Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Today in Racism

A couple of days back, it was Indians. Today, KKK-ate takes on Muslims. Seems the more time a person spends in ratholes like Delisle, Saskatchewan, where there aren't too many "diverse" people, the more xenophobic they become. This kind of hate plays well in places where folks don't actually know any dark-skinned people personally, but it falls flat in places where people live beside, teach or talk with Muslims and find the ratio of good/bad people is no different than among the pasty people of outer Saskabush.
I've made what I think are pretty strong arguments against using HRCs -- administrative tribunals -- to police hate speech. I certainly don't believe, however, in getting rid of the Criminal Code hate crimes provisions. And I think these SmallDeadAnimals postings, which are controlled by the site's owner, should be investigated and, if warranted, charges should be laid.
Why do I believe that?
Because this hate speech is not only harmful to those who its targeted at, it tears apart social harmony and the public peace:



Original Post:
When the concept of multiculturalism was introduced to Canadians, most assumed it meant "more pavilions at Folkfest";

Al-Qaeda's North Africa wing threatened on Tuesday to take revenge on France for its opposition to the burka, calling on Muslims to retaliate against the country, the US monitoring service SITE Intelligence reported.

[...]

"We will take revenge for the honour of our daughters and sisters against France and against its interests by every means at our disposal."

The group also called on Muslims to retaliate for what it called French "hostility" against the community and its attempt to obstruct Islam's practice on its territory.

"For us, the mujahedeen ... we will not remain silent to such provocations and injustices," Abdul Wadud said without elaborating, according to SITE.

"We call upon all Muslims to confront this hostility with greater hostility, and to counter France's efforts to divide male and female believers from their faith with a greater effort ... (by) adherence to the teachings of their Islamic sharia."

I told you so.

Posted by Kate at June 30, 2009 3:51 PM


Comments


You know Kate, there’s times when you are insufferable, particularly if you’re right.
Posted by: robins111 at June 30, 2009 4:01 PM


come on over to my neighbourhood asshole. i bite back.
Posted by: old white guy at June 30, 2009 4:03 PM


Yeah, no kidding.
Which part of "barbaric and intractable" was unclear?
Posted by: mojo at June 30, 2009 4:41 PM


Just one question: if Islamic extremists do become even more hostile, how will we be able to tell?
Posted by: JJM at June 30, 2009 4:46 PM


No! It must be a lie! After all, the people on the news, they keep telling us that Islam is a religion of tolerance and peace! We gotta believe everything those serious-looking people in suits and ties tell us, 'cause they're wearing suits and ties... no way would they lie, would they?
Must... believe... ALL... Muslims... wouldn't... kill... a... fly.
Oh, wait... I saw Obama kill a fly... and he enjoyed it!
Hmm... now, if ONE Muslim would actually gleefully kill a fly... hmm... brain suddenly jerks, twitches, vibrates, putt-putt-rrrr-rrrr-vvvrrroooommmm!
Posted by: Canadian Sentinel at June 30, 2009 4:51 PM


Hag In A Bag wont sell too well here either! How do we know whats really under that tent of evil. That is how Saddam and Osama-Bin-doofus hid for many days.
Posted by: FlimFlamMan at June 30, 2009 4:51 PM


These guys sound like out takes from a Monty Python sketch.
With the exception of Israel, the Middle East is one backasswards political and cultural wasteland that has theocrtic thugocracy as its political philosophy.
Posted by: Fred at June 30, 2009 4:53 PM


The honour of their daughters and sisters only matters when it can further the aims of Islamification..otherwise, it's business as usual with the stonings, the abysmal treatment, the non status etc etc..
Car-b-ques courtesy of the religion of perpetual outrage in 4..3..2..
Posted by: Kursk at June 30, 2009 5:02 PM


and meanwhile spinsella lines up lobby groups for the "new order"
heh
Posted by: scanoo at June 30, 2009 5:12 PM


