Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 524
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

No, I don’t want you to hate refugees.  But if somebody expresses a willingness to go back to their country of origin, are they really refugees?  I always thought refugees are suppose to come from rea

Does Prince Harry count as an "entitled refugee"?   Sorry, he was the one that came to mind.   https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-harry-canada-jobs-1.5429202    

Entitled refugees? Yes, it seems so. There is an ironic story in the G&M today undoubtedly designed to raise sympathy for the plight of poor refugees trying to find housing in Toronto. It fails ba

Posted Images

15 hours ago, Goddess said:

WalMart has always had security and greeters at their doors and they often check receipts.  I don't think it's because of immigrants.  Theft and crime on the rise - yes.

This Walmart had a greeter for years. He was a man with down syndrome. Haven't seen him in a long time. This is different. This is someone with 'Security' written on the back of his coat. Seemed strange to me. I think crime is up because of immigration in this particular area.

Edited by Teena
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Teena said:

This Walmart had a greeter for years. He was a man with down syndrome. Haven't seen him in a long time. This is different. This is someone with 'Security' written in the back of his coat. Seemed strange to me. I think crime is up because of immigration in this particular area.

I think in bigger cities Wally World has Security at the doors?  I've seen them nearly at every Wally's, but I've been in bigger cities for quite a few years now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Did they install self checkouts?  Apparently there's been a lot of theft with self checkouts because people aren't scanning and paying for some things they buy, so some companies are starting to check bags and receipts.

I do not think there is self check outs here. But I will check next time I'm there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what Walmart security policies have to do with Muslims needing to be banned in Canada from entry but I can say this...what a lovely drift, Lol. I was referring to the snow fall.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Rue said:

Your need to pose as being more educated than me only serves to show your insecurity and inability to challenge opinions other than your own with civility. 

Sorry if my not weeping over exagerated claims like you do makes me seem less civil. But I guess I'm just not as emotional a person as you are. I like to think instead.

Quote

Your spin on the residential schools speaks for itself as does your other response to me denying the role of anti-semitism in helping the Nazis gain power

I didn't deny the role. You're now simply lying. I said it held a secondary role in how they took power.

Quote

Your attempt to deny you speak in  absolutes is fun.

I almost never speak in absolutes. Perhaps you could take a rudimentary English course which would teach you how to comprehend the language.

Quote

Please show where you have qualified your negative generalizations.You made a false sweeping statement that all Muslim countries make it legal for husbands to rape  wives.

No, I responded to someone complaining about how we only banned it a few decades back by saying Muslim countries never banned it at all. Yes, I was incorrect to say it was legal in ALL Muslim countries instead of almost all. So sue me.

Quote

When shown a list of Muslim countries  you then did not qualify your statement as being incorrect, you chose instead to denyTurkey is a Muslim state. Please do advise Erdogan of that.

This is again a lie or more evidence of your bafflement at comprehending English. I never denied Turkey was a Muslim state. I pointed out some of those 'muslim' states on your list aren't even Muslim, and that in most cases your inclusion of them as outlawing marriage rape was merely because they made no mention of it and therefore marriage rape was technically covered under ordinary rape laws.

Quote

I also noted you ignored your other absolute false statement that  these listed countries make it legal as well to beat wives and now your latest false absolute statement that homosexuality is a capital offence in these countries.

This another lie as I said it was a capital offense in thirteen countries, and all of them were Muslim.

Quote

You again provide no substantiation of your legal opinions

It wasn't a legal opinion. It was a statement of fact easily verifiable anywhere you care to check.

Quote

Got it and thanks. Your reminder you do not like Muslims is most helpful when discussing government policies.

And again your outrage that anyone would exercise basic logic and judgement simply indicates your lack of same. I will again reprint a perfect description of the reasons behind your shrill defense of Islam because they fit you so perfectly.

Recently its founder, Yigal Carmon, observed that this Jew-hatred had spread to America and Europe where it was turning into “really violent threats based on Islamic texts”.

