Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

So am I to conclude that Gilchrist's supporters in this thread think Jack Foote represents what we should be looking for in a new immigrant to Canada? Is it safe to assume you folks have no objections to him bringing his AK-47s and A5-15s into Canada so he can continue to practice his culture?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this article funny. (Wow seems a lot of people have never met an immigrant in their life post in this board)

So majority of you want a melting pot. What would that "main" culture be? The Italians want their culture, the Irish want theirs, then the Columbians, Mexicans, Polish, Scottish, English, Indians, Natives want their culture. Which culture do you mean?

Multiculturalism is a good thing. Melting pot does not work. I'm surprised you don't understand it, melting pots encourage more cultural assimilation.

The so-called Melting Pot nation US, what does it have? You bet, the largest ghettos, largest spots of communities that stay within their own community. We can see this with Mormons in Utah, Baptists, Pentacostals etc. in the Bible belt, Mexicans in the Los Angeles area, the fundamental rednecks in North Florida vs. the leftist hippies in South Florida, inner city youth and gangs. The last I've seen no non-Christian forget about Muslims even Catholics don't willingly venture into the Bible belt. So you mean by a melting pot there should be 1 kind of culture, and 1 kind of life. But even in that 1 cultural practices you have denominational conflicts of Protestants vs Catholics vs. Baptists just like Shia vs. Sunnis. So how are you going to make that happen where everyone is happy?

You see where I am getting at? at least multi culturalism makes an attempt to allow people to work together even after their differences but a melting pot atmosphere only causes more pre-conceived notions, and dumb assumptions. All we see here is "the muslims are doing honour killings" or "that Sikh wants to ride without a helmet" but never "that Canadian wants" and you are the same people advocating a melting pot ideology.

People say they are shocked that McGuinty won a majority, after looking at these responses I can see why, the immigrants are more scared than you are and being an immigrant myself who's been living here for almost all my life, I can see why they would vote for McGuinty because even though most immigrants hate his record, when he gave that speech in the BAPS temple in Toronto, a lot of Indo-Canadians especially liked that one thing in him.

Now whether he believes it or not is another issue but there is a reason why he won the majority and there is a reason why a Conservative Hero like Reagan could not gain popularity with the Blacks, Hispanics and other minorities even though he had a charming personality because he could not connect with them as well as someone like Bill Clinton did and it must be hurting the CPC and conservatives that the immigrants are siding with the Liberals the same way African-Americans, Hispanics and some other minorities have sided with the democrats who have changed the political spectrum completely. It really is no co-incidence.

Edited by CanadianOak
Link to post
Share on other sites

No link to the original article (only the "reaction"), so can't comment on its own merits; however I agree that as long as it was made clear that the post was the opinion of the author only, and not that of the board, it should be left up to the electorate alone to judge the performance (including judgement) of any official in the next election. Board can issue it's opinion inc. disapproval of any such act but that's it period. No public ostrachism censorship expulsion execution because of political correctness.

It should be made very clear to everybody who does not understand it already that this country is governed by law. The law that protects, among other things, the right of individual to express their opinion on any subjects - as long as that itself does not break the law. Countries that do not allow, or restrict these rights usually fare much worse than this country; that may be the reason why some people come here in the first place; they should then understand (or be helped in understanding, if need be) that this right, ultimately, works to their, and everybody's advantage, by exposing issues and problems that could otherwise be swept under the rug.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing like not allowing a man to express an opinion.

Of course if this had happened in kebek and had been a franco vs anglo thing everyone would accept it as normal behaviour.

Here of course, everyone wants to throw the big r word around.

How typically canucklehead and how typically limp wristed.

Borg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, fine. 33 million people live in Canada, and of that, 12 million live in Ontario.

But you are right, the majority of Canadains live in Ontario.

if 1/3 is a majority in you books, then fine.

How are your fractions? Did you math teacher have diffulty with fractions?

If he said, Ontario is the most populous province, fine. But that is not what he said.

Can you follow along leafless?