"The group also called on Muslims to retaliate for what it called French "hostility" against the community and its attempt to obstruct Islam's practice on its territory."
"on its territory" - sadly the Europeans have allowed Europe to become (Islamic) territory - and we are not all that far behind.
I have had far too many conversations with people who express concern over the rise of Islam, but finish the conversations with a sigh of "yeah I know they are winning, but what can ya do?"
Um how about fight back?
Posted by: Gordon MacDonald at June 30, 2009 5:31 PM
The answer is as obvious as it is impracticable for the civilized west: start shooting the preachers. They are the source and primary vector of the Islamist infection.
Posted by: mojo at June 30, 2009 5:43 PM


"Um how about fight back?"
At what cost? Losing your job? Being defamed? Personal injury?
Many of us have been neutered by PC. I've said before that "assimilation will be easy for me" and I mean it. Until "historically discriminated against visible minorities" or our political leaders start to fight back, I would council anyone fitting my description who has something worth fighting for to keep their heads down.JMO
Posted by: Indiana Homez at June 30, 2009 5:45 PM


France will soon need another Charles Martel to face the hordes at a new battle of Tours(732) and probably in the same locale.
Posted by: charles at June 30, 2009 5:46 PM


Gordon:
Next time you have that conversation with somebody, ESPECIALLY if they have daughters or young female relations, tell them that to simply shrug and say "what can you do?" is to abandon their girls (or their daughters or daughters' daughters) to a fate that is essentially a living death, and do they really want to let it happen without a fight? Also, if they had relatives in WW2 or in Afghanistan now, ask them if those soldiers made/are making a sacrifice just so their blood can be spilled in vain for a population that won't stand up for itself.
Posted by: Monique at June 30, 2009 5:48 PM


One thing that would make me smile is to strip the mosques of their tax-free status in Canada. Another would be for people to realize that all religions are not equal. The only thing that prevents most people from calling them a cult is their numbers,but that is what islam is,a very large male driven cult.
Posted by: wallyj at June 30, 2009 6:19 PM


"my Jihad is to expose you and people like you, and to prove that you derive your convoluted knowledge of Islam from sources known only to yourself." - (Raheel Raza)
Posted by: fly on the wall at June 30, 2009 6:28 PM


Here's one for Jen Lynch, Babs Hall, and the rest of the gang:
I really, REALLY, despise Islam.
Posted by: Mississauga Matt at June 30, 2009 6:47 PM


Why do Muslims insist that they must live in the West, according to their laws which they insist are religious rather than cultural, but if a Westerner goes to, eg., Saudi Arabia, that Westerner must live according to the Saudi Muslim rules.
That is, why does a Western woman have to wear a head scarf if she is in Saudi Arabia? If the 'rule' is religious, and she is not a Muslim, then why does this nation insist that she follow Muslim religious rules?
If the rule is cultural, and she is not from Saudi Arabia, then, why does this nation insist that she follow Saudi cultural rules?
If Muslims in France and elsewhere insist that they should reject the national rules then why do they insist, in SA, that the visitor should follow the national rules?
Posted by: ET at June 30, 2009 6:57 PM


Because Muslims are people and kuffirs are just animals - like women.
Posted by: mojo at June 30, 2009 7:17 PM


I would like to see veils stripped or cut off any woman in public. I suspect that we will see that in the UK or Europe before long.
Posted by: tranio at June 30, 2009 7:23 PM


A few years ago driving through Cincinnati (looking for the WKRP building) a car beside me was being driven with someone wearing in a full-blown burka.
Can welders wear a welding shield and drive? No. Well, they could. It's not really a safe practice and there's probably some law about "distractions" and "obstructed vision".
There has to be zero peripheral vision in one of those things.
I wonder if anyone keeps stats related to vehicle accidents and items related to "obstructed" vision.
Posted by: Curious at June 30, 2009 8:03 PM


Be patient, Obama is well on his way to making peace with the Muslim world. They will listen to the purveyor of hope and change and peace will spring forth throughout the nations of Islam..... ya, right!
Posted by: Liz J at June 30, 2009 8:30 PM


Hmmmm.
The Barbary pirates used to blackmail bribes to leave shipping alone.
Then, IIRC, President Jefferson had enough of that crap and sent in the Marines.
"From the halls of Montezuma. To the Shores of Tripoli..."
Barry won't ever be TJ. It's better to empty the state coffers and hope things will change.
Posted by: Curious at June 30, 2009 8:52 PM