And yet, he added, the American Jewish community targeted by such attacks was silent. “Not a protest, no public activity, nothing at all. They are afraid to be thought of as Islamophobic” Carmon’s observation is also true of British Jews. With a few exceptions over the years, the secular and religious leadership has been silent about Muslim antisemitism. Yet the problem is serious.

This is because Jewish leaders equate Islamophobia with antisemitism. They have thus fallen for the Islamists’ propaganda ploy in making a grotesque comparison.

The key difference is the distinction between truth and lies.

For while antisemitism is based entirely on deranged fantasies about the Jewish people, Islamophobia labels as bigotry all adverse comment about Muslims, including truths about Islamic extremism and jihadi terrorism. Some people are indeed irrationally prejudiced against Muslims. But the term Islamophobia was coined to suppress rational, legitimate and necessary acknowledgment of the dangers within the Islamic world.

Surely, if a particular group is disproportionately involved in hatred of Jews the community should denounce this? In this case, it does not. It brushes it under the carpet. What it targets instead is “Islamophobia”. In other words, the people in its sights aren’t Muslim antisemites but those who call out Muslim antisemitism and extremism.

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rue said:

I am not sure what Walmart security policies has to do with Muslims needing to be banned in Canada from entry but I can say this...what a lovely drift, Lol. I was referring to the snow fall.

Hi Rue, I am not sure either. I never mentioned Muslims being banned in Canada? I was referring to immigration as a whole and increased crime. Are they related? We have many here in my town coming in from Somalia, India and the ME. When I shop at this particular Walmart, which I have been for years, there was NEVER Security at the door until this new year. And also when shopping here, I sometimes wonder what happened to the white folk? Hey, I stole as a kid. I got caught and never did it again and my parents had to pay a fine and I had to write an essay why it was wrong. I was 12 or 13. Wonder if they still do that?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2020 at 11:46 AM, Argus said:

Sorry if my not weeping over exagerated claims like you do makes me seem less civil. But I guess I'm just not as emotional a person as you are. I like to think instead.

I didn't deny the role. You're now simply lying. I said it held a secondary role in how they took power.

I almost never speak in absolutes. Perhaps you could take a rudimentary English course which would teach you how to comprehend the language.

No, I responded to someone complaining about how we only banned it a few decades back by saying Muslim countries never banned it at all. Yes, I was incorrect to say it was legal in ALL Muslim countries instead of almost all. So sue me.

This is again a lie or more evidence of your bafflement at comprehending English. I never denied Turkey was a Muslim state. I pointed out some of those 'muslim' states on your list aren't even Muslim, and that in most cases your inclusion of them as outlawing marriage rape was merely because they made no mention of it and therefore marriage rape was technically covered under ordinary rape laws.

This another lie as I said it was a capital offense in thirteen countries, and all of them were Muslim.

It wasn't a legal opinion. It was a statement of fact easily verifiable anywhere you care to check.

And again your outrage that anyone would exercise basic logic and judgement simply indicates your lack of same. I will again reprint a perfect description of the reasons behind your shrill defense of Islam because they fit you so perfectly.

Recently its founder, Yigal Carmon, observed that this Jew-hatred had spread to America and Europe where it was turning into “really violent threats based on Islamic texts”.

And yet, he added, the American Jewish community targeted by such attacks was silent. “Not a protest, no public activity, nothing at all. They are afraid to be thought of as Islamophobic” Carmon’s observation is also true of British Jews. With a few exceptions over the years, the secular and religious leadership has been silent about Muslim antisemitism. Yet the problem is serious.

This is because Jewish leaders equate Islamophobia with antisemitism. They have thus fallen for the Islamists’ propaganda ploy in making a grotesque comparison.

The key difference is the distinction between truth and lies.

For while antisemitism is based entirely on deranged fantasies about the Jewish people, Islamophobia labels as bigotry all adverse comment about Muslims, including truths about Islamic extremism and jihadi terrorism. Some people are indeed irrationally prejudiced against Muslims. But the term Islamophobia was coined to suppress rational, legitimate and necessary acknowledgment of the dangers within the Islamic world.

