Montreal Escorts

Terrorist attack in Quebec city

Halloween Mike

Original Dude
Apr 19, 2009
5,107
1,200
113
Winterfell
Hey Mike, no beef with you, just with Sol's post.

That being said, I worry about the "our ancestors built Canada" idea. Does that mean that rights should vary based upon who our ancestors are? I feel that there are some people in Canada/Quebec who actually feel that way, at least behind closed doors.

This is a little too complicated to explain and i have little time this morning. But in a nutshell Canada was establish with certain peoples and certain valors. Even tough some of those valors took a backseat(religion for instance) and the society has become much more open these days than in the old days, we are still a society evolved from a certain "type" from back then. Therefore as Sol says, i am all for immigrants who come here and love the country and want to pursue a better life here respecting that culture that we have establish trough the years and grow to be better. I said it many times, i do not care about skin color or origin AT ALL, what i care about is the attitude and how well the peoples can "adapt" here. If some peoples come here but then demand things left and right and that they don't like it here and back in there countries they could do this and that, hell just go back then and don't let the door hit your ass on the way out...

For instance why when i was a teen in high school, i had to remove my cap right as i enter school building, not when i arrive to my locker, or when i was to enter class, literraly when i enter school. I hated that, and most of the time i didn't have a shit and kept it til my locker, but when i was spot they would always give me shit for it. Now imagine if there would had been Muslim with hijab or Sikh with turbans(they where none where i live at least at the time, its a small town), and they would had told me that "for them its ok, cause its there religion". I would certainly had been pissed off a lot and call this BS and injustice. Why they get a treatment of favor for this just because there different?

I know its a small exemple and one 13 years old teen tantrum is not exactly world breaker, but its just an exemple in a pool of many many "demands" they have that are different than our values and rules. They need there own meat, there own chuch (in a society that has fough hard to remove as much power as possible from the church) , Sikh are allow to carry there knives in school while if we would do the same thing, even a little pocket knife just as short, we would be suspended. As a kid i loved going in the woods, like many kids, i would make "camps" and "forts", i had one right behind my home so my mother would always be ok to let me go there, we where pretty much in a rural area. Anyway, i always brough my pocket knife there to cut cord and tape and other stuff to build my "camp". One time i forgot i had it in my pocket, i dunno, guess i was out of clean pants that day whatever... Just happened that day i was asked to empty my pockets (they would do that ocasioanlly, especially when called to the director office) and when they saw it they got nuts, they took it, call my parents and all the fucking drama. But if your Sikh, its ok touh...

This is the kind of stuff that bothers me ... among other things. I feel if you go live in a new place, you should respect and apply the laws and culture of that place.

Known fact, Muslims prefer to migrate to Liberal/Socialist countries as they are weak and easy to manipulate

Sadly this is true, our own governement is to be blame too, as they let all of this happen, even encourage it in a way.

Its like letting your friend live at your place because he is in a bad situation. Normally he should be respecting you and your place, but if you allow him to do stuff that bothers you just because you want to be a good friend, then he will do it, and eventually push it, and if he realize your "tolerant", he will always push more and more until there is a breaking point and you can't tolerate anymore....

On a country scale tough, the breaking point could be different...

Well in the end my short reply got longer than i tough and shit i have to hurry up now lol.
 

Oz-Man

Active Member
Apr 16, 2017
300
86
28
Hey Oz man, first... Are you a Muslim, Antifa or BLM member/sympathizer?
HM thinks like I do but you only have an issue with me? OK, I can live with that.
You are concerned about a date 150 years ago being out a few years, it is a moot point, it is history...

...There is a lot of ignorance to your posts, you seem to be a far left sympathizer.
Known fact, Muslims prefer to migrate to Liberal/Socialist countries as they are weak and easy to manipulate.

And no I do not mean all Muslims, just the radical ones and with 3 billion Muslims and with a 7% terrorist activity you have only 210 million terrorists.
https://sites.google.com/site/islam...w-many-muslims-are-there-how-many-are-jihadis
But again, this is all false just to sell papers, according to you.
Is there a problem in Canada now? Not yet thanks to an ocean.
Lastly, as I have stated many times, I welcome all immigrants but do not try and change the Canadian way of life to that of which you are fleeing.

Your ad hominem attack at the beginning of your post really set the tone for the weakness of your arguments. This illustrates one of the ways in which your posts differ from HM’s and why I have a problem with your posts over his.

