• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Canada on the Brink of Incorporating Islamic Speech Codes

beefheart said:
You read white supremacist rantings and you post from their sites.

You should be ashamed.
Click to expand...

It will be a cold day in Hell when you see me ashamed of anything I have said about Islam.
 
According to the text of the petition,

"Recently an infinitesimally small number of extremist individuals have conducted terrorist activities while claiming to speak for the religion of Islam. Their actions have been used as a pretext for a notable rise of anti-Muslim sentiments in Canada; and these violent individuals do not reflect in any way the values or the teachings of the religion of Islam. In fact, they misrepresent the religion. We categorically reject all their activities. They in no way represent the religion, the beliefs and the desire of Muslims to co-exist in peace with all peoples of the world. We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia".

While a motion will have no legal effect unless it is passed as a bill, the symbolic effect of the Canadian parliament unanimously condemning "all forms of Islamophobia," without making the slightest attempt at defining what is meant by "Islamophobia," can only be described, at best, as alarming.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9296/canada-parliament-condemns-free-speech
Click to expand...

Based on a petition filed by a Muslim Canadian, a motion was passed to condemn Islamophobia. However, the motion will have no legal effect unless it is passed as a bill and it's merely a symbolic gesture to condemn "all forms of Islamophobia".
 
Tigerace117 said:
And how many medals and honors did the men of the 442nd earn again? More than enough to shut the mouths of the bigots who thought like you do.

Twenty one members received the Medal of Honor. the unit received eight Presidential Unit Citations, including five in one month. It was the most decorated unit for it's size and length of service in the history of American warfare.



So yes, putting people in internment camps was idiotic. I'd like to think we learn from history, dont you?
Click to expand...

I'd just like to think, period. Hurts my head too much, though. Almost everything and everyone must seem idiotic to someone as brilliant and comprehending as you. No doubt the rest of us benighted folk, lacking your great intellect and education, just can't learn the truth about these things--however self-evident it is to you. I realize how it must frustrate someone to whom all things are so clear to have us lesser lights question him, and it makes me better understand the peevishness chronically on display in your posts.

The great accomplishments of the 442d RCT are not evidence of the loyalty of the many other tens of thousands of people of Japanese ancestry who were relocated away from our West Coast in 1942. The Niihau incident, by itself, was enough to raise serious doubts about whose side persons of Japanese ancestry living on U.S. territory would take if faced with the choice.

The very day of the Pearl Harbor attack, two of only a handful of Japanese speakers living among several hundred people on a remote Hawaiian plantation island began to cozy up to a Japanese pilot who had ditched his plane there, as prearranged, after it was damaged during the attack. He had a big problem--one of the alert natives had waited until he wandered away from the plane, and then taken the radio out of it and hidden it. The pilot needed that radio to contact a submarine that had been standing by off Niihau (which the Japanese mistakenly had believed to be uninhabited, and therefore a good place for any carrier aircraft in distress to make an emergency landing) to pick up any pilots who had had to ditch there.

As time passed, this man became more desperate to get away. When everyone had come to the island's weekly get-together, he began waving his pistol and threatening to use it if his radio was not returned. And when he did, the Japanese couple who had taken him into their house sided with him, brandishing the only other firearm on the island--a shotgun. But the plan went south when the pilot seized a woman, because as she struggled with him, her husband rushed in an stabbed him to death. Seeing that his treachery had failed, the Japanese husband then turned the shotgun on himself.

I am sure this incident made President Roosevelt wonder how many other persons of Japanese ancestry living near the Pacific were disloyal, particularly the thousands who were dual citizens. The fact a person living here was a citizen of both the U.S. and Japan was by itself a very good reason to question his loyalty to this country.
 
Last edited:
matchlight said:
I'd just like to think, period. Hurts my head too much, though. Almost everything and everyone must seem idiotic to someone as brilliant and comprehending as you. No doubt the rest of us benighted folk, lacking your great intellect and education, just can't learn the truth about these things--however self-evident it is to you. I realize how it must frustrate someone to whom all things are so clear to have us lesser lights question him, and it makes me better understand the peevishness chronically on display in your posts.

The great accomplishments of the 442d RCT are not evidence of the loyalty of the many other tens of thousands of people of Japanese ancestry who were relocated away from our West Coast in 1942. The Niihau incident, by itself, was enough to raise serious doubts about whose side persons of Japanese ancestry living on U.S. territory would take if faced with the choice.

The very day of the Pearl Harbor attack, two of only a handful of Japanese speakers living among several hundred people on a remote Hawaiian plantation island began to cozy up to a Japanese pilot who had ditched his plane there, as prearranged, after it was damaged during the attack. He had a big problem--one of the alert natives had waited until he wandered away from the plane, and then taken the radio out of it and hidden it. The pilot needed that radio to contact a submarine that had been standing by off Niihau (which the Japanese mistakenly had believed to be uninhabited, and therefore a good place for any carrier aircraft in distress to make an emergency landing) to pick up any pilots who had had to ditch there.