Surely, if a particular group is disproportionately involved in hatred of Jews the community should denounce this? In this case, it does not. It brushes it under the carpet. What it targets instead is “Islamophobia”. In other words, the people in its sights aren’t Muslim antisemites but those who call out Muslim antisemitism and extremism.

First off calling me a liar or angry and getting personal  simply shows me you are angry  and still unable to substantiate your previous subjective generalizations so deflect from this failure with name calling.

In this latest response to me you now make unsubstantiated sweeping absolute generalizations that Jews are afraid  to be Islamaphobic  and our leaders have fallen for Islamic extremist  propaganda.

Oh do please provide the names of these Jews, the names of the Jewish leaders you speak of and the statements they made or other evidence you obtained from them illustrating your conclusions.

What I do know Argus is you continue to utter absolutes with no qualifications or substantiation if any kind. It comes in each and every sentence you respond  with.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rue said:

First off calling me a liar or angry and getting personal  simply shows me you are angry 

Or that you're lying.

3 hours ago, Rue said:

In this latest response to me you now make unsubstantiated sweeping absolute generalizations that Jews are afraid  to be Islamaphobic  and our leadersh have fallen for Islamic extremist  propaganda.

Oh do please provide the names of these Jews, the names of the Jewish leaders you speak of and the statements they made or other evidence you obtained from them illustrating your conclusions.

No, I quoted an article I posted earlier. I didn't make those claims. The article did.

But here's more quotes.

Percentage of Muslims with Unfavorable Views of Jews (not Israelis, JEWS):
Jordan - 100 percent
Lebanon - 99 percent
Egypt - 98 percent
Morocco - 88 percent
Indonesia - 76 percent
Pakistan - 74 percent
Turkey - 60 percent

https://www.learnreligions.com/muslim-views-of-jews-2076073

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2020 at 9:07 PM, Argus said:

Or that you're lying.

No, I quoted an article I posted earlier. I didn't make those claims. The article did.

But here's more quotes.

Percentage of Muslims with Unfavorable Views of Jews (not Israelis, JEWS):
Jordan - 100 percent
Lebanon - 99 percent
Egypt - 98 percent
Morocco - 88 percent
Indonesia - 76 percent
Pakistan - 74 percent
Turkey - 60 percent

https://www.learnreligions.com/muslim-views-of-jews-2076073

To summarize you have in your responses presumed OP to lecture me and Jews and others that:

1- we must assume the worst in all of a people if many or some of that people engage in evil;                                                                                                                               

2-engage in process 1 to assume all Muslims have negative attributes undesireable in Canadian society and so we should ban Muslims from Canada;                         

3-that we Jews and our leaders who disagree with you as to 1 and 2  are afraid to be called Islamaphobic and are dupes of  Islamic extremists.

You have  also evidenced in your responses to me:

4-you have no basis of extrapolation for any assumptions you have made  to  assume the negative generalizations  you have made and you continue to be unable to understand your conclusion that we should hate all Muslims because many of them hate us is not based on denying many hate us (that was never challenged) but that it makes no logical sense because it simply generates  the same hatred back in response, i.e., negative  generalizations to rationalize discrimination against an entire category of people.

Further and ironically you claim your Muslim  adversaries hate in disprorportionate  amounts, but you do the exact same thing by assuming  an entire Muslim population is undesireable.

In addition, you started off claiming Muslims should be banned for being more likely to be terrorists and then when provided counter arguments to show you had no statistics for that justify such assumptions you deflected and switched the focus to having us believe your true concern about Muslims and why they shoudl be banned is because they hate Jews so you  now present numbers showing Muslims hate Jews when that was never the issue of this thread or contested.

Interestingly you  have never come on this forum once and  started a thread saying lets said ban anti-semites from coming to Canada  It is  only when challenged about your negative generalizations about Muslims, you then raise dit, and then only in relation to Muslims, no other peoples.

So Argus. You would have us believe what...that  you are so concerned about Jews in Canada this justifies your negative stereotypes of Muslims but no other anti semites?