As for your citing “Canadian Conquest/Consent” in 1884, it’s just hard to understand you when you get both the name of the event and the date wrong. It doesn’t add much to your credibility and betrays your ignorance of history as well as your sloppiness in presenting your arguments here.

The fact that you then try to misrepresent what I wrote, “we can feed the Christians to the lions, attempt to kill all Jews and all is good” indicates that you are unable to actually respond to what I actually did write. Your anger on this topic likely clouds your ability to reason and further undermines you. Your repeated use of logical fallacies compounds this.

Your claim that 210 million Muslims are terrorists is offensive and sad. The fact that your choice of source for this statistic comes a journalistic gem of a website called, “Islamic Threat Simplified” on a page entitled, Islamic Evil Simplified”, points to your inability or unwillingness to identify objective sources. It also exposes your indulgence in hate porn. Your hate porn is not welcome here.
For a better gauge of the actual number of Jihadists:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/26/opinion/bergen-schneider-how-many-jihadists/
This article estimates the number as being 106,000, “on the high end”. Based on a global population of around 1.6 billion Muslims, that translates into 0.0063%, rather than the 7% that you quoted from your hate site.

You cited a few articles describing terrorist acts, including some from credible sources. However, no one is denying that terrorism (including that perpetrated by non-Muslims) exists. The problem occurs when you overgeneralise to try to scare people into believing that we should fear a significant portion of a group because of it, when the evidence demonstrates that only a very small percentage of that group are actually terrorists.

Ultimately, experience has shown that those who promoted hatred and/or fear against groups of immigrants with the type of generalisation you are making, have been proven to be on the wrong side of history. The fear/mistrust/intolerance against waves of Irish, Asian, Jewish, Black and other immigrants was eventually exposed as being unfounded and discriminatory. Those attitudes were born out of ignorance and the perception that there was a race, ethnicity or religious group that was inherently evil/dishonest/dangerous/dirty or so on. You and I start with different premises. My premise is that Muslims, just like any Christian Francophones or Anglophones are mostly all peaceful people, but that there are some nuts in the bunch as well. And there are also a few bigots.

Oz
 

jalimon

I am addicted member
Dec 28, 2015
6,268
162
63
This article estimates the number as being 106,000, “on the high end”. Based on a global population of around 1.6 billion Muslims, that translates into 0.0063%, rather than the 7% that you quoted from your hate site.

All it took for 2001 attack is 21 of them.

My premise is that Muslims, just like any Christian Francophones or Anglophones are mostly all peaceful people, but that there are some nuts in the bunch as well. And there are also a few bigots.

I think that is true. The problem relies on a vast majority of Muslims and Islamic country being very weak to blame their own people. The solution will certainly not arise from us North America or Europe as we are only making matter worse. The solution can only come from Muslim to eradicate their bad apples.

Cheers,
 

laid_back_alex

Active Member
Jul 7, 2013
290
90
28
I applaud Oz-Man's level of intellect and his ability to reason with ignorance and bigotry and hate at the highest level with such eloquence. The cognitive dissonance displayed by some people here is truly astonishing, to the point where they solely base their opinions on mainstream media and hate articles that go in line with their dissonance.

This chart gives a better visual of the actual numbers stated in the article in the previous post: http://wp.production.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/files/2015/11/Muslims-vs-terrorists.jpg

I also suggest watching this speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy9tNyp03M0

Also, for those who are worried and scared shitless about Sharia Law due to a lack of education, word of mouth by ignorants and mainstream media, watch this video starting at 36:13 as it explains what Sharia Law actually is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UZHiJY91Vs

Obviously I'd recommend to watch the whole thing along with the 2 other parts as mentioned in my previous post.

Jalimon, Muslims all over the world and Muslim scholars all over the world have spoken against terrorism since day one of 9/11. They continue do to so every day, it's just not being mediatised.

