Saturday, February 20, 2010

Fine, Upstanding Torontonians Who Just Happen To Be Muslims?

Well, "fine" and "upstanding" are subjective adjectives, of course.

Apparently NOT ALL Muslims are all that nice, nor fine, nor upstanding as citizens.

Some Muslims think that mass murder in the name of Allah is funny.

Some Muslims are racist.  And/or anti-Jewish.

Just reporting the truth, however inconvenient...

Hamid Mohammadi said media deception has caused hatred and fear of Muslims by presenting the "false belief that religion is incapable of running a country" and that Iran is therefore illegitimate. He said the result has been political "position changing" by Western countries against Muslims. He quoted an "American thinker," whose name did not come clearly through his strong accent, to the effect that "future wars are in the hands of the media, and their words are more effective than bullets."
Somehow, his brief remarks were among the least controversial at a conference about the "Media War on Islam" on Sunday at a Toronto-area Islamic centre, in which the Christmas Day underwear bomber was described as the tool of an Israeli plot; Barack Obama was referred to as "Mr. Black Man"; al-Qaeda was called "the figment of the imagination of the West"; and a video was shown that mocked 9/11 by putting the Muppet Show logo over slow-motion footage of the second plane's impact, with screams of terror for audio.

An apparent Islamic Supremacist speaking inside:
He said he told police that if protesters were to trespass, "I guarantee nothing," to which the audience responded with chants of "Allahu Akbar."
Chillingly ominous.  "I guarantee nothing", followed by "Allahu Akbar".  Chilling.

Now... imagine how the Left would react if a "white supremacist" had said something like that, and if the other supremacists in the obviously homogeneous audience had seig-heil saluted and chanted "Heil Hitler".  There's little difference, actually, especially when one is aware of the strong, historical ties between the Nazis and the Islamic Supremacists.

So please spare me all the warm-and-fuzzy propaganda about all or even most Muslims being meek and helpless, truthfully respectful of others' differences and necessarily always peaceful.  After all, we're told to believe that polite dogma without knowing whether it's true or false.  So let's go by hard evidence and keep looking at the actual words and actions of everyone, no exceptions, in society, and point out everyone who acts badly, and not be afraid to mention their "group membership", to shame them as representatives thereof, and to motivate the respectable members of their groups to take steps to quash such anti-social, hateful behavior.

Because far, far, far too many, including Muslims, have publicly demonstrated such shocking, and ominous, behavior.  And, obviously, as we've been told over and over, anti-social, racist, etc. behavior is harmful, so...  Whip out your fingers, folks, and point out the bad behavior wherever it happens, by whomever.  Don't even think about skin color, or whatever someone's wearing, be it a turban or a hijab or a Molson ballcap or whatever.  Focus on their behavior and their words.  They invite the finger-pointing!  Geez... people are so lucky nowadays that we don't pillory folks for anti-social behavior anymore (of course, some of 'em just get unconstitutionally jackbooted by so-called "human rights" commissars, simply for being rude or politcially incorrect)...

If it weren't for double standards, Progressives, the Media of Mass Deception and Muslims wouldn't have any standards at all.

It's time to point fingers at hatefully-acting Muslims, too.  TOO!

Read it all.

With a come-and-get-me-you-cowardly-bastards finger's-up salute to any lurking Liberal Fascists.


Balbulican said...

Let's cut to the chase here, Scenty.

Some conservative bloggers have called for a complete ban on immigration to Canada by ANY Muslims, and have proposed that Canadian Muslims be deported.

Do you support that view?

Canadian Sentinel said...

They're overreacting, though such overreaction must be understood and certainly mustn't be merely knee-jerk-condemned-and-dismissed-as-lunatic-fringe or ignored with closed-minded, politically-correct prejudice, and the root cause (too many Islamic Supremacist immigrants, not citizens, getting away with all kinds of dangerous, threatening things and still being allowed to stay and not be deported) of the overreaction must be understood, and dealt with more effectively and seriously than is the case today... if the cause of sentiment isn't taken seriously and dealt with

I would rather support much tighter rules for immigration, regardless of such things as whether one's a Muslim, a JudeoChristian, an atheist, whatever.