I call that out and  challenge you for  using anti-semitism as a shield, a pretense an object of exploitation to justify your own hatred of Muslims. You don`t speak for any Jew about anti-semitism and your presumption you can dictate to me or any Jew why we are hated let alone why we must hate Muslims or anyone is the kind of presumptuous and patronizing tone that gives birth to hatred and negative generalizations and so policies that led to residential schools or the holocaust and so many other acts of legislated discrimination.

Further  your  previous denial of anti-semitism and its role in enabling  Nazism and then trying to back  track saying oh you didn`t deny it, just caled it secondary shows your ignore of Jewish history and anti-semitism you presume to lecture about. Secondary..you called it secondary...bull shit, you only called it secondary after being called out and when you did that you showed you continue to trivialize anti semitism and what it is capable of doing and how the thought process is no different from the one you are engaging in now.

Most ironic is you quote Pew Polls to justify hatred. Long before the Pew Polls kept track of anti semitism in geographic locations the ADL has been doing that. You presume to tell me and Jews we do not know what the ADL is or the statistics it keeps and what they mean? You claim to tell me or any Jew how we must use those statistics ...

The ADL was created in 2011 by a lawyer to combat thought processes that led to the discrimination and hateful attacks against Jews. Its mission was to expose this behaviour these thought processes as negative generalizations made to define Jews as less worthy, human, equal, than non Jews. That mission of the ADL was never limited to just understanding how it impacts on Jews BUT all peoples targeted with hatred. The ADL has been a strong ally assisting Christian, Muslim and all kinds of religious and social groups defend ourselves against hatred. Because it does, because the B`Nai B`Rith does as well, because Jewish leaders reach out to Christians and Muslims and others to combat hatred, this makes us dupes of Islamic extremists...why because you say so...you would prefer we build walls and define entire peoples as undesireable. 

In your world, you try place yourself in an anti-septic bubble where everyone believes like you do and that makes you more educated than I.

In conclusion, your words simply repeat your bigotry against Muslims Argus and Jews and anyone else who disagrees with your beliefs.

You want to come on and piss on Muslims, that is your right. Its my right and the right of others to challenge your negative generalizations as being illogical and unhelpful in understanding what criteria would be needed to properly enunciate immigration policies. Yes we know you are quick to be able to say what is not Canadian but never once have you come on here and say what it IS to be Canadian. Your silence in that regard I would contend shows you can`t create concepts or beliefs  you only know how to tear down or piss on beliefs.

 

 

Edited by Rue
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rue said:

To summarize you have in your responses presume to lecture me and Jews and whoever else that we must:

Not really. I have merely posted cites, largely FROM Jews. If anyone is lecturing you it's Jews.

1 minute ago, Rue said:

1- assume the worst in all of a people if many or some of that people engage in evil;

Nope.

1 minute ago, Rue said:

2--specifically engage in process 1 in regards to  assuming all Muslims have negative attributes undesireable in Canadian society;

Nope

1 minute ago, Rue said:

3-that to engage in 1 and 2 is logical;

Since 1 and 2 are your own inventions - nope.

1 minute ago, Rue said:

4-that  all Muslims should be banned from Canada based on 1-3;

Nope. What I have stated is that given the oft-expressed social values throughout the Muslim world towards our own beliefs, and given they are particularly harsh in many of our source immigration countries we should screen potential immigrants, or failing that simply no longer take immigrants from those regions. Government stats show they fare poorly in economic terms, overall anyway compared to other groups.

1 minute ago, Rue said:

5- that Jews who disagree with you as to 1-4 are afraid to be called Islamaphobic and if leaders, have fallen for Islamic extremist propaganda.

Merely cited opinions which said so. Although to be fair, I think that is accurate given your own behaviour.

