threat to Canadians - such as effectively enforced no-contact laws on abusive men. Would it be fair then for the families of innocent people killed in other lands by US/Canadian soldiers to sue the soldiers they believed responsible for those deaths? Leaving aside whether Khadr did/did not actually kill anyone or how old he was, he was in a conflict situation. It seems odd to me that he'd be such a special case that he could be successfully sued for killing someone in that conflict? Conflict is conflict; each side believes they are right, and the other side is wrong - suing anyone for 'wrongful' death in those situations makes no sense to me. Although if it were widely implemented, with the State (US, Russia, Syria, whoever) having to pay on behalf of it's soldiers, I suppose it would add to the cost of war and maybe we'd stop having so many? Which would not have applied in Khadr's case, as he's not a foriegn national, correct? Yeah - every time someone's solution is "send them back to where they came from" I wonder what makes them so sure they'd be accepted back where they came from. Perhaps we need another Australia to send all the 'unwanted' to. Funny how that prison outpost became a place millions of people love to visit/live. It kind of reminds me of places where people cross roads unsafely - the municipality knows about it, and they ticket people if they catch them - but they often don't actually do anything till someone, or a couple of someones, get killed - then they'll put a crosswalk in, or a fence that prevents people from crossing. The fact is that terrorism, in Canada, is still pretty rare. If/until that changes, the cost will be considered too high. I agree that he was never rehabilitated, but to me he comes across as remorseful. Why do you feel differently?
  10. Silly girl. Of the two of us, who has gone out of their way to acknowledge and agree with the others' POV in the last couple of hours? Did they now? You don't provide a site, and I couldn't find anything on Google - I even checked the Religion of Peace website, no luck. So, I regard this statement with considerable skepticism. Anyway, why wouldn't you believe them? Probably the same reason you've dismissed the 300 Islamic leaders signing an anti-terror statement; one supports your view of Muslims as 'evil', and the other does not.
  11. Seems to me both union and companies are guilty of that 'good vs. bad' propaganda. Do you really think it's all one way?
  12. "I disagree because it's nonsense" isn't an argument. So, you are out of cogent arguments. I win!
  13. Yes, they move .... it's not like we can stop them from moving from wherever they are, eh? We can try to stop them at the border, assuming we have the resources to do so. But at some point, if there's enough movement, we'll lose. I thought conservatives support the right of people to make decisions independent of government intervention. No? Anywhere is better than the shifting illogic of conservative ideology.
  14. Out of cogent arguments already?
×
×
  • Create New...