Muslim Terrorists killing soldiers inside Canada
- Thread starter gwb-trading
- Start date
One thing that is noticeable from growing up in T.O. is that it is much more of a melting pot, and people arent waiting to be perpetually offended about any comments on their homeland like in the states.
I remember one of my jobs while going to U of T was in a timeshare sales office, and the office had every race, age, and gender covered, because they always wanted to match people by race for the presentations. It was funny because amongst the salesmen everybody in the room made fun of the stereotypes (which were mostly accurate) by race. I was a 22 year old punk kid, and one of my best friends in that office was this older indian guy named Ilyas, he was one of the closers, and he taught me how to sell Indian people.
From living in both the states and canada, what ive noticed is that people are alot more willing to joke around and they dont have their back up about their race/culture, where as in the states people just want to jump down your fucking throat if you even bring the topic up.
I remember one of my jobs while going to U of T was in a timeshare sales office, and the office had every race, age, and gender covered, because they always wanted to match people by race for the presentations. It was funny because amongst the salesmen everybody in the room made fun of the stereotypes (which were mostly accurate) by race. I was a 22 year old punk kid, and one of my best friends in that office was this older indian guy named Ilyas, he was one of the closers, and he taught me how to sell Indian people.
From living in both the states and canada, what ive noticed is that people are alot more willing to joke around and they dont have their back up about their race/culture, where as in the states people just want to jump down your fucking throat if you even bring the topic up.
Radical Islam is like a world wide plague. It is not confined to a single country, or even a region. Sadly we cannot bomb it out of existence. We can only kill'em where we find them. Unfortunately we're not even doing that. Worse, we're not even identifying them as terrorists in many cases. We might offend someone. Consequently the threat of radical Islam advancing in number and power grows greater every single day.
Numerous posts on this forum would be illegal in Canada. Specifically, the more obvious racism and bigotry. Several posters on here could be charged criminally if anyone thought it was worthwhile. The site owner would be required by law to identify the posters who were posting the hatred.
The US could learn a lot from Canada, you'd be a less violent, safer country with less hatred.
In fact, gun control IS effective as any proper look at crime statistics in Canada and the US would support.
Most illegal guns here are sourced from the US, so unfortunately we are not immune from some adverse side effects from your society. Even given that, our crime rates are very much smaller then the US and in recent years violent crime rates in Canadian major cities have been dropping.
It might be more beneficial for you to realize at some point that doing something just because it's the way America "has always done it" doesn't make it the best path. If you want high crime rates, do your best to arm as many citizens as possible and give them freedom to carry almost anywhere. It's a proven formula.
MSNBC's Alex Wagner: 'Distressing' Canadian Rampage Seen as 'Terrorist Act'
By Mark Finkelstein | October 23, 2014 | 6:10 PM EDT
Share it Tweet it#grayscale'); -webkit-filter: grayscale(100%); float: left; margin-right: 4px; background: url(http://ct1.addthis.com/static/r07/widget/img/widget008.old.32.icons.png) 0px -160px no-repeat;">#grayscale'); -webkit-filter: grayscale(100%); position: absolute !important; top: auto !important; width: 1px !important; height: 1px !important; overflow: hidden !important;">More Sharing Services
0
shares
On her MSNBC show today, Alex Wagner found it "surprising" and "distressing" that some were seeing the attack on the Canadian Parliament by a Muslim convert as a "terrorist act." Wagner was joined by CAIR's Nihad Awad who said that anyone claiming "that there is an Islamic component" in the attack shows either "ignorance or hostility" toward Islam.
Another guest claimed the attack was "much more like ordinary crime." Right. No Islamic extremism here. Zehaf-Bibeau was probably just planning to get the Members of Parliament to empty their pockets.
Why does the liberal media have such an apparently vested interest in denying Islamic terrorism even when it stares them in the face? Back in 2010, NewsBusters noted an MSNBC host "hoping" that the Times Square bomber would not turn out to have ties to Islam. He of course did.
Note the fair-and-balanced panel assembled by Wagner (whose recent wedding President Obama attended): the Executive Director of CAIR, and someone whose major claim to fame is defending Guantanamo prisoners.
UPDATE: Alex might be cross with Chris Matthews. On Hardball tonight, Matthews spoke of the attacker's "jihadist purpose." Distressing!
NIHAD AWAD: I'm saddened to see that many media commentators and politicians are using the Islamic point here by saying he converted to Islam, he reverted to Islam, that there is an Islamic component in it, and I believe this shows either ignorance or lack of information, lack of knowledge about Islam itself. Had the religion of this individual been not Islam, it would not have been an issue.
. . .
ALEX WAGNER: There are a few folks who in the aftermath of this have said well wait a second, there is a difference between someone who is a terrorist and someone who is a deranged, unhappy person with a gun and yet it has been surprising, I think, to see even Josh Earnest at the White House say, considered it a terrorist act and I guess from a sort of constitutional, civil liberties, rights perspective, how distressing is that?
SHAYANA KADIDAL: Right, right. It shows how far we are from any coherent notion of what the word terrorism means. It's really just a watch word for we should intervene overseas and, you know, a whole bunch of other things connected with that.
WAGNER: And the inextricable link between what some folks see as one religion and if that religion is associated in a violent act it then becomes an act of terror.
KADIDAL: Sure. Terrosism, Islam, overseas intervention, military response: right? Whereas this seems much more like ordinary crime, someone with a troubled past, a history of run-ins with the law and drug problems and so forth.
- See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-f...mpage-seen-terrorist-act#sthash.QKbD5JWt.dpuf
By Mark Finkelstein | October 23, 2014 | 6:10 PM EDT
Share it Tweet it#grayscale'); -webkit-filter: grayscale(100%); float: left; margin-right: 4px; background: url(http://ct1.addthis.com/static/r07/widget/img/widget008.old.32.icons.png) 0px -160px no-repeat;">#grayscale'); -webkit-filter: grayscale(100%); position: absolute !important; top: auto !important; width: 1px !important; height: 1px !important; overflow: hidden !important;">More Sharing Services
0
shares
On her MSNBC show today, Alex Wagner found it "surprising" and "distressing" that some were seeing the attack on the Canadian Parliament by a Muslim convert as a "terrorist act." Wagner was joined by CAIR's Nihad Awad who said that anyone claiming "that there is an Islamic component" in the attack shows either "ignorance or hostility" toward Islam.
Another guest claimed the attack was "much more like ordinary crime." Right. No Islamic extremism here. Zehaf-Bibeau was probably just planning to get the Members of Parliament to empty their pockets.
Why does the liberal media have such an apparently vested interest in denying Islamic terrorism even when it stares them in the face? Back in 2010, NewsBusters noted an MSNBC host "hoping" that the Times Square bomber would not turn out to have ties to Islam. He of course did.
Note the fair-and-balanced panel assembled by Wagner (whose recent wedding President Obama attended): the Executive Director of CAIR, and someone whose major claim to fame is defending Guantanamo prisoners.
UPDATE: Alex might be cross with Chris Matthews. On Hardball tonight, Matthews spoke of the attacker's "jihadist purpose." Distressing!
NIHAD AWAD: I'm saddened to see that many media commentators and politicians are using the Islamic point here by saying he converted to Islam, he reverted to Islam, that there is an Islamic component in it, and I believe this shows either ignorance or lack of information, lack of knowledge about Islam itself. Had the religion of this individual been not Islam, it would not have been an issue.
. . .
ALEX WAGNER: There are a few folks who in the aftermath of this have said well wait a second, there is a difference between someone who is a terrorist and someone who is a deranged, unhappy person with a gun and yet it has been surprising, I think, to see even Josh Earnest at the White House say, considered it a terrorist act and I guess from a sort of constitutional, civil liberties, rights perspective, how distressing is that?
SHAYANA KADIDAL: Right, right. It shows how far we are from any coherent notion of what the word terrorism means. It's really just a watch word for we should intervene overseas and, you know, a whole bunch of other things connected with that.
WAGNER: And the inextricable link between what some folks see as one religion and if that religion is associated in a violent act it then becomes an act of terror.
KADIDAL: Sure. Terrosism, Islam, overseas intervention, military response: right? Whereas this seems much more like ordinary crime, someone with a troubled past, a history of run-ins with the law and drug problems and so forth.
- See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-f...mpage-seen-terrorist-act#sthash.QKbD5JWt.dpuf
Thankfully, I can tell you to go fuck yourself.