1 minute ago, Rue said:

You have  also:

6- evidenced repeatedly you have no basis of extrapolation for any assumptions you have made about all Jews or all Muslims that you have made or  how you determined all Muslims have the same undesireable attributes as the ones you feel you have exposed;

Oh I'm just getting tired of your whiny attempts to misstate my position. No one needs you summarizing every goddam word I've written and opinion I've given. People can read my own words above. Your only purpose for 'summarizing' is to try to change the meaning of what I said and put your own dishonest interpretation on it. Normal people simply quote the statement their interlocutor made and then address it. You instead choose to 'rephrase' it and then address your own interpretation. I see no reason behind that but deliberate dishonesty.

1 minute ago, Rue said:

You started off claiming Muslims should be banned for being more likely to be terrorists

Never said any such thing. Go ahead. Cite my actual words instead of your twisted interpretation.

1 minute ago, Rue said:

You  now present numbersyou think establish since if we believe you Muslims hate Jews this is why they should not be in Canada. You now use anti-semitism as your premises or pretext to ban them all.

No. I put those numbers up because of your previously expressed outrage when I said that the Muslim world has a deep strain of anti-semitism. Note, you never actually stated my position was wrong. You merely expressed your outrage I had dared to write it. Now you appear to be conceding what I said as "obvious".

1 minute ago, Rue said:

Most ironic is you quote Pew Polls to justify hatred. Long before the Pew Polls kept track of anti semitism in geographic locations the ADL has been doing that. You presume to tell me and Jews we do not know what the ADL is or the statistics it keeps and what they mean? You claim to tell me or any Jew how we must use those statistics ...

And yet when I said that there was a deep strain of antisemitism in the Muslim world you blew your top and started wailing and shrieking like a demented old woman, throwing out accusations and insults galore.

Maybe if you learned to discuss things like an adult instead of an overly emotional child we could get somewhere. As it is I'm going to stop even responding to you when you 'rephrase' everything I write and then tell me that I wrote it - complete with insults and insinuations. If you're capable of rational discussion then you may reply to my quoted text or not at all.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Argus said:

Not really. I have merely posted cites, largely FROM Jews. If anyone is lecturing you it's Jews.

Nope.

Nope

Since 1 and 2 are your own inventions - nope.

Nope. What I have stated is that given the oft-expressed social values throughout the Muslim world towards our own beliefs, and given they are particularly harsh in many of our source immigration countries we should screen potential immigrants, or failing that simply no longer take immigrants from those regions. Government stats show they fare poorly in economic terms, overall anyway compared to other groups.

Merely cited opinions which said so. Although to be fair, I think that is accurate given your own behaviour.

Oh I'm just getting tired of your whiny attempts to misstate my position.No one needs you summarizing every goddam word I've written and opinion I've given. People can read my own words above. Your only purpose for 'summarizing' is to try to change the meaning of what I said and put your own dishonest interpretation on it. Normal people simply quote the statement their interlocutor made and then address it. You instead choose to 'rephrase' it and then address your own interpretation. I see no reason behind that but deliberate dishonesty.

Never said any such thing. Go ahead. Cite my actual words instead of your twisted interpretation.

No. I put those numbers up because of your previously expressed outrage when I said that the Muslim world has a deep strain of anti-semitism. Note, you never actually stated my position was wrong. You merely expressed your outrage I had dared to write it. Now you appear to be conceding what I said as "obvious".

And yet when I said that there was a deep strain of antisemitism in the Muslim world you blew your top and started wailing and shrieking like a demented old woman, throwing out accusations and insults galore.

Maybe if you learned to discuss things like an adult instead of an overly emotional child we could get somewhere. As it is I'm going to stop even responding to you when you 'rephrase' everything I write and then tell me that I wrote it - complete with insults and insinuations. If you're capable of rational discussion then you may reply to my quoted text or not at all.

 

 

 

You now try back track and claim I have misrepresented you and that you never contended Muslims should be banned unless its a last resort. The wording you now useisctgat we should screen potential immigrants, or failing that simply no longer take immigrants from those regions.

Given the totality of your responses and comments about Muslim to date the above attempt to restate your position is a little late and I will like you say....let other people decide from the totality of your words in responses, what your positions are.

You  also again engage in a device to avoid culpability and responsibility for your subjective remarks by claiming you only repeat the opinions of others, i.e., and I quote: `Merely cited opinions which said so...`Your subjective remarks I have challenged were never sourced or cited as you are well aware.