Your logic is twisted.

Canada consist of ten provinces and is not one single entity like what you are claiming.

When population statistics state the population of Canada is 33 million, they are stating IOW, the total population of ALL TEN Canadian provinces is 33-million.

You got be a Liberal, with no respect for individual provinces or majorities of any kind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

No link to the original article (only the "reaction"), so can't comment on its own merits; however I agree that as long as it was made clear that the post was the opinion of the author only, and not that of the board, it should be left up to the electorate alone to judge the performance (including judgement) of any official in the next election. Board can issue it's opinion inc. disapproval of any such act but that's it period. No public ostrachism censorship expulsion execution because of political correctness.

It should be made very clear to everybody who does not understand it already that this country is governed by law. The law that protects, among other things, the right of individual to express their opinion on any subjects - as long as that itself does not break the law. Countries that do not allow, or restrict these rights usually fare much worse than this country; that may be the reason why some people come here in the first place; they should then understand (or be helped in understanding, if need be) that this right, ultimately, works to their, and everybody's advantage, by exposing issues and problems that could otherwise be swept under the rug.

Sorry when I originally posted I had read the letter but was unable to find the link, I believe Argus did post a link.

I agreee with your opinion on the role of the law, however what bothers me is these organizations (the anti-racism groups and even the school board itself) are not referencing any law in their opposition to Gilchrist. It's as though their own sense of moral outrage (justified or not) is an adequate substitute and thereby justifies punishment. By calling him and ignorant racist and more they destroy his reputation since most of the public won't be bothered to read the original letter. In essence they become the morality police.

Even worse in my mind is that even out in the sticks these are the people who run the school board, which just reinforces my opinion that the school system is less for education and more for the social manipulation of our children.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the initial reaction to both the story and the letter is that the context for both was missing until I dug up some info on Jack Foote. I suspect the reaction of people closer to Gilchrist must have had a better inkling of this nuance to the issue than we did.

I still think a hearty public bwahaha would have been a better reaction than firing him. I think the public dissemination of whacky ideas is probably the best way to expose their stupidity. A good laugh never hurt anyone.

In the meantime I'd like to know more about whether this Foote character was actually allowed to immigrate to Canada. I find that as shocking as anything I've heard in this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I find this article funny. (Wow seems a lot of people have never met an immigrant in their life post in this board)

In point of fact, those who have "never met an immigrant" are likely to be the most welcoming to immigrants. Most of the people here who are most vocal in opposition to our current immigration system are the people who have spent the most time around immigrants. I lived in an area which was over 70% immigrants for years.

So majority of you want a melting pot. What would that "main" culture be? The Italians want their culture, the Irish want theirs, then the Columbians, Mexicans, Polish, Scottish, English, Indians, Natives want their culture. Which culture do you mean?

It's called Canadian. I don't know if you've ever met any. They're a fine people.

Multiculturalism is a good thing. Melting pot does not work. I'm surprised you don't understand it, melting pots encourage more cultural assimilation.

The melting pot clearly works quite well in the US. If you compare their approach to that of the UK and France, where multiculturalism was stressed, you'll find that clearly Muslims feel more at home and more a part of the community in the US. In France, the UK and other European nations where there was far more tolerance for diverse cultures there are race riots and active participation in terrorism by local Muslims. Polls repeatedly show local Muslims feel themselves to be outsiders and don't like or trust their own countrymen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with the initial reaction to both the story and the letter is that the context for both was missing until I dug up some info on Jack Foote. I suspect the reaction of people closer to Gilchrist must have had a better inkling of this nuance to the issue than we did.

I still think a hearty public bwahaha would have been a better reaction than firing him. I think the public dissemination of whacky ideas is probably the best way to expose their stupidity. A good laugh never hurt anyone.

In the meantime I'd like to know more about whether this Foote character was actually allowed to immigrate to Canada. I find that as shocking as anything I've heard in this thread.

