The Toronto Story could Be Huge (Up Mahrams Ass)

[Ricter]

You guys are scared, and consequently, angry. That's understandable. But all that emotion does not change the simple fact that even if 1000 times as many Muslim men in Toronto, as they just caught, are in the "temptable by jihad" category, they are still a minority of the entire Muslim population in Toronto, and this relationship is true most everywhere else as well.

So quit talking about Muslims as if you mean all Muslims. All Muslims are no more guilty of pursuing jihad, than I'm guilty of waging war on abortionists because some in my religion are willing to bomb clinics.

I'm as eager as any man to jump into a good fight, actually, I'm more eager than most men I know, and Al Qeada will do just fine as the enemy of the month. But I'm not going on a hunt for all Muslims, just as I'm not going to round up everyone with black hair. Sorry, I'm just not that scared.

Edit: I caught the dig on socialism too, and it's just more black and white thinking on your part. I like certain socialistic aspects of my job, like paid sick days and paid holidays. Is the economy I work in, by virtue of having such socialistic components, therefore socialism? No.

 

[Pabst]

True enough. However if one were to ask a terrorist, why target civilians? The answer would likely be, "we don't have the means to fight militarily and besides civilians should be held accountable for the policies of the leaders they select." Certainly most Germans didn't favor invasion of those lands ceded in Versailles or for the execution of Jews yet it was the shopkeeper in Dresden who "paid the price." War is indiscriminate. How does one conquer thoughts and deeds that present danger without failing tests of morality?

You say even if 1000x of the accused are potential terrorists that the majority of Toronto Muslims are peaceful. Ok, I'll bite. But what's a nations "cut-off" point? Is it kosher if 1% want to kill us, 5%, 25%, at what point do the civilized respond in an uncivilized manner? Or do we turn the other cheek until it's too late? Has Israel not reached a point where although they know that many Palestinians are nonviolent one can't reasonably ascertain who is violent?

Quote from Ricter:

You guys are scared, and consequently, angry. That's understandable. But all that emotion does not change the simple fact that even if 1000 times as many Muslim men in Toronto, as they just caught, are in the "temptable by jihad" category, they are still a minority of the entire Muslim population in Toronto, and this relationship is true most everywhere else as well.

So quit talking about Muslims as if you mean all Muslims. All Muslims are no more guilty of pursuing jihad, than I'm guilty of waging war on abortionists because some in my religion are willing to bomb clinics.

I'm as eager as any man to jump into a good fight, actually, I'm more eager than most men I know, and Al Qeada will do just fine as the enemy of the month. But I'm not going on a hunt for all Muslims, just as I'm not going to round up everyone with black hair. Sorry, I'm just not that scared.

Edit: I caught the dig on socialism too, and it's just more black and white thinking on your part. I like certain socialistic aspects of my job, like paid sick days and paid holidays. Is the economy I work in, by virtue of having such socialistic components, therefore socialism? No.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Pabst:

...But what's a nations "cut-off" point? Is it kosher if 1% want to kill us, 5%, 25%, at what point do the civilized respond in an uncivilized manner? Or do we turn the other cheek until it's too late? Has Israel not reached a point where although they know that many Palestinians are nonviolent one can't reasonably ascertain who is violent?

Excellent questions, and ones we have to ask if we're to stand for principle. The problem is religious fundamentalism. It's not Islam, it's not guys with black hair, and it's not males, even if those attributes are prevalent amongst the current fundamentalists we're battling.

 

[jem]

Why must you say religious fundamentalism. Have the balls to say it is Muslim fundamentalism. And then state what percent of the Muslims in the Middle East qualify as Muslim fundamentalists.

 

[patoo]

Quote from bronks:



GWB and this administration will go down in history, after time, as one of the more forward looking and ballsy political machines in a long time.

....or the biggest baffoon

 

[Ricter]

Quote from jem:

Why must you say religious fundamentalism. Have the balls to say it is Muslim fundamentalism. And then state what percent of the Muslims in the Middle East qualify as Muslim fundamentalists.

Have the balls to take time and think. You're dead eventually anyway, no matter what you do, so spend the time.

Fundamentalism is the problem, whether religious, economic, or political.

 

[Cesko]

Muslims don't scare me at all comparing to ignorant Latinos getting their voting rights and then voting for WORLD WORKERS PARTY like people.There are just too many of them and they procreate much easier than Whites. That's how many advanced cultures ended up in history. Being absorbed.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Cesko:

Muslims don't scare me at all comparing to ignorant Latinos getting their voting rights and then voting for WORLD WORKERS PARTY like people.There are just too many of them and they procreate much easier than Whites. That's how many advanced cultures ended up in history. Being absorbed.

What's a Latino? What if they have really light skin, are they then white?

Just trying to understand the premises behind your reasoning, in case anyone ever tries to attack it.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Let's say 1% of all drivers on the road are drunk drivers, who may kill you.

Do you:

1. Stop driving?
2. Start drinking and driving too?
3. Ignore the problem because America is a country that likes to drink, and the alcohol lobby is just too damn strong?
4. Enact legislation requiring all vehicles be fitted/retrofitted with devices that connect the ignition to a built-in breathalyzer?
5. Give each drunk driver the death penalty?


How come we have a war against drugs, against terrorism, when alcohol abuse, directly or indirectly kills hundreds of thousands each year?

Yes, this point is 100% strawman, but it does go to show that in this country we are really not about elimination of risk of life, or injury to life, we are about control of the lifestyle we choose, which has everything to do with the selling and marketing of "legal" means of risk....


How about this, ala Ann Couter:

Drunk Drivers: Convert them to sobriety, or kill them....

In my mind, the terrorist have won already, because they have generated sufficient fear to control behavior, start unnecessary wars, put us in debt, and re-elect moron presidents....

Quote from Pabst:

True enough. However if one were to ask a terrorist, why target civilians? The answer would likely be, "we don't have the means to fight militarily and besides civilians should be held accountable for the policies of the leaders they select." Certainly most Germans didn't favor invasion of those lands ceded in Versailles or for the execution of Jews yet it was the shopkeeper in Dresden who "paid the price." War is indiscriminate. How does one conquer thoughts and deeds that present danger without failing tests of morality?

You say even if 1000x of the accused are potential terrorists that the majority of Toronto Muslims are peaceful. Ok, I'll bite. But what's a nations "cut-off" point? Is it kosher if 1% want to kill us, 5%, 25%, at what point do the civilized respond in an uncivilized manner? Or do we turn the other cheek until it's too late? Has Israel not reached a point where although they know that many Palestinians are nonviolent one can't reasonably ascertain who is violent?

 

[bronks]

Quote from patoo:

....or the biggest baffoon

Quite possibly. But you know what, I love my country, I like the way it's being run for the most part and if uncle sam called me back into service and sent me to Iraq, or where ever, I would go.