Next,  on the one hand you state: `` Never said any such thing. Go ahead. Cite my actual words instead of your twisted interpretation`.. but earlier you stated, `No one needs you summarizing every goddam word I've written and opinion I've given. ` I summarize what you said and am specific about what you said precisely because you deny what you say or claim you said things you never did to try back track on what you originally said. Everything you have stated that I challenged I have given clear and proper reference to.

As well for someone who complains I have misrepresented him you have now stated and I quote:

``your previously expressed outrage when I said that the Muslim world has a deep strain of anti-semitism ``You merely expressed your outrage I had dared to write it. ``

My words are there for all to read. Never have I debated you or challenged you on the fact that many or all Muslims may hate Jews. What I have challenged and you now ignore is there for all to read. 

You now engage in name calling. Well do so. It means nothing but I sure as hell will call our your words when they are hateful or exploit  or mistate anti-semitism as I have.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rue said:

You now try back track and claim I have misrepresented you and that you never contended Muslims should be banned unless its a last resort. Here is the wording you now use:we should screen potential immigrants, or failing that simply no longer take immigrants from those regions`:

Given the totality of your responses and comments about Muslim to date the above attempt to restate your position is a little late and I will like you say let other people decide from the totality of your words in responses what your positions are.

You again engage in a device to avoid culpability and responsibility for your subjective remarks by claiming you only repeat the opinions of others, i.e., and I quote: `Merely cited opinions which said so...`` Your subjective remarks I have challenged were never sourced or cited as you are well aware.

Next,  on the one hand you state: `` Never said any such thing. Go ahead. Cite my actual words instead of your twisted interpretation``.. but earlier you stated, ``No one needs you summarizing every goddam word I've written and opinion I've given. `I summarize what you said and am specific about what you said precisely because you deny what you say or claim you said things you never did to try back track on what you originally said. Everything you have stated that I challenged I have given clear and proper reference to.

As well for someone who complains I have misrepresented him you have now stated and I quote:

``your previously expressed outrage when I said that the Muslim world has a deep strain of anti-semitism ``You merely expressed your outrage I had dared to write it. ``

My words are there for all to read. Never have I debated you or challenged you on the fact that many or all Muslims may hate Jews. What I have challenged and you now ignore is there for all to read. 

You now engage in name calling. Well do so. It means nothing but I sure as hell will call our your words when they are hateful or exploit  or mistate anti-semitism as I have.

Sorry Rue.  You kinda lost all credibility when you started down the Nazi, Hitler road.  It's never a good idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2020 at 2:44 PM, Argus said:

Because that would be stupid and impossible. We do the possible. Just because we have child molesters in this country does not suggest we're being unfair by not importing more.

Judge the foreigners by a double standard, the native born get a pass. When you only care about crimes committed by foreigners, you have jumped the shark.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rue said:

You now try back track and claim I have misrepresented you and that you never contended Muslims should be banned unless its a last resort. Here is the wording you now use:we should screen potential immigrants, or failing that simply no longer take immigrants from those regions`:

How is that backtracking? That has been my position for years. YOU invented a new position about 'banning' all Muslims' without even explaining what that even meant. I've always felt we were taking in too many immigrants, and the only people profiting off that are immigration lawyers. We should cut back and focus on those who would make the best cultural and economic fit. That's simple logic, not bigotry.

4 hours ago, Rue said:

You again engage in a device to avoid culpability and responsibility for your subjective remarks by claiming you only repeat the opinions of others, i.e., and I quote: `Merely cited opinions which said so...`` Your subjective remarks I have challenged were never sourced or cited as you are well aware.

All of my remarks have been cited. That includes the ones about Jews terrified of daring to criticize Muslims.

4 hours ago, Rue said:

Next,  on the one hand you state: `` Never said any such thing. Go ahead. Cite my actual words instead of your twisted interpretation``.. but earlier you stated, ``No one needs you summarizing every goddam word I've written and opinion I've given. `I summarize what you said and am specific about what you said precisely because you deny what you say or claim you said things you never did to try back track on what you originally said. Everything you have stated that I challenged I have given clear and proper reference to.