Why do you keep talking about Jack Foote? He is not a Canadian immigrant. Apparently he is a member of one of those vigilante groups along the US/Mexican border. Aside from using him as an example of what happens when a government ignores the demands of its citizens to control immigration he really has nothing to do with this controversy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote I assume from article: "Although we're happy the board censured him and condemned his remarks, we feel that it's just not enough," Ma said.

Yes I'm sure all the dippers are happy he's been "CENSORED" now they want him publicly flayed flogged and persecuted for having an opinion that doesn't mirror theirs. How utterly appalling these people are, an individual can be fired for having an opinion that doesn't mirror the dippers and appeasers. Welcome to Canada, and it's only going to get worse. People who brag about censoring anothers' opinion are the same people who'd incarcerate you for speaking lest you offend their twist communist ideology. Hail Hilter to the Censors of "Freedom of expression and thought" beware your days are numbered the Liberals and Conservatives will unite on this issue. Enjoy your heady Censorship power while you have it, we aren't taking your bullshite anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you keep talking about Jack Foote? He is not a Canadian immigrant. Apparently he is a member of one of those vigilante groups along the US/Mexican border. Aside from using him as an example of what happens when a government ignores the demands of its citizens to control immigration he really has nothing to do with this controversy.
Let me be the first to accuse Mr. Jack Foote of prejudice. Clearly, Mr. Foote is prejudiced in favour of all that is good about Canada, and fearful of all those things which work against maintaining this, the finest country in the world. Good for you, Mr. Foote, I have seldom read Canadian cultural argument written with such pride, candour, clarity and conviction. Although an immigrant Canadian, Mr. Foote has recognized many of the changes foisted on this country by misguided politicians who were motivated only for re-election and not armed with the determination to sustain Canadian values through vision, patriotism and love of country, with its magnificent future potential.

Foote appears to be a central to this controversy. Gilchrist did more than just use Foote as an example of the prejudices our immigration policies inspire, it looks like he also praised him for excersizing them. Gilchrist put his Foote in his mouth when he tried to use him as the starting point or basis for a rational opinion. Perhaps Foote's opinions were also widely disseminated amongst the people who subsequently jumped on Gilchrist.

Foote sounds like a pig that Gilchrist attempted to apply make-up to but it didn't fool anyone. Gilchrist's letter also indicates he is an immigrant Canadian, perhaps this means Foote immigrated to the US rather than the other way around. Better them than us if that's the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Foote appears to be a central to this controversy. [/quote

Foote sounds like a pig that Gilchrist attempted to apply make-up to but it didn't fool anyone. Gilchrist's letter also indicates he is an immigrant Canadian, perhaps this means Foote immigrated to the US rather than the other way around. Better them than us if that's the case.

Foote is merely the writer of a previous letter, and unless you know what he said you have no business insulting him. This is the entirity of what I could find about Foote's letter without paying to get it from archives

Hoping for serious dialogue on subject of Canadian culture

Port Hope Evening Guide (ON) - 03-06-2008 - 456 words

letter was supposed to accomplish. It would be good to see some intelligent discussion for a change. I invite the many people who phoned me to get involved. Jack Foote / Campbellcroft

Doesn't sound particularly scary to me, but then I'm not afraid of serious dialogue or intelligent discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Foote is merely the writer of a previous letter, and unless you know what he said you have no business insulting him. This is the entirity of what I could find about Foote's letter without paying to get it from archives

Hoping for serious dialogue on subject of Canadian culture

Port Hope Evening Guide (ON) - 03-06-2008 - 456 words

letter was supposed to accomplish. It would be good to see some intelligent discussion for a change. I invite the many people who phoned me to get involved. Jack Foote / Campbellcroft

Doesn't sound particularly scary to me, but then I'm not afraid of serious dialogue or intelligent discussion.

It doesn't sound like anything without the rest of the letter and there's no way anyone can tell what he said. On the other hand Foote's documented actions - argueably illegal actions by the looks of things - speak volumes about what's on his mind. You're wrong to assume I'm afraid of discussing this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements



×
×
  • Create New...