Like, if one's reasonably suspected as being from the IRA, then deny immigration to them. Ditto reasonable suspicion of being Al Qaeda, Chinese Communist Party spy, Russian GRU, etc., etc.

Common sense... duh!

But one thing's for sure- if there's any evidence suggesting that any individual might potentially be a threat, due to their past behavior or words spoken or associations with known threatening individuals or groups... that can and must necessarily be taken into account, and there must be more resources deployed to identify such disqualifying factors.

Like, do we want suspected neo-Nazis coming in here? 'Course not. Why the hell would we want ANY suspected-threatening individuals coming in? Should we say scary whities from Germany can't come in, but well-tanned folks from deep in Afghanistan can always come in, no questions asked, 'cause we mustn't ever, EVER question any single Muslim, ever, like we appropriately question palefaced non-Muslim immigration applicants?

Surely even you Progs have enough common sense to realize that it's insane to allow immigration of known Al Qaeda associates?

Would you allow a known Al-Qaeda member to immigrate, just because they're related to the Al-Qaeda Khadr family? I bet you, or a lot of your Proggy brethren, would! And then I'd have a problem with THAT.

Bottom line: Do Progs want ANY dangerously hateful people immigrating? Does being dark-skinned/Muslim/etc. make any apparent dangerously-hateful mentalities ok and acceptable vis-a-vis immigration, just because you Progs want to "support diversity at all costs"?

Some folks want to ban all Muslim immigration. I don't.

But I want our Free World governments to treat Islamic Supremacism and Islamization no less harshly than they've been treating white supremacism, neo-Nazism, Skinheadery, etc. Do you not share this sentiment? Be they Skinheads or Islamic Supremacists/Islamizationists, shall we crack down on them and make Islamic Supremacism/Islamizationism an unacceptable threat against the People, and subject to strict state action so as to "end the hate", as the proverb goes?

Canadian Sentinel said...

And, no, I don't want to see people being deported for simply being Muslim, of course not.

'Cause then we'd see Reformist Muslims being deported (thought I think they're citizens, but you know what I mean). And the loss of Reformists would be devastating, 'cause we need Reformists to lead the fight against Islamic Supremacism from within the ISlamic Community). WE'd also probably see the loss of members of Muslims Against Sharia, and that loss would be a bad thing, too. So, no, I don't support deporting anybody just for being Muslim- that's unacceptable.

But if one's not a citizen, and there's hard evidence of certain behaviors, sentiments, associations, etc, that makes one a perceived threat to public safety/national security, then it's appropriate to deport. Whether they're Muslim or not.

Canadian Sentinel said...

And I chuckle at your Pavlovian reactionarism to my post.

You automatically worry that I must necessarily be anti-Muslim just because I'm anti-Islamic-Supremacism, it seems.

Typically Prog.

Just sayin'.

'Cause you felt it necessary to do this inquisition, as if you were from the CHRC or something.

At least I know you're not Richard Warman...

Balbulican said...

"Surely even you Progs have enough common sense to realize that it's insane to allow immigration of known Al Qaeda associates?"

Yes, most of us do.

"And I chuckle at your Pavlovian reactionarism to my post. You automatically worry that I must necessarily be anti-Muslim just because I'm anti-Islamic-Supremacism, it seems. Typically Prog."

Are you being "funny" again? Because when I look at the sheer insanity of the mindset you attribute to "the left" in almost every post, I wonder what frickin'
planet you're getting those ideas from.

The people advocating a ban on Muslim immigration and the deportation of Canadian Muslims include Kathy Shaidle and Ghost of Flea - not minor bloggers. A couple of weeks ago Flea put up a post, which Shaidle linked to approvingly, suggesting that detention and internment similar to what was done during WW2 to the west-coast Japanese might not be a bad idea.

I admit there's a lot about blogging that I don't "get". But I don't see anything remotely funny about that kind of suggestion. And once things like that are suggested, they tend to enter the political conversation and become less and less shocking each time they're raised.

I'll bet you a hundred bucks that a fair number of the your friends at Jihad Watch would be entirely supportive of the idea.

I'm relieved to learn that you aren't.

Canadian Sentinel said...

You must admit that a "fair number" of YOUR friends are no less scary-sounding than those you allege to be mine.

Balbulican said...

Not one of my "friends" has ever advocated the banning of immigration, deportation, or forced internment of ANY nation or religion.

Canadian Sentinel said...

Nevertheless, you Prog-types do take many frightening stances, as a group, though not necessarily all individuals share their group's majority views.

Don't claim that you don't know what I'm talking about, because you and I both know the truth.

Canadian Sentinel said...

"And I chuckle at your Pavlovian reactionarism to my post. You automatically worry that I must necessarily be anti-Muslim just because I'm anti-Islamic-Supremacism, it seems. Typically Prog."

Are you being "funny" again? Because when I look at the sheer insanity of the mindset you attribute to "the left" in almost every post, I wonder what frickin'
planet you're getting those ideas from.

--And I wonder what frickin' planet you Progs get many of YOUR ideas from.

Pluto, perhaps?

And how come the Progressive Movement, including the Media of Mass Deception, is always trying to blame all sorts of bad stuff, like the leftist nutbar in the plane at the IRS, on the "Right" or, more specifically, the Tea Party folks?

You gotta admit that the movement to which you clearly belong and identify... it's quite wacko.

Balbulican said...

"Nevertheless, you Prog-types do take many frightening stances, as a group, though not necessarily all individuals share their group's majority views."

You can't have it both ways. You just told me not to tar you with Kathy Shaidle's beliefs? Then don't make assumptions about mine.

You talk about the "movement to which I clearly belong and identify", and characterize it as 'wacko'.

Uh...okay. If you feel free to attribute the beliefs of some "movement" to me, then I guess it's fair to attribute the most odious, racists views of the Shaidles and their ilk to you.

Which is it going to be, Steve? Do you want to talk about what I, Terry, really think, or about what you imagine some huge, scary, imaginary LEFTIST boogieman thinks?

Do you want me to talk to you about what YOU believe, or about what the worst racists and crazies on the right believe?

Which will it be?

Canuckguy said...

"I wish I knew how to quit you"
Balbul to Sentinel

Canadian Sentinel said...

I have no idea what on earth he's getting his panties all wedgied up about...

But that's the nature of Progs. Taking everything personally when it wasn't really so much made out to be.

I just want Progs to review why on earth they gravitate towards that movement if it's so screwy and extreme. Perhaps they should distance themselves if they don't want to be perceived as screwy and extreme themselves. And they should stop bashing the Mainstream, too, you know, the majority, to whom the Progs currently refer as "right-wing" or "teabaggers". That's all I really meant.

Of course, the problem could be that Progs don't believe that something to which they gravitate is screwy and extreme, so that could account for their willingness to so gravitate...

I wish Progs would admit to themselves that the "Progressive" movement is screwy and extreme, once all the self-righteous, warm-and-fuzzy pretenses and airs are stripped away and the unpleasant core agenda is revealed.

Canadian Sentinel said...

By the way, I'd remind all that Islam is NOT a "race". If Islam were a "race", then so would Nazism be, so, really, it's ridiculous to use words like "race" when discussing Islam, simply because it's an ideology, not a race, as evident in the fact that anyone can convert to Islam, regardless of race.

Balbulican said...

So your answer is you can't actually see beyond your Giant Prog Boogieman, and debate honestly with someone on the basis of what they actually say?

Scenty, do you even understand the question?

Canadian Sentinel said...

Oh, I understood the question.

And I didn't answer it, actually.

Why should I?

If Obama doesn't have to show his birth certificate to prove Constitutional Eligibility for POTUS office ("Why should he?"), then why should I answer a question as absurd as that? It's absurd to think I'd dignify it with a response.

There's not merely one Giant Prog "Boogieman". There's actually a whole bunch of them! And they're real people, who wear suits and don't look scary, but when you can tell what's going on inside their heads, they do become scary...

Canadian Sentinel said...

"Debate honestly"?

You mean like how Obama wants to "be bipartisan"?

Sorry, but I don't believe you to be an honest, no-agenda debater.


Our "debate" over Obama's eligibility was the final straw that made me see the uselessness of trying to "debate honestly" with you. Your mind is so incredibly stubborn that it can't understand the meaning and significance of the plain facts in evidence, so it was buh-bye, Bal-by.

Balbulican said...

Dude, you admitted you don't actually believe Obama was born in Kenya. You were just throwing up smoke. What was left to debate??

Canadian Sentinel said...

I have no recollection of saying I don't believe he was born in Kenya.

I doubt that I actually said that.

Perhaps you're recalling something else, but are a little confused.

Canadian Sentinel said...

And I was NOT "throwing up smoke". YOU were. You were spinning like a top!

Canuckguy said...

Boys, boys, get a room.

Canadian Sentinel said...

Nothing doing. Not my cuppa tea. You guys can go right ahead and have a gay old time yourselves.

Canadian Sentinel said...

Oh, and my avg. daily visits are now approaching 500. Yesterday they topped 600...

Therefore, comment volume does not equal visit volume.

Balbulican said...

" Therefore, comment volume does not equal visit volume."

Nope. It just shows the value of a blog as a forum, as opposed to propaganda source.

But I don't begrudge you your readership, Scenty. As you know, I send a lot of people to your site, just as I take my nieces and nephews to the zoo when they come to town.

Canuckguy said...

Talk about slipping in the dagger between the ribs

Canadian Sentinel said...

Nope. It just shows the value of a blog as a forum, as opposed to propaganda source.

Oh, of course. It's either a "forum" or a "propaganda source".

No other possibilities. Of course. Duh!

And we're off topic.

That'll be all.

Balbulican said...

Scenty, you have stated that you don't care about facts if they contradict your world view.

That's as good a definition of propaganda as I've ever seen.

Canadian Sentinel said...

What on EARTH is wrong with your brain?

I said NO such thing.

I have no fecking inkling how you could possibly come up with that idea.

Unless, of course, your sarcasm detector is broken.

Balbulican said...

Oh, really?

So...think REALLY hard are now claiming that you have NEVER said that facts are less important that your own interpretation of reality?

Last chance...think REAL hard.

What's the answer, Scenty?

Do you need a hint?

Canadian Sentinel said...

Like, what are you talking about?

Be specific, point and explain, or be gone.

Otherwise, I and others will only dismiss you as wasting time here.

What are you talking about? Exactly?

And, the answer is, NO, I never said that, though I might've said something sarcastic that you misinterpreted to your advantage, as is typical for you Machiavellian Prog propagandists. No idea what it might've been, though.

Perhaps I, alternative to being sarcastic, said that "understanding is more important than facts", only in terms of facts, alone-only, being of little value unless one makes the effort to analyze and understand their meaning and significance, which few people bother to do. It's no good to be a walking encyclopedia without intelligence and comprehension. Facts are critically important, but one still must properly apply one's brain thereto!

Facts are of little value if not accompanied by understanding of their meaning and significance. This is my position; and your interpretation, if that's what you were talking about, is nothing but bullshit.

You know, if I was as daft as you sometimes accuse me of being, then you couldn't stand me and wouldn't be here. After all, intellectuals have great difficulty standing the lazy-minded. Hmm... now, I wonder why I don't bug you on your comments threads... oh, my... like, burn, eh!

Canadian Sentinel said...

... and can you prove that I have plenty of visits, only because you "send visitors" my way?

The difference would be small, really, in my assessment. After all, the continuing trend, with or without your presence in the comments, is upwards. You might or might not occasionally boost the gross intra-diem visitations by 50 or so, and many are repeat visits, not unique.