What babbling gibberish is this? How can I deny my words when they're written above? I deny YOUR words 'summarizing' my words. If you want to challenge me on my words then challenge me on what I said, not your damned summary.

4 hours ago, Rue said:

``your previously expressed outrage when I said that the Muslim world has a deep strain of anti-semitism ``You merely expressed your outrage I had dared to write it. ``

My words are there for all to read. Never have I debated you or challenged you on the fact that many or all Muslims may hate Jews. What I have challenged and you now ignore is there for all to read.

Your words are indeed there for all to read. I don't need to summarize them. When I mentioned the rise in antisemitism in Europe due to the influx of Muslims you sneered at me and derided the statement. Here are you words.

Argus you now show  clearly your agenda is to promote  fear mongering about Muslims to justify not letting them come to Canada..thank you.

It is also interesting to see you mention no one but Muslims when you tell me let alone presume too tell me  who I should fear as a Jew.

At this point you fear monger.

When you have something to discuss other than your fear of Muslims let me know. It is stale.

Your using anti semitism to try justify your bigoted assumptions about Muslims is noted.

Your use of the tem much of the Muslim world to engage in a negative collective reference of all Muslims is noted  as well.

Thanks for your concern. Nice to know your fear is logical and done on my behalf.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Judge the foreigners by a double standard, the native born get a pass. When you only care about crimes committed by foreigners, you have jumped the shark.

I care about all crimes. Always have. Thus my continuing critique of the judicial system's lax sentencing.

Nor are we talking about 'foreigners'. Have you not even read a few stray sentences of this topic before opening your mouth to blather? We are talking about foreigners we are deliberately bringing to live here among us forever. I am suggesting we be more selective about those we bring and boot out those who commit crimes. How exactly is that jumping any damned sharks?

We can do nothing about home born criminals. But only a complete moron would suggest that is a reason why we should not be selective and do our best not to bring in foreigners to commit more crimes. Especially when it looks like a disproportionate amount of violent crimes in many of our cities are being committed by these immigrants.

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites

An American forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Michael Welner, noted these distinctions between Khadr and child soldiers:

Quote

"He voluntarily learned the trappings of violence," Dr Michael Welner said. "Violence in his approach was glorified, not something he was horrified by. So he didn’t need to be desensitized as child soldiers are, through drugs and coercion. He wasn’t kidnapped from his parents, who were murdered in order to facilitate that. No. In his approach, not only his Islamic affiliation, he was seeking martyrdom."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Welner's inquiry also led him to repudiate defense claims that Khadr had been tortured.[80] He came to the impression of Khadr as worldly beyond his years....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Welner

I'm betting it was the peach fuzz that impressed Welner. Assholes and especially right wing ones always did fall for that.

In any case good luck amending the Geneva Conventions. Let us know how that works out.

Edited by eyeball
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Goddess said:

An American forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Michael Welner, noted these distinctions between Khadr and child soldiers:

 

And Dr. Stephan Xenakis had this to say about Khadr and Welner:

Quote

No, he’s an adolescent. That’s the second point here, and I think what the travesty is, what the error is. This was a 15-year-old kid sent there by his father and doing what his father asked him to do. We as civilized democratic countries recognize that different standards should be applied socially and legally to people who are adolescents.  (Welner) Totally misses what the mental state is, capacity, reasoning, and the maturity of adolescence. What [Welner's] doing is in fact characterizing this [then] teenage boy as if he's a small adult and absolutely ignores everything we know about neuro development for young people, in particular teenagers.  

Welner spent what - 7 hours? - with Khadr, and then went off to interview his jailers.  Xenakis spent 200 hours with Khadr.  Who do you suppose is going to understand him better?

Oh, btw - you are "misinformed"; you said:

Quote

He has never renounced his terrorist beliefs.

He did on May 15, 2015 - in person, in front of several cameras.

He told his prison psychiatrist that he renounces terrorism.

So, that's at least twice.  And in many interviews he's reiterated his desire to live a peaceful "ordinary" life, and has advised young people not to take the same path he did. 

 

Edited by dialamah
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Argus said:

How is that backtracking? That has been my position for years. YOU invented a new position about 'banning' all Muslims' without even explaining what that even meant. I've always felt we were taking in too many immigrants, and the only people profiting off that are immigration lawyers. We should cut back and focus on those who would make the best cultural and economic fit. That's simple logic, not bigotry.

All of my remarks have been cited. That includes the ones about Jews terrified of daring to criticize Muslims.

What babbling gibberish is this? How can I deny my words when they're written above? I deny YOUR words 'summarizing' my words. If you want to challenge me on my words then challenge me on what I said, not your damned summary.

Your words are indeed there for all to read. I don't need to summarize them. When I mentioned the rise in antisemitism in Europe due to the influx of Muslims you sneered at me and derided the statement. Here are you words.

Argus you now show  clearly your agenda is to promote  fear mongering about Muslims to justify not letting them come to Canada..thank you.

It is also interesting to see you mention no one but Muslims when you tell me let alone presume too tell me  who I should fear as a Jew.

At this point you fear monger.

When you have something to discuss other than your fear of Muslims let me know. It is stale.

Your using anti semitism to try justify your bigoted assumptions about Muslims is noted.

Your use of the tem much of the Muslim world to engage in a negative collective reference of all Muslims is noted  as well.

Thanks for your concern. Nice to know your fear is logical and done on my behalf.

 

I stand by my words. You now playing the victim and trying to deny what you said is to be expected and sad.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Argus said:

I care about all crimes. Always have. Thus my continuing critique of the judicial system's lax sentencing.

Nor are we talking about 'foreigners'. Have you not even read a few stray sentences of this topic before opening your mouth to blather? We are talking about foreigners we are deliberately bringing to live here among us forever. I am suggesting we be more selective about those we bring and boot out those who commit crimes. How exactly is that jumping any damned sharks?

We can do nothing about home born criminals. But only a complete moron would suggest that is a reason why we should not be selective and do our best not to bring in foreigners to commit more crimes. Especially when it looks like a disproportionate amount of violent crimes in many of our cities are being committed by these immigrants.

For someone why plays the unfair victim of wrath you dish it out again insulting nd showing your ignorance and disrespect of Y's opinion.

You falsely  misrepresented what he said and why he said it.  

The law already deports non Canadian citizens who deport a crime.

Your reference to the law needing to be more selective means what....go on  Argus...just once tell everyone your criteria for selection.

 

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Argus said:

I care about all crimes. 

Nor are we talking about 'foreigners'. 

Argus you stated the above and yet in the remainder of the same reply made it clear your only concern was with those coming to Canada who commit crimes. Your disconnect in what you claim to say and actually say does not lend to credibility.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Shady said:

Sorry Rue.  You kinda lost all credibility when you started down the Nazi, Hitler road.  It's never a good idea.

Your sorrow is selective.

What was not a good idea was Argus presuming to lecture me about anti-semitism and telling me I must negatively generalize about all Muslims because they hate Jews which is precisely what he did  which  then made me morally obliged as a Jew to explain it is precisely because Nazis negatively generalized about all  we Jews that for anyone  to tell us to do the same thing to others is absurd and just outright ignorant.

You want to be sorry, then start by trying to understand when and why I raised the history of Nazism. I only did so when Argus played the Jew card suggesting as a Jew  I  should know  certain Muslims hate Jews.

My raising it was as an analogy of direct relevance  to the consequences that arise when any of us define an entire people as undesireable.

If you can not understand that with due respect it might be good idea you tried rather than try indirectly to suggest I unfairly called Argus a Nazi.

I have challenged his hateful negative generalizations of an entire people as a Jew whose family history was the target of it, as a Zionist faced with it as an impairment to achieving peace with certain Muslims and as a human being.

 

 

 

Edited by Rue
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
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




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...