As time passed, this man became more desperate to get away. When everyone had come to the island's weekly get-together, he began waving his pistol and threatening to use it if his radio was not returned. And when he did, the Japanese couple who had taken him into their house sided with him, brandishing the only other firearm on the island--a shotgun. But the plan went south when the pilot seized a woman, because as she struggled with him, her husband rushed in an stabbed him to death. Seeing that his treachery had failed, the Japanese husband then turned the shotgun on himself.

I am sure this incident made President Roosevelt wonder how many other persons of Japanese ancestry living near the Pacific were disloyal, particularly the thousands who were dual citizens. The fact a person living here was a citizen of both the U.S. and Japan was by itself a very good reason to question his loyalty to this country.
Click to expand...

Well, it seems obvious that thinking hurts your head judging by your posts. And clearly, despite the sarcasm, what you said in the first paragraph is absolutely true. Your average American has little to no understanding of history, especially world history. That's why you have people screaming about "oppression" every five minutes--- because at no time in American history has the majority of the American population experienced actual oppression, the kind of stuff which drove people here in the first place.m

Gee, a whole two people. There were about two dozen Brits who joined an SS unit. By your standards I suppose we should have tossed all the British people in the US into camps. After all, clearly the fact that other British people had joined the SS, and the fact that they were British and living here, means they couldn't be trusted.....right?

Roosevelt shamelessly pandered to anti Asian(not just anti Japanese; your average American mob circa 1941 was notorious for not being able to tell the difference between Chinese and Japanese people) sentiment on the West Coast.

As the actions of the men of the 442nd proved rather decisively, where there was a tiny handful of smoke, there was no fire.
 
coldjoint said:
What is the time frame? 1 year, two?
Click to expand...

Canada adopting Sharia law? In a year or two?
Good Lord, man, seriously? You know what 'Sharia' means?
One year, no odds. No, these odds- you pay me $100 Cdn., I pay you $100 US. We're talking about adopting laws based on the Quran, right?
Jesus, how could you think this is a possibility?
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Well, we finally know for sure that ColdJoint is a white supremacist.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself. I do not know any such thing, or even suspect it. But I am pretty sure that a lack of game is a common reason why some posters here rely on directly calling other posters unflattering names. They seem to imagine no one will realize what a cheap substitute for facts and reasoning it is. They may even imagine no one notices that the people who pull this weak stunt tend to have a similar political philosophy.
 
Grand Mal said:
Canada adopting Sharia law? In a year or two?
Good Lord, man, seriously? You know what 'Sharia' means?
One year, no odds. No, these odds- you pay me $100 Cdn., I pay you $100 US. We're talking about adopting laws based on the Quran, right?
Jesus, how could you think this is a possibility?
Click to expand...

We are talking about restricting speech that offends Islam, which is certainly part of Sharia. I think you better brush up on Sharia.
 
CMPancake said:
Yes, what better way to protect our Western Values than to contradict them completely.
Click to expand...

You confuse defending our values with protecting them. Letting in possible terrorists shows we value stupidity.
 
coldjoint said:
We are talking about restricting speech that offends Islam, which is certainly part of Sharia. I think you better brush up on Sharia.
Click to expand...

Yeah, okay. Not Sharia per se, just a bit of it. You say Canada will, in the next year, outlaw speech that offends Islam. That right? Okay, but we need to define terms. Let's let a Muslim state define 'speech that offends Islam'. Is that Sharia enough for you? I'll google, you google, we'll define 'speech that offends Islam according to Sharia.
 
Grand Mal said:
Yeah, okay. Not Sharia per se, just a bit of it. You say Canada will, in the next year, outlaw speech that offends Islam. That right? Okay, but we need to define terms. Let's let a Muslim state define 'speech that offends Islam'. Is that Sharia enough for you? I'll google, you google, we'll define 'speech that offends Islam according to Sharia.
Click to expand...

Muslim states define zero. The Koran and Hadith plainly state any speech insulting Islam or Muhammad can be punished with death. If you have not realized Muslims are offended quite easily. Will Canada put people to death, no, but it will be fining them and jailing them in the near future much like European countries.
 
shrubnose said:
Some of Trump's minions are trying to promote Islamophobia.

Will they be able to install a total ban on Muslims entering the USA?

Lets wait and see what happens in the next 4 years.
Click to expand...

I haven't run across any of those minions myself and my Muslim neighbors seem to be coexisting with all of us non Muslims quite amicably, even though I know of several who voted for Donald Trump. I don't know who our Muslim neighbors voted for.