I often wonder if school staff ever question a burka clad person coming to pick up their kid/kids. How would one know that the kid/kids are being taken by the mother or a kidnapper? Has anyone ever visited the Thornhill area of Toronto? Visit Zellers over there, but carry some aspirin with you for your migraine, because you are sure to get one - a big one.
Posted by: MarionN at June 30, 2009 9:19 PM


Islamofascists don't give one care about their women unless they are being embarrassed by them (i.e.- NOT wearing some ridiculous covering or learning how to read). The only people to be bought over by this utterly transparent lie are bleeding hearts who hate America (or Canada) as much as they hate their parents.
Posted by: Osumashi Kinyobe at June 30, 2009 9:31 PM


Just like Muslims to turn a comment about poor fashion into a flippin' jihad.
Talk about a about one-note religion,jihad jihad jihad.
Oh, bugger off already.
Posted by: Fred2 at June 30, 2009 9:57 PM


France!
Enjoy your cultural enrichment. Obviously you needed some. How is the Liberal socialism working out for you now? Still topless in the streets?
This time we will NOT bail you out!
Posted by: Knight 99 at June 30, 2009 10:14 PM


ET>
“If the rule is cultural, and she is not from Saudi Arabia, then, why does this nation insist that she follow Saudi cultural rules?”
Your comments are obviously rhetorical, but I will add –
Anyone who has worked or lived in Muslim countries (Middle East, Asia Pacific) knows full well the hypocrisy of the Islamic peoples. The intent of Muslims living in the west is either full blown conversion or preferred resident status, full stop! Regardless of the MO the desired result is power, elevated status, and control of the resources including government and its people. These are all people who believe in status and pampering utilizing the abundant cheap labor of their own countries as slave labor. This is culturally accepted in its deepest meaning.
The Arab Muslims for example have a huge homosexual population that is quite overt but utilizes the disguise of “we’re just male childhood friends” holding hands and showing affections publicly that would be recognized instantly for what it is in the west. I have lived and worked for many years in these countries and the instances of myself and other westerners stumbling across actual sexual activity between males is too numerous to count. The same goes for the immense alcohol abuse.
Another example is that I have never seen an issue in any Muslim country of decorating Xmas tree’s by Muslim women and giving gifts (they quite enjoy it). At times you will even hear Xmas carols and music in places of business.
All that changes on western soil! There is only one obvious reason as to why that occurs. What is so pathetic is that our liberal elites, who are supposed to be so worldly and knowledgeable, cower and demand of us social acceptance and cultural sensitivity to this race baiting and intolerant backwards people.
Posted by: Knight 99 at June 30, 2009 10:42 PM


In the west, it's usually called Christmas.
Posted by: set you free at June 30, 2009 10:48 PM


No harm intended - just short hand. I'm actually in the "East" at the moment so possibly can be forgiven.
Posted by: Knight 99 at June 30, 2009 10:53 PM


Monique:
Totally!
I am extremely passionate about this subject, a fact which others become aware of very quickly, I refer to blogs, books, broadcasters, and most of all the importance of discussing this problem open and in public (no whispering allowed!) no matter who might be in close proximity. I remind anyone and everyone who will listen, that freedom of expression is a use it or loose it proposition.
Posted by: Gordon MacDonald at June 30, 2009 11:08 PM


Saying it again. In the context of Islam, immigration is invasion.
Posted by: Revnant Dream at July 1, 2009 1:03 AM


"That is, why does a Western woman have to wear a head scarf if she is in Saudi Arabia?"
And, as we've mentioned here many times before, why are vocal leftist-leaning "feminists" not standing up for what is going on in those countries? Weren't they supposed to be supporting women everywhere? Or was it just supporting women that had similar political beliefs that was motivating them?
Posted by: PiperPaul at July 1, 2009 1:22 AM


"why are vocal leftist-leaning "feminists" not standing up for what is going on in those countries?"
Or gay rights activists? They would rather march with Hamas in the streets of Toronto.
Posted by: Knight 99 at July 1, 2009 1:28 AM


The kid from Brooklyn is back and he's got a beef with the Muzzle take over.
Extreme language warning. He IS from Brooklyn.
Foot Bath
If you think it's too rude, let me know.
Posted by: Momar at July 1, 2009 1:40 AM


Momar, that was hilarious! And correct.
Posted by: A Steve at July 1, 2009 1:51 AM


The Big Man is right. I had to sit behind some women in hijabs, at my son's graduation, last year. The smell pretty well ruined the whole event for me.
Posted by: dp at July 1, 2009 8:39 AM


Momar, that was hilarious! And correct.
Posted by: A Steve at July 1, 2009 1:51 AM


The best kind of correct!
Posted by: FREE at July 1, 2009 8:54 AM


Why are you guys all freaking out over this?
The solution to this non-problem was invented by Mr. Samuel Colt in 1836 and has been improved upon since, bringing it to a state of mechanical perfection unrivaled in modern technology.
Every woman in Canada gets a .38 snubbie from Dad for their 16th birthday, and thence forward wears whatever the hell she pleases. Anyone who doesn't like it will most certainly keep it to themselves.
This is the way of civilized discourse. Barbarians such as Al Queerda will come upon those rocks and shatter.
You just ask your daughters and sisters if their right to wear FM shoes and short skirts is worth sticking a gun in some bearded ruffian's face and telling him to shove off, see what they say. Lefty girliemen will no doubt be shocked at the answers they get.
The female of the species will fight for her FM shoes.
Posted by: The Phantom at July 1, 2009 9:20 AM


Momar, what the f- is so f-ing rude about the Kid from f-ing Brooklyn, for F- sakes? Jeeze!
Posted by: The Phantom at July 1, 2009 9:24 AM


There's a simple solution that would work for everyone (except for lefty politi-critters): Why don't they just get the f*** out and go back to where their backward barbarism is accepted?
Posted by: Edward Teach at July 1, 2009 10:19 AM


People like Indiana Homez are making things worse and accelerating the process.
I love how people like you post anonymously at other people's websites, while some of us use our own names, our own money and risk our careers to fight. Meanwhile you snipe like a coward on the sidelines.
People like you undo everything some of us do at great risk to ourselves.
I've heard every excuse in the book. And I'm sick of it. Some of us are particularly tired of hearing "I support what you do -- just don't tell anybody." Again, that very attitude makes what "we do" harder to accomplish.
That kind of "support" is as much of a burden as the abuse we get from the world's Kinsellas, believe it or not.
I have news for you: there is no such thing as job security. You'll do everything right, keep your head down, and get fired anyway. Maybe you've heard of that thing called the "recession"?
You don't want to lose your precious job because it lets you keep about 50% of what you make, and once a year you get a free pair of glasses or they pay for the kid's braces. Wow, what an empire you've built for yourself!! I'm impressed.
Some of us have already chosen between our children's crooked teeth and our children's crooked minds.
Your pension is gone. CCP won't be there. By the time you figure you have nothing to lose -- you'll be right! And you'll be the very reason we got to that point, so your help will be of pretty dubious use at this point.
If you're so caught up with taking refuge in the dubious "security" and petty rewards you've built around yourself, then slag off.
The Founding Fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.
And they signed their own damn names.
Posted by: Kathy Shaidle at July 1, 2009 11:17 AM


I would council anyone fitting my description who has something worth fighting for to keep their heads down.
Your description would be traitorous, sniveling liberal coward or ... smelly Muslim trying yet another tactic to scare or soften us up for your scourge of the civilized world. You are the scum of the earth. You represent everything that is weak and despicable in a human being.
And what Kathy said.
Posted by: Momar at July 1, 2009 12:15 PM


I think that was a troll pretending to be Homez. He doesn't strike me as the run-and-hide type.
Still, Kathy makes a good point. I never keep my head down. I keep my head up. I've kissed off jobs over less, and taken personal injury over less too.
If you have to bend over at work, your job sucks and you should get a new one. If you find -every- job sucking, self employment is The Way.
OTOH, it is stupid to go looking for trouble. If you just go along as normal and let the trouble come to you, you get to meet it at a time and place of -your- choosing. Which is better than bending over at work every day, you know?
Sun Tzu is instructive reading on this point. Or Von Clausewitz. Note to Kathy, read 'em both. Myamoto Musashi is also worth a look. Attitude is good but not always sufficient to the task. Sometimes sneaky is also good.
Posted by: The Phantom at July 1, 2009 1:17 PM


Kathy Shaidle;
Is completly right you know. Living in boom bust Alberta we know this intimitly.
It will come down to favorites or relitives when it comes to jobs. Social security is a tax scam. Didn't start out that way, but neither did EI.
Its unstatainable. A ponzi scam cloacked as a pension, predicaded on population growth. We all know that its been policy for years for depopulation to make a liberal paradise while taking over parental rights.
Trying to make the gay lifestyle on par with marrage & any benifits to children or couples have dissapeared. Worse the families are being taxed into poverty to support the nuts in society.
Canada is not for Canadiaqns anymore. The HRC's ought to be the biggist clue. The government is at war with its own population for power & perks. When ypou deal with these folks its always about them & how great they are, with the little people laughed at by the jackels like Taliban Layton.
This is the age of Divine absolute Government by newly made nobles by ripping off the middle class to allow this insidious Entitlement mentality.
JMO
Posted by: Revnant Dream at July 1, 2009 2:04 PM

Posted by: Kathy Shaidle at July 1, 2009 11:17 AM>
Well said!!!!!!!
I also use an online moniker – but not for fear of the HRC or losing my “assets” as you put it…… But because I travel 60% of my time though various Muslim/ communist countries and post from them. I do not need potential border issues or worse.
My petition signing, letters to MP’s ect are full blown me.
Posted by: Knight 99 at July 1, 2009 8:24 PM

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I look at it like this: better to have them venting online, than marching in Christie Pitts.

Ottawa Watch said...

First, they're cowards. The would never actually sign their names, let alone publicly defend their positions.
Second, they would get their asses handed to them, just like the fascists did back in the 1930s.

maplestar said...

Seems the more time a person spends in ratholes like Delisle, Saskatchewan, where there aren't too many "diverse" people, the more xenophobic they become.

Please don't undercut your point. Prejudice is JUST as wrong when directed at residents of small towns as it is when directed at people of different races.

I don't know who you're quoting, but there was no need to drag an entire town into your legitimate opposition to her words.

Ottawa Watch said...

Good point.

Anonymous said...

I scrolled through those comments yesterday. All I can conclude is that Kate McMillan, who runs a successful blog that's boats visitors from across Canada and the US, is providing a forum in which her readers call for the death of Muslims, and have actually extolled the virtues of shooting them.

I don't think it's enough to label her and her commentators cowards, since they're all creating a public space of hatred that could very much be helping steer some of the sicker individuals among us to act on their provocations.

Anonymous said...

I spoke to a friend of mine who sits on the board of a large Muslim association in my province. She knows about this particular posting at SDA, and tells me her association will be contacting police about some of the more threatening comments.

Stay tuned...

Anonymous said...

"I don't think it's enough to label her and her commentators cowards, since they're all creating a public space of hatred that could very much be helping steer some of the sicker individuals among us to act on their provocations."

Like I said, better to be posting anonymously, like cowards, on the internet, than marching in Christie Pitts.

Mark, they may be cowards on their own. Most of the people who lynched blacks in the 19th were probably cowards. You put them with like minded people, fill them with alcohol, give a nice rousing speech about defending the white women, and watch how brave they suddenly become.

Ottawa Watch said...

I think SDA emboldens them, though I still think most of them are all talk.
There seems to be a lot of hatred ou there.

David S said...

Ottawa watch is absolutely right there is way too much hatred and ignorance out there. More people need to wake up and stop being "mental midgets" No offense to the little people ;)


Breakup Advice & Ending a relationship

FredfromBC said...

Any of you people who see "hate speech" anywhere in there are as laughable as Jennifer Lynch herself. Amusement, certainly...outrage, of course. The original threat of violence was made by the Muslims, and anyone who would meekly say nothing in response deserves the label of "coward" that you left-wingers so proudly wear.

Must be nice to have a little place like this where everyone else agrees with everything you say, huh? Saves you from exposing yourselves to the ridicule and derision you would face in a truly open forum, you pathetic little whiners...