This page focuses on condemnations of the 9/11 terrorist attacks and other terrorist incidents since then as well as of terrorism in general. It is not a complete listing of all condemnations written or spoken by Muslims but is intended to provide a representative sample. It has often been claimed in the media that Muslims are "silent" and do not condemn terrorism. This page is intended to refute that claim. Muslims have not been silent. Not even close.
http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/kamran-pasha/the-big-lie-about-muslim_b_188991.html
 

Mohamed

New Member
Nov 12, 2017
69
1
0
Excellent comeback johnhenrygalt! Level of education is not at all a good predictor for terrorism.
 

bratislava1

Member
Jul 4, 2012
30
13
8
Celui qui pense qu'il y a 210 millions de terroristes musulman dans le monde en faisant un raccourcis (aussi petit que son étroitesse d'esprit) ne mérite pas plus de discussion que cela. Bientôt il va nous parler de la menace nucléaire de l'Iran. Sa ne sert a rien de discuter quand le niveau n'est pas le même aussi prétentieux que cela puisse paraître. (Mohamed Ali contre Britney Spears sur un ring de boxe, est ce logique? non. pas le même niveau) "Comprendra qui pourra"

Le postulat de départ est erroné.

Analyse le problème sérieusement, lis quelques livres et tu comprendras peut être un peu mieux.

1er conseil de lecture: the grand chessboard (Zbigniew Brzezinski).
 

laid_back_alex

Active Member
Jul 7, 2013
290
90
28
J'ai bien aimé la Comparaison de Mohamed Ali contre Britney Spears. Comique, mais vrai

Lire un livre? Malheureusement tu en demandes trop à ces gens la. Nous sommes rendus au point que des gens sont fiers de nous faire part de leur stupidité et de leur ignorance, par exemple en admettant qu'ils n'ont pas lu le Qu'ran, ne sont jamais allés en moyen orient et en citant des sources du genre Islamic Threat Simplified”, “Islamic Evil Simplified”. Je suis prêt a te parier que je peux te trouver des enfants du primaire qui sont capables d'argumenter mieux que certaines personnes ici. J'en ris, mais en même temps ''I shake my head'. Le pire est que ces gens la font exprès de ne pas consulter des sources crédibles, ils font exprès de ne pas lire le Qu'ran, ils font exprès de ne pas s'éduquer par peur d'apprendre la vérité et s'effondrer tellement qu'ils auront honte d'eux même. Ils réaliseront à quel point ils sont ridicules et a quel point ils ont tort et ne veulent pas faire face à cette honte donc ils continuent a cracher du n'importe quoi constamment. Quelqu'un de moindrement intelligent aurait le réflexe d'aller chercher l'information par soi-même plutôt que de citer des versets complètement hors contexte dans le but de rabaisser un peuple/religion suivie par près de 2 milliards de personnes à travers le monde.

Le manque de d'éducation, de pensée critique, de logique, de rationalisation et l'abondance de haine, de xénophobie, de brainwashing, de dissonance cognitive manifesté par certaines personnes me fascine.

Regardez nos prêtres Catholiques à travers le monde qui violent des enfants gauche à droite. Pope Francis a dit ''One in 50’ Catholic priests, bishops and cardinals is a paedophile''. J'en doute pas que la majorité des gens sont assez intelligents pour dénoncer les actes de ces prêtres plutôt que de dénoncer la religion Catholique au complet. Même si c'est une ''épidémie'', même si ça arrive à chaque jour, il semble que le monde entier est d'accord pour ne pas blâmer la religion Catholique pour ces actes. Le pire est que, ça serait tellement facile de blâmer la religion pour ces actes la si on utilise la même logique que les gens utilisent pour blâmer la religion Musulmane pour tout acte interdit... Spécialement que ce sont des prêtres!
Fermez les yeux 1 minute et imaginez donc un article dans le journal qui dit ''Imam accusé de harcèlement sexuel envers un mineur''. Disons que je peux gager ma vie qu'une proportion bien plus élevé de personnes vont tout de suite blâmer, critiquer, citer la religion Musulmane... et ce avec simplement 1 article qui mentionne 1 cas.... comparé a des milliers de prêtres qui le font au quotidien.

''Too often we... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.''
John F. Kennedy
 

Sol Tee Nutz

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2012
7,694
1,546
113
Look behind you.
Your claim that 210 million Muslims are terrorists is offensive and sad. The fact that your choice of source for this statistic comes a journalistic gem of a website called, “Islamic Threat Simplified” on a page entitled, Islamic Evil Simplified”, points to your inability or unwillingness to identify objective sources. It also exposes your indulgence in hate porn. Your hate porn is not welcome here.
For a better gauge of the actual number of Jihadists:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/26/opinion/bergen-schneider-how-many-jihadists/
This article estimates the number as being 106,000, “on the high end”. Based on a global population of around 1.6 billion Muslims, that translates into 0.0063%, rather than the 7% that you quoted from your hate site.

Oz

You use CNN as a reliable source, funny. Here is your author and the article it started from: Tariq Yusuf, American Muslim..https://www.quora.com/How-many-extr...th-the-wider-and-world-wide-Muslim-population

If you would have done some more reading in this same article you would have read.
I"m not an expert on this at all, but I did see this recent poll from the Pew Research Center : Views of ISIS Overwhelmingly Negative, which surveyed people's opinion of ISIS (Favorable, Unfavorable, Don't Know). It's overwhelmingly unfavorable but there are some countries where support is actually quite high (not a fringe percentage like 0.00006625%). In Nigeria favorable support for ISIS polls at 14%. In Malaysia 11% and in Pakistan only 28% of the people had a "unfavorable" opinion. The other 72% didn't know or had a favorable opinion. That's a scary large portion of the population of a country with nuclear weapons.

Excerpt from Muslim Statistics (This website seems to represent the numbers in a very biased way b.t.w, but they are quoting solid sources):

Despite only minorities in each nation surveyed holding clear support for ISIS, the large total population of the region translates into a massive number of ISIS supporters. For these 11 nation-states alone, the favorability ratings for ISIS reported by the Pew poll are indicative of at least 63 million ISIS supporters – and potentially upwards of 287 million if the undecided are included in the calculation. These numbers suggest there are, at a minimum, hundreds of millions of ISIS supporters worldwide.

Above is the article, below is my thoughts...

Yes, a very small group if you take percentages but no matter how you look at it two hundred million is a lot of people. With your mostly good people means 50% plus 1 as that is the most.
Name me one other group that is causing suicide bombings, car crashes, live executions ( brutal ones ).... ISIS, extreme right wing Muslims, 200 million of them in the world.

You are the prefect person in denial, shut out world news and pretend it will not happen here. If your bubble will not burst your kids will.

My hate porn is not welcome here, spoken like a true left wing socialist, not my beliefs, stay away from here, you are not welcome..... Fuck that is funny.

PS: Love the way you pick and chose your posts from left wing media.
 

Sol Tee Nutz

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2012
7,694
1,546
113
Look behind you.
Funny thing the internet.
Look long enough and you can find studies, news reports, to prove what ever you want.

None of it helps the innocent people that are killed by terrorists, and nothing helps all the innocent people that are blamed because these terrorists happen to be the same religion.

Too bad many live under a rainbow where these things do not happen here, ever. Bring in thousands more without proper background checks, only 7% will try and kill you, what the fuck is wrong with that.
 

Sol Tee Nutz

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2012
7,694
1,546
113
Look behind you.
3, no wait how about 9... nope I like the sound of 2.... thinking about it 4 is pretty cool.... final answer may be 5 unless it changes to 7. Oh fuck e-mail Justine and ask him.
 

Mohamed

New Member
Nov 12, 2017
69
1
0
3, no wait how about 9... nope I like the sound of 2.... thinking about it 4 is pretty cool.... final answer may be 5 unless it changes to 7. Oh fuck e-mail Justine and ask him.
How about 10,000? Good enough? Now let’s do some basic math (since your approach is probabilistic)7% (not sure where you’re getting that percentage but let’s say) of 10,000 is 700 therefore for every 10,000 new Muslim immigrant a national comes across, 700 of them is potentially a killer. Now what’s the current Canadian population? I would say about 37M. So, based on the current Canadian population, what are the probabilities that you, for instance, come across one of those 700 potential killers? Easy: 700 divided by 37,000,000 = 0,00001892 or not even two chances out of one hundred thousand that you come across one of those potential 700 killers and that doesn’t mean at all that he will actually kill you. Of course, I’m saying all this in jest and to mock a bit your probalistic analysis because, as it been in Canada since the very first immigrants came here, the number of victims of radical Islamist terrorism amounts to a grand total of ZERO.In other words, to get back to your savant 7% chance, the probabilities of being killed by an Islamist terrorist is historically and infinitely inferior to the global probabilities of being murdered in Canada.
 

laid_back_alex

Active Member
Jul 7, 2013
290
90
28
Sol Tee Nutz

You wrote: And no I do not mean all Muslims, just the radical ones and with 3 billion Muslims and with a 7% terrorist activity you have only 210 million terrorists.

Let me start off by correcting you in that there are at most 1.8 billion Muslims in the world right now, not 3 billion. Therefore my first point is that 7% of 1.8 billion is 126 million instead of 210 million that you mentioned. I understand this number is still high by your logic and that there are still 126 million ''terrorists'' but I had to point out this major inaccuracy.

Gallup carried out the biggest poll on this topic (50,000 Muslims in 35 countries). 93% of Muslims rejected suicide attacks/terrorism. Of the 7% that didn't reject them cited ''political reasons'' for their support for violence and not religious reasons

We asked how many people condone the 9/11 attacks and found that the vast majority condemn the attacks; only 7 percent thought it was completely justified. We also asked about attacks on civilians in general, the moral justifiability of sacrificing one's life, and about the moral justifiability of attacking civilians as an individual or as a military. We asked those 7 percent about why they felt the attacks were justified and, surprisingly, not a single one offered a religious justification. Instead, the responses sounded like revolutionaries; they talked about American imperialism. Instead of piety motivating their responses, it was politics.

That being said, my understanding of your logic is the following '' If a person supports ISIS for political reasons, that person is automatically terrorist''. Therefore, as per your citation earlier, 126 million Muslims are terrorists. Your quote
''And no I do not mean all Muslims, just the radical ones and with 3 billion Muslims and with a 7% terrorist activity you have only 210 million terrorists.''

And that is precisely where your argument falls off. You see, someone who supports a violent group for political reasons does not make them a terrorist per se. Same way someone who supports a murderer does not make him a murderer nor a potential murderer. You can call that person whatever you want... but not a murderer until he/she commits the crime of murder and is formally charged for it. I believe that you need to be objective and see it for what it is. You cannot call 126 million Muslims terrorists just because they have a favorable political opinion about what the ''terrorists'' are doing... I mean it's a free country, you can call them what you want but if you want people to take you seriously you have to use some sense. Therefore, the 0.0063% (around 100k of them) is the actual representation of how many ''terrorists'' actually are.

Also, It is important to note that ISIS is also viewed favourably by 7% of Nigerian Christians and 6% of Malaysian Buddhists. Their support is mostly for political reasons and has nothing to do with religion either. Now, if a Christian or a Buddhist supports ISIS, does that also make them terrorists? Or is it just if Muslims support it?

To sum it up, anyone (Muslim or not) that supports terrorism for political reasons (let's just add religious reasons for the sake of argument even if there are almost no reports of religious reasons for supporting these groups) based on a survey is not a terrorist. A person only becomes a terrorist once the act of terrorism has been committed... therefore your numbers actually, empirically, factually incorrect.

As Mohamed stated earlier, there have been no Islamist terrorist attack in Canada. Actually, quite the opposite where Muslims have been the victims... ah the irony.... Here is a list of other terrorist attacks and incidents in Canada:

-June 3, 2017: A Toronto-area woman allegedly attacks several people with a golf club at a Canadian Tire store and pulls a large knife out from her clothes. A month later, police lay terror-related charges against Rehab Dughmosh, 32, including attempted murder for the benefit of or in association with a terrorist group. She is set to undergo a court-ordered mental health assessment.

-Jan. 29, 2017: Six men were killed and others injured after a shooting at a Quebec City mosque. Alexandre Bissonnette, 27, is facing six counts of first-degree murder and five counts of attempted murder using a restricted firearm. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard both called the shooting a terrorist attack.

-Aug. 10, 2016: Police shoot and kill terror suspect Aaron Driver in Strathroy, Ont., after he made a video that suggested he was planning to detonate a homemade bomb in a Canadian city during morning or afternoon rush hour. Driver detonated an explosive device in a taxi cab before police killed him.

-Oct. 22, 2014: Parliament Hill security and police shoot and kill Michael Zehaf-Bibeau after he killed Canadian soldier Cpl. Nathan Cirillo at the National War Memorial and then stormed the Parliament Buildings.

-Oct. 20, 2014: Quebec police shoot and kill Martin Couture-Rouleau after he threatens an officer with a knife. Couture-Rouleau was wanted for running down warrant officer Patrice Vincent and another soldier in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu. Vincent died of his injuries.
 

Sol Tee Nutz

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2012
7,694
1,546
113
Look behind you.
Sol Tee Nutz

You wrote: And no I do not mean all Muslims, just the radical ones and with 3 billion Muslims and with a 7% terrorist activity you have only 210 million terrorists.



Gallup carried out the biggest poll on this topic (50,000 Muslims in 35 countries). 93% of Muslims rejected suicide attacks/terrorism. Of the 7% that didn't reject them cited ''political reasons'' for their support for violence and not religious reasons



That being said, my understanding of your logic is the following '' If a person supports ISIS for political reasons, that person is automatically terrorist''. Therefore, as per your citation earlier, 126 million Muslims are terrorists. Your quote
''And no I do not mean all Muslims, just the radical ones and with 3 billion Muslims and with a 7% terrorist activity you have only 210 million terrorists.''

And that is precisely where your argument falls off. You see, someone who supports a violent group for political reasons does not make them a terrorist per se.I believe that you need to be objective and see it for what it is. You cannot call 126 million Muslims terrorists just because they have a favorable political opinion about what the ''terrorists'' are doing...

Also, It is important to note that ISIS is also viewed favourably by 7% of Nigerian Christians and 6% of Malaysian Buddhists. Their support is mostly for political reasons and has nothing to do with religion either. Now, if a Christian or a Buddhist supports ISIS, does that also make them terrorists? Or is it just if Muslims support it?

As Mohamed stated earlier, there have been no Islamist terrorist attack in Canada. Actually, quite the opposite where Muslims have been the victims... ah the irony.... Here is a list of other terrorist attacks and incidents in Canada:-June 3,

.

First off my error for the 3 mil Muslims

Second... I do not really care if someone in a group kills someone for religious or political reason they still killed someone

Third, You can not say all Nigerians are Christians and all Malaysians are Buddhists, some could be Muslims, it would be like saying all Canadians are Catholic.

Fourth, If someone was a fan of Ted Bundy and thought he was cool do you not think he is a ticking time bomb, would you let him baby sit your kids?

Fifth, the no Islamic terrorist attacks in Canada. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lone_wolf_(terrorism)

Now personally I have no fear of a terrorist attack happening to me as the odds are very slim but that does not mean I should not care if someone else gets killed, the more you let in the higher the odds are and you can not disagree with that. Canada has been sheltered from these attacks due to the access into Canada had been limited due to a large body of water, if that ocean was not there we would be the same as the European countries.

Now my main concern has never been terrorist attacks which some have zeroed in on, my main concern is their ( right wing Muslims ) wanting to change Canada to please them, have you seen a group be it a race or religion that has caused as much shit as Muslims? Any Italians, Buddhists or whatever make demands to continue their lifestyle they left to continue here.

My also concern is the way they treat their women and how they see western women, second class and raping them is no issue https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/265873/refugee-rape-gangs-sweden-dawn-perlmutter

Our media cover up these incidents that have happened here, the refugee who raped women in Edmonton was a blip in the news but a story of a Muslim girl who claimed to have her head covering cut off was headline news.. and it was fake. Read news ( even though it is censored to stop Islamophobia ) in Europe and around the world, where right wing Muslims migrate... But wait, the extremists will not come to Canada, must be a fear of flying or hate boat rides or something.

Now we do not have a major problem, give it some years... But hey, in your mind you are safe and have no concerns, enjoy the day.
 

hungry101

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2007
5,857
552
113
It is amazing to me that liberals come out of the woodwork when someone objects to mass immigration of Muslims. Liberals want them here in the worst way and everyone is a bigot that does not agree. Liberals would like to see 1/2 of Aleppo in North America, no questions asked. Muslims treat their women like possessions and make them live their adult lives under bed sheets, stone to death women that have been raped etc. and a liberals want to embrace every aspect of their cultural diversity and they find their culture fascinating. Meanwhile, a white North American heterosexual male calls a women "Hey Toots" and the same liberal, do-gooders will demand that he is immediately fired and that he is brought up on charges for sexual harassment. They will spontaneously gather to block traffic dressed as life sized pussies because the white guy said "Hey toots. That's a nice ass." Nice double standard.

Why don't we do this. For every Syrian that is allowed to immigrate into Saudi Arabia, the West will take 1 vetted middle-east immigrant?
 

Sol Tee Nutz

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2012
7,694
1,546
113
Look behind you.
These Liberals like to be reactive instead of proactive. Best to say holy fuck now what do we do like Germany is doing instead of finding a solution now. And yes, they do have double standards and prefer to argue that nothing is wrong even though world news says otherwise.
 

Mohamed

New Member
Nov 12, 2017
69
1
0
These Liberals like to be reactive instead of proactive. Best to say holy fuck now what do we do like Germany is doing instead of finding a solution now. And yes, they do have double standards and prefer to argue that nothing is wrong even though world news says otherwise.
What’s wrong, actually, is rational and pragmatic thinking has practically vanished from the political discourse, leaving all the room to irrational fears, bipartisan logic and identity insecurities. Rings a bell?
 

bratislava1

Member
Jul 4, 2012
30
13
8
Why don't we do this. For every Syrian that is allowed to immigrate into Saudi Arabia, the West will take 1 vetted middle-east immigrant?

C'est ce que je disait. Quand tu ne connais pas les faits ne sort pas des commentaires du genre.

Maintenant assis-toi et prend des notes.

Le nombre de réfugié syrien admis en Arabie-Saoudite est de 0 selon les medias et quelques think tanks américain. (Brookings en premier) Hors ces statistiques donne le nombre de réfugiés selon un critère très précis: la convention 1951 de l'ONU et le protocole 1967. Le "problème" c'est que l'Arabie Saoudite ne fait pas parti des protocoles de l'ONU et donc ne compte aucun réfugié par le fait même.

Maintenant venant en a la réalité des choses. Combien de syrien fuyant la guerre ont été accueillis en Arabie-Saoudite? Il y a au bas mots 500,000 refugiés syriens en Arabie saoudite selon le UNHCR (hors convention 1951). (UN High Commission of Refugees) Sans oublier les millions (au moins 4 millions) de réfugiés accueillis dans les pays voisins (liban, egypte, jordanie...) tous musulmans.

Poursuivons mantenant avec le nombre de réfugiés syriens accueillis aux USA et Canada. Prenons le plafond de 50,000 et on le double pour être sur. Non! On le triple 150,000 réfugies.

Why don't we do this. For every Syrian that is allowed to immigrate into Saudi Arabia, the West will take 1 vetted middle-east immigrant?

500,000 - 150,000 = 350,000

Par ta "logique" tu viens de faire admettre 350,000 refugiés syriens.

Comprendra qui pourra.
 

Sol Tee Nutz

Well-Known Member
Apr 29, 2012
7,694
1,546
113
Look behind you.
What’s wrong, actually, is rational and pragmatic thinking has practically vanished from the political discourse, leaving all the room to irrational fears, bipartisan logic and identity insecurities. Rings a bell?

Really? Justine Trudeau a rational thinker? Funny.
Do you not read what is happening to the countries that Muslims walked into, made it their home base, not the pleasant way it used to be anymore. Any rational politician would think about its own citizens first and then after all is good allow people in who want to become Canadians
That POS we have made it a policy that for a group to get federal miney they must agree with his stance on abortions, it they disagree they get no funding and at the same time he caters to the Muslims, illegals and refugees. Rational? Sounds fucked up to me.
 

Mohamed

New Member
Nov 12, 2017
69
1
0
Really? Justine Trudeau a rational thinker? Funny.
Do you not read what is happening to the countries that Muslims walked into, made it their home base, not the pleasant way it used to be anymore. Any rational politician would think about its own citizens first and then after all is good allow people in who want to become Canadians
That POS we have made it a policy that for a group to get federal miney they must agree with his stance on abortions, it they disagree they get no funding and at the same time he caters to the Muslims, illegals and refugees. Rational? Sounds fucked up to me.
From your reply I can tell that you're having difficulties processing what you read and that you are generally misinformed.

First of all, where did I say that Trudeau is a rational thinker? Nowhere! So why do you even bring him up?

But since you brought him up, you can obsess all you want over Trudeau (who btw is not getting my vote in the next elections), the fact remains that Canada's policies for refugees status are not guided by Trudeau but rather by two documents Canada signed on June 4th 1969, i.e. the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. In addition, in 1970, the Trudeau (father) government issued the "Guideline for Determination of Eligibility for Refugees Status".

So, in short, Canada's policies, guidelines and protocols in regards to refugees status under Trudeau son, Trudeau father, Turner, Mulroney, Campbell, Chrétien, Martin and Harper were invarialibly guided by those same 3 documents. Same rules, same narratives, same criterions for eligibility and so forth - It's definitely not a "Justine" thing.

Also, since you seem to ignore it, there exists in Canada NO STATUS OF LEGALITY OR ILLEGALITY FOR REFUGEES.

I won't bother answering your comment on abortion which is unrelated and makes no sense (speaking of rational thinking)
 
Toronto Escorts