As Trump has never seriously suggested banning all Muslims but as he has explained, he would like to ban those coming from countries sponsoring terrorism and also those coming as refugees until there is some way to find out who and what these people are before we turn them loose into our society. Given that fact that most--not all but most--organized and spontaneous terrorism in modern times is being committed by Muslim terrorists, I can't find much fault with that point of view.
 
matchlight said:
I'd just like to think, period. Hurts my head too much, though. Almost everything and everyone must seem idiotic to someone as brilliant and comprehending as you. No doubt the rest of us benighted folk, lacking your great intellect and education, just can't learn the truth about these things--however self-evident it is to you. I realize how it must frustrate someone to whom all things are so clear to have us lesser lights question him, and it makes me better understand the peevishness chronically on display in your posts.

The great accomplishments of the 442d RCT are not evidence of the loyalty of the many other tens of thousands of people of Japanese ancestry who were relocated away from our West Coast in 1942. The Niihau incident, by itself, was enough to raise serious doubts about whose side persons of Japanese ancestry living on U.S. territory would take if faced with the choice.

The very day of the Pearl Harbor attack, two of only a handful of Japanese speakers living among several hundred people on a remote Hawaiian plantation island began to cozy up to a Japanese pilot who had ditched his plane there, as prearranged, after it was damaged during the attack. He had a big problem--one of the alert natives had waited until he wandered away from the plane, and then taken the radio out of it and hidden it. The pilot needed that radio to contact a submarine that had been standing by off Niihau (which the Japanese mistakenly had believed to be uninhabited, and therefore a good place for any carrier aircraft in distress to make an emergency landing) to pick up any pilots who had had to ditch there.

As time passed, this man became more desperate to get away. When everyone had come to the island's weekly get-together, he began waving his pistol and threatening to use it if his radio was not returned. And when he did, the Japanese couple who had taken him into their house sided with him, brandishing the only other firearm on the island--a shotgun. But the plan went south when the pilot seized a woman, because as she struggled with him, her husband rushed in an stabbed him to death. Seeing that his treachery had failed, the Japanese husband then turned the shotgun on himself.

I am sure this incident made President Roosevelt wonder how many other persons of Japanese ancestry living near the Pacific were disloyal, particularly the thousands who were dual citizens. The fact a person living here was a citizen of both the U.S. and Japan was by itself a very good reason to question his loyalty to this country.
Click to expand...

However unjust it was to Japanese citizens who indeed were just living here and not part of any organized effort, it isn't difficult to see how Roosevelt and his advisers could not know who was friend and who was foe and felt it their duty to take drastic precautions.

We had the same phenomenon in the days/weeks immediately following 9/11. It was shortly after 9/11 that my husband was working a very large loss involving some very valuable Persian and oriental rugs. Unable to find anybody locally with the expertise to appraise them, he flew in an Iranian American expert from L.A. The man arrived without incident but said his wife was terrified for him to fly, afraid he would be assaulted or arrested because of all the suspicion following 9/11. And indeed the whole country was pretty much on near lock down for awhile because the government had no way to know if the guys involved in the initial attack were the whole bunch or if other attacks were planned and still to be executed.
 
coldjoint said:
Muslim states define zero. The Koran and Hadith plainly state any speech insulting Islam or Muhammad can be punished with death. If you have not realized Muslims are offended quite easily. Will Canada put people to death, no, but it will be fining them and jailing them in the near future much like European countries.
Click to expand...

Lookit. We're not talking about offending Muslims. We're talking about speech that offends Islam. That's a specific charge under Sharia, and you're betting that Canada makes it illegal in the next year.
I'll bring you a definition of it, according to Sharia, and then we have a bet.
 
coldjoint said:
Tell us what was not factual concerning Islam in that letter, and prove it. I'll wait.
Click to expand...

1) Your letter was written by a white supremacist.
2) Burden-of-proof reversal is a logical fallacy.
3) :lamo

This is great.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
1) Your letter was written by a white supremacist.
2) Burden-of-proof reversal is a logical fallacy.
3) :lamo

This is great.
Click to expand...

Do you know his name?
 
Grand Mal said:
Lookit. We're not talking about offending Muslims. We're talking about speech that offends Islam. That's a specific charge under Sharia, and you're betting that Canada makes it illegal in the next year.
I'll bring you a definition of it, according to Sharia, and then we have a bet.
Click to expand...

We will have a bet when I say we do.
 
coldjoint said:
Where is your so called definition for Sharia?
Click to expand...

Not Sharia, 'speech that offends Islam' under Sharia. What you said Canada would outlaw within a year.
I'll make time to look it up tomorrow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom