Jagmeet Singh is a hypocrite


AMKiller
+2
#1
He says he doesn't support hate but his vote against Motion 36 which rejects the boycott of Israeli goods and the BDS movement says different. Singh also sponsored a press conference attended by 9/11 truthers and anti-Israel activists in support of Nadia Shoufani who made inflammatory comments about Israel at that hatefest known as the Al-Quds day rally.

Why is it that a white person speaking their mind is full of hate but minorities doing the same thing are "free expressions of dissent"?

Double standard? Ya think?
 
AMKiller
+1
#2
And now for the full story on the Jagmeet Singh heckler incident | Columnists | Opinion | Winnipeg Sun
 
taxslave
+2
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by AMKiller View Post

And now for the full story on the Jagmeet Singh heckler incident | Columnists | Opinion | Winnipeg Sun

Since our media is lefty run what do you expect? Truth? Facts? unlikely. Just look at how much effort they put into silencing Ezra Lavant.
 
AMKiller
+3
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

Since our media is lefty run what do you expect? Truth? Facts? unlikely. Just look at how much effort they put into silencing Ezra Lavant.

I'm not a fan of Ezra Levant. He does more harm than good.

Notice how when Liberals disagree with someone, that someone is spewing hate. But when they agree with a form of "hate speech" it's a "free expression of dissent".
 
Danbones
+1
#5
Quote:

I guessed that Singh’s position on the ban was actually what this woman was raving about. And, sure enough, she later posted a video to Facebook confirming this was the case.

Seems to be the heart of the matter right there.
 
AMKiller
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by Danbones View Post

Seems to be the heart of the matter right there.

She did seem unhinged and she could have presented her argument better, but it still wouldn't stop leftist dopes from screeching racist.
 
Danbones
#7
Big difference between what is said and how it is said...
 
Durry
#8
Typical of these brown people, they like to call racism against Whites, but when Browns do it, it seems to be perfectly acceptable with these Brown types.

Canadians have always given these minorities a lot of slack and often overlooked their faults only because Canadians felt they were disadvantaged in some respect.

But these Browns have taken full advantage of the good nature of Canadians and now they feel they are entitled to benefits other Canadians are held to account for.

Time to call a spade a spade and call this Brown dude a racist.
 
lone wolf
+2
#9
You're albino?
 
ZulFiqar786
+1
#10
Jagmeet Singh isn’t a hypocrite. He is a great political leader who will not only become the NDP leader for sure, but hopefully someday Prime Minister too. Now don’t get me wrong, I like Trudeau a lot and wouldn’t mind a Liberal government under Trudeau for decades to come. I’m not a leftist but rather more of a liberal centrist with a libertarian streak. That means I prefer low taxes, small government, privatization as much as possible, maximum civil liberty, and overall a free market with free trade and an open door immigration policy. But I recognize that Jagmeet Singh is the strongest voice against racism and bigotry at the moment, and these are the most pressing issues of the day. As a fellow South Asian, I’m naturally inclined to Jagmeet Singh and sincerely hope he becomes more influential in politics. He’s still relatively young, 38 years old, and I can see he has a bright future in federal politics. We need more young, cosmopolitan, racial minority, charismatic figures like him. The NDP will pass into oblivion if it chooses anyone else besides Jagmeet. The NDP needs to acquire the support of people like me, young, Middle Class, South Asian visible minority, cosmopolitan, from the growing Peel Region of Ontario. Otherwise the NDP has no future, simple as that. At present, the NDP old timers are resistant to Jagmeet Singh for two reasons: 1. They simply don’t want a South Asian in command of their party, they use the excuse “Quebec won’t accept him”, but in reality, they themselves aren’t ready for a non-White at the helm, and 2. They claim Jagmeet isn’t radical leftist enough. But that’s actually a good thing. We need someone like Jagmeet to mainstream the NDP and bring it closer to the center, especially on economic issues.
 
AMKiller
+2 / -1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by ZulFiqar786 View Post

Jagmeet Singh isn’t a hypocrite. He is a great political leader who will not only become the NDP leader for sure, but hopefully someday Prime Minister too. Now don’t get me wrong, I like Trudeau a lot and wouldn’t mind a Liberal government under Trudeau for decades to come. I’m not a leftist but rather more of a liberal centrist with a libertarian streak. That means I prefer low taxes, small government, privatization as much as possible, maximum civil liberty, and overall a free market with free trade and an open door immigration policy. But I recognize that Jagmeet Singh is the strongest voice against racism and bigotry at the moment, and these are the most pressing issues of the day. As a fellow South Asian, I’m naturally inclined to Jagmeet Singh and sincerely hope he becomes more influential in politics. He’s still relatively young, 38 years old, and I can see he has a bright future in federal politics. We need more young, cosmopolitan, racial minority, charismatic figures like him. The NDP will pass into oblivion if it chooses anyone else besides Jagmeet. The NDP needs to acquire the support of people like me, young, Middle Class, South Asian visible minority, cosmopolitan, from the growing Peel Region of Ontario. Otherwise the NDP has no future, simple as that. At present, the NDP old timers are resistant to Jagmeet Singh for two reasons: 1. They simply don’t want a South Asian in command of their party, they use the excuse “Quebec won’t accept him”, but in reality, they themselves aren’t ready for a non-White at the helm, and 2. They claim Jagmeet isn’t radical leftist enough. But that’s actually a good thing. We need someone like Jagmeet to mainstream the NDP and bring it closer to the center, especially on economic issues.

You want low taxes, small government, maximum civil liberties and privatization and you want an NDP or a Liberal government, lol. These parties contradict everything you claim you want. Good luck getting those things with either of those parties in charge. You're a walking oxymoron.

An open door immigration policy is not what Canada wants.

You're not a Libertarian as you claim but you are a leftist.

Singh is a hypocrite for those reasons I stated above.
Last edited by AMKiller; Sep 13th, 2017 at 05:36 PM..
 
DaSleeper
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by amkiller View Post

you want low taxes and privatization and you want an ndp or a liberal government, lol. Good luck getting those things with either of those parties in charge. You're a walking oxy moron.

singh is a hypocrite for those reasons i stated above.

fify
 
ZulFiqar786
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by AMKiller View Post

You want low taxes, small government, maximum civil liberties and privatization and you want an NDP or a Liberal government, lol. These parties contradict everything you claim you want. Good luck getting those things with either of those parties in charge. You're a walking oxymoron.

An open door immigration policy is not what Canada wants.

You're not a Libertarian as you claim but you are a leftist.

Singh is a hypocrite for those reasons I stated above.

I never said I'm a libertarian, but rather that I have a libertarian streak. Even the Conservative Party isn't as libertarian as you think. In fact, they love to increase military and police spending, which libertarianism opposes.

Furthermore, I'm not a registered member of any political party. But for me, the problem of racism and attacks on multiculturalism are more pressing than any economic issues. This is why I prefer a Liberal or NDP government, even if I'm not exactly a fan of either's economic policies and platforms. As a racial minority that is South Asian and Muslim, I don't have the luxury to be immediately concerned about the budget, taxes or size of government. I will simply express support for that politician who is most beneficial to my community.

An open door immigration policy is what Canada needs. We need cheap labor and we also need skilled labor. We actually have one of the more restrictive and tough immigration systems of the developed world. We need to relax it and allow for millions of more immigrants, especially skilled immigrants from Asia. We could also benefit from more unskilled labor from Mesoamerica since America is closing its door to them. We will benefit from this economically and also socially. When you say what Canada wants, you are talking about the declining majority of old White people. That is the old Canada, we are working on strengthening a new Canada.
 
lone wolf
+1
#14
Word of caution: Don't use a word that will catch on some people in here - no matter what its context. It's all they know after that and they'll shape you around it.
 
AMKiller
+2
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by ZulFiqar786 View Post

I never said I'm a libertarian, but rather that I have a libertarian streak. Even the Conservative Party isn't as libertarian as you think. In fact, they love to increase military and police spending, which libertarianism opposes.

Furthermore, I'm not a registered member of any political party. But for me, the problem of racism and attacks on multiculturalism are more pressing than any economic issues. This is why I prefer a Liberal or NDP government, even if I'm not exactly a fan of either's economic policies and platforms. As a racial minority that is South Asian and Muslim, I don't have the luxury to be immediately concerned about the budget, taxes or size of government. I will simply express support for that politician who is most beneficial to my community.

An open door immigration policy is what Canada needs. We need cheap labor and we also need skilled labor. We actually have one of the more restrictive and tough immigration systems of the developed world. We need to relax it and allow for millions of more immigrants, especially skilled immigrants from Asia. We could also benefit from more unskilled labor from Mesoamerica since America is closing its door to them. We will benefit from this economically and also socially. When you say what Canada wants, you are talking about the declining majority of old White people. That is the old Canada, we are working on strengthening a new Canada.

You've been spoon fed talking points on racism. Stop feeling sorry for yourself, you aren't being discriminated against. Multiculturalism doesn't work, it never has in any country.

No, racism and multiculturalism aren't as important as the economy. You can't excel and maximize your earning potential with a bad economy.

The Conservative Party aren't Libertarian either but they are the better option when it comes to minimizing the things you claim you want.

You want cheap labor? You want to keep people poor? Ridiculous. How about we train and employ those people already here.

I think you don't know what you want or are asking for.
 
ZulFiqar786
+1
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by AMKiller View Post

You've been spoon fed talking points on racism. Stop feeling sorry for yourself, you aren't being discriminated against. Multiculturalism doesn't work, it never has in any country.

No, racism and multiculturalism aren't as important as the economy. You can't excel and maximize your earning potential with a bad economy.

The Conservative Party aren't Libertarian either but they are the better option when it comes to minimizing the things you claim you want.

You want cheap labor? You want to keep people poor? Ridiculous. How about we train and employ those people already here.

I think you don't know what you want or are asking for.

What makes you say multiculturalism doesnít work? It works very well, it is essential for any nation to grow and be socially cohesive into the 21st century. Why do you think there are much worse social problems in the United States and Europe? Because none of them have adapted the policy of multiculturalism that originated in Trudeauís era here in Canada. The U.S. is a land of race riots, and Europe is falling into the clutch of extremely far-Right White nationalist parties, because none of those places have genuine multiculturalism, with the exception of California, New York, Chicago, Boston and similar major urban centers. But you will find that those places are the most prosperous and best places in America precisely because of cosmopolitanism or multiculturalism.

If not multiculturalism, then what do you propose? Please be specific.
 
Durry
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by AMKiller View Post

Multiculturalism doesn't work, it never has in any country.


You want cheap labor.

If this ZulF fool likes multiculturalism so much and wants cheap labour, he should move to his native country of India, it's multicultural, cheap labour and most of all there are very few Whites there so he won't have much competition and no discrimination.

Mind you the lack of Whites there is one reason India is such a pure shit hole, but I think this is what he wants.
 
White_Unifier
#18
Some will argue that immigration hurts the economy more than benefits it. Firstly, research shows otherwise. Secondly, if cost were a legitimate concern, then no one would object to Svalbard-style open borders which simply grant visa-free access to work but not social services. Those that oppose that have no economic leg to stand on.
 
ZulFiqar786
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Durry View Post

If this ZulF fool likes multiculturalism so much and wants cheap labour, he should move to his native country of India, it's multicultural, cheap labour and most of all there are very few Whites there so he won't have much competition and no discrimination.

Mind you the lack of Whites there is one reason India is such a pure shit hole, but I think this is what he wants.







Actually, India is rising fast and is an immanent superpower. It is a nuclear armed state with a powerful military which recently forced China to back off in the Doklam scuffle. True, Indiaís current BJP government is a disaster, since Modi is a Hindu bigot and further made the blunder of demonetizing. However, Iím confident the present BJP government wonít last beyond the next general election, it was rejected in Punjab, and before that in Bihar during State elections. The entire Asia-Pacific region is rising fast and is booming economically. Look at Malaysia in particular. Even Pakistan is experiencing steady GDP growth and has good prospects due to the CPEC project being coordinated with China. Meanwhile, the countries which are declining the fastest are European, like bankrupt Greece and Russia, countries experiencing labor shortage, social problems, an aging population without enough young people to fill the jobs let alone any potential for growth. Europe is declining and Asia-Pacific is rising. Even African countries are experiencing economic growth like never before.




But why should I move to India just because you want me to? You think someone will seriously decide to move to another country just because some racist told him to do so on an online discussion board? Donít be so naÔve and ridiculous. We are here to stay in Canada and we will make this country in our image. Why should we surrender when we are winning?


 
Durry
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by ZulFiqar786 View Post







Actually, India is rising fast and is an immanent superpower. It is a nuclear armed state with a powerful military which recently forced China to back off in the Doklam scuffle. True, Indiaís current BJP government is a disaster, since Modi is a Hindu bigot and further made the blunder of demonetizing. However, Iím confident the present BJP government wonít last beyond the next general election, it was rejected in Punjab, and before that in Bihar during State elections. The entire Asia-Pacific region is rising fast and is booming economically. Look at Malaysia in particular. Even Pakistan is experiencing steady GDP growth and has good prospects due to the CPEC project being coordinated with China. Meanwhile, the countries which are declining the fastest are European, like bankrupt Greece and Russia, countries experiencing labor shortage, social problems, an aging population without enough young people to fill the jobs let alone any potential for growth. Europe is declining and Asia-Pacific is rising. Even African countries are experiencing economic growth like never before.




But why should I move to India just because you want me to? You think someone will seriously decide to move to another country just because some racist told him to do so on an online discussion board? Donít be so naÔve and ridiculous. We are here to stay in Canada and we will make this country in our image. Why should we surrender when we are winning?


Yes it's the best place for you, a country full of useless losers and you would fit right in. It has everything you want.

N America will always be a White Christian country, and you don't fit in. Plus we don't want losers like you here trying to make this country a loser like India.
 
ZulFiqar786
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

Some will argue that immigration hurts the economy more than benefits it. Firstly, research shows otherwise. Secondly, if cost were a legitimate concern, then no one would object to Svalbard-style open borders which simply grant visa-free access to work but not social services. Those that oppose that have no economic leg to stand on.




I rather like the idea of open borders and no social services. In fact, social services should be at a minimum for naturalized citizens too. Libertarianism is actually the most positive with regard to the immigration issue. If I hire someone from another country to come work on my property, why should the government interfere and prevent that? I can invite whoever I want on to my property. Immigrants need two basic things; housing and jobs. The private sector provides both. So immigration need not be a burden to public services at all. If there is a demand for immigrants, which I assure you there is and will continue to be, then we must let them come with minimum fuss. Those who say local people canít find jobs due to immigration donít know what they are talking about. There are plenty of jobs, but people just arenít willing to do them, either because of the nature of the job or the wages. Go to any factory here in Ontario, they are filled with immigrant, newly arrived labor and temporary workers. Youíd be hard pressed to find local people working the actual assembly lines. Come here to Brampton where I live, you will be bombarded by agencies begging you to take a job.

 
lone wolf
+2
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Durry View Post

Yes it's the best place for you, a country full of useless losers and you would fit right in. It has everything you want.

N America will always be a White Christian country, and you don't fit in. Plus we don't want losers like you here trying to make this country a loser like India.

Hey Idiot: North America isn't a country.
 
AMKiller
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by ZulFiqar786 View Post

What makes you say multiculturalism doesnít work? It works very well, it is essential for any nation to grow and be socially cohesive into the 21st century. Why do you think there are much worse social problems in the United States and Europe? Because none of them have adapted the policy of multiculturalism that originated in Trudeauís era here in Canada. The U.S. is a land of race riots, and Europe is falling into the clutch of extremely far-Right White nationalist parties, because none of those places have genuine multiculturalism, with the exception of California, New York, Chicago, Boston and similar major urban centers. But you will find that those places are the most prosperous and best places in America precisely because of cosmopolitanism or multiculturalism.

If not multiculturalism, then what do you propose? Please be specific.

Bullcrap!!! In Europe they bend over backwards for Muslims yet Muslims don't want to assimilate to western culture but instead force their ideology onto others, form their own enclaves and preach hatred towards Jews and Christians in the mosques. Islamophobia is a bullcrap term and nobody in their right mind believes in it. If anything Islamic countries and many Muslims are westernphobic.

Also, don't give me the line that I don't know any Muslims, I know a ton, and even the more moderate ones share more radical views.

Why don't Saudis make their nation including Mecca and Medina, multicultural? If multiculturalism is so great.
 
ZulFiqar786
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by AMKiller View Post

Bullcrap!!! In Europe they bend over backwards for Muslims yet Muslims don't want to assimilate to western culture but instead force their ideology onto others, form their own enclaves and preach hatred towards Jews and Christians in the mosques. Islamophobia is a bullcrap term and nobody in their right mind believes in it. If anything Islamic countries and many Muslims are westernphobic.

Also, don't give me the line that I don't know any Muslims, I know a ton, and even the more moderate ones share more radical views.

Why don't Saudis make their nation including Mecca and Medina, multicultural? If multiculturalism is so great.




Wrong, Europe systematically discriminates against Muslims and treats them like 2 nd class citizens. Muslims are discriminated in services and employment. France bans Muslim ladies from observing the veil, nothing but blatant discrimination and violation of religious freedom. Muslims are faced with extreme difficulties in building mosques due to deliberate government policies and opposition from Islamophobic locals. There is increased talk about banning circumcision, Halal meat, mosques and even deporting all Muslims from Europe, even though Muslims have been living there for generations and have no other place to go back to.




Saudi Arabia doesnít claim to be secular, whereas Europe does. If European countries initially claimed to be White Christian countries and not secular, Muslims wouldnít have immigrated there. Muslims only began to settle in Europe when the latter was recognized as secular and egalitarian. But now Europe is becoming more xenophobic and anti-Muslim. Saudi Arabia is our equivalent of the Vatican, do you see any mosques in the Vatican? Saudi Arabia is our holy land, but why not give the example of many other Muslim countries where Christians reside without any discrimination, like Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia, Bangladesh etc.?

 
AMKiller
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Durry View Post

Yes it's the best place for you, a country full of useless losers and you would fit right in. It has everything you want.

N America will always be a White Christian country, and you don't fit in. Plus we don't want losers like you here trying to make this country a loser like India.

You're out of line, sir.
 
White_Unifier
#26
Another argument against immigration is crime. Research shows others, and again, a simple solution if it were a problem would be what a friend of mine is proposing in a book she's writing and that I've had a chance to preview and advise on. Make anyone entering the country without a visa and without legitimate refugee status sign a teetotaler contract prohibiting that person from consuming alcohol, gambling, even fornicating, etc. etc. etc. or face a fine for doing so with the fine doubling for each repetition of the offence for fornication. This way, the prosecution would not need to prove drinking and driving, but merely drinking to at least make the person pay a fine. No need to prove that he's operating an illegal gambling den. he'd pay a fine just for gambling money. No need to prove paying or taking money for sex or sexual assault. just the act of fornication itself would make him pay a fine. etc.

In short, if he wants to be free to consume alcohol, etc. he'll need to get a visa. Otherwise, he just needs to sign a teetotaler contract. The choice would be his. Bingo. No more legitimate argument about crime as if there ever was one to begin with.

Quote: Originally Posted by AMKiller View Post

You're out of line, sir.

I pity the fool.
 
lone wolf
#27
Damn you like to be ruled.... Are you into whips and chains too?
 
White_Unifier
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by ZulFiqar786 View Post



Wrong, Europe systematically discriminates against Muslims and treats them like 2 nd class citizens. Muslims are discriminated in services and employment. France bans Muslim ladies from observing the veil, nothing but blatant discrimination and violation of religious freedom. Muslims are faced with extreme difficulties in building mosques due to deliberate government policies and opposition from Islamophobic locals. There is increased talk about banning circumcision, Halal meat, mosques and even deporting all Muslims from Europe, even though Muslims have been living there for generations and have no other place to go back to.




Saudi Arabia doesnít claim to be secular, whereas Europe does. If European countries initially claimed to be White Christian countries and not secular, Muslims wouldnít have immigrated there. Muslims only began to settle in Europe when the latter was recognized as secular and egalitarian. But now Europe is becoming more xenophobic and anti-Muslim. Saudi Arabia is our equivalent of the Vatican, do you see any mosques in the Vatican? Saudi Arabia is our holy land, but why not give the example of many other Muslim countries where Christians reside without any discrimination, like Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia, Bangladesh etc.?

I don't profess Islam, but I've read the Qur'an. I can say that few Muslim states truly embody Muslim thought. Just to take one of many example. Qur'an 4:3 states that a man can have up to 4 wives on the condition that he treat them equally, yet 4:129 states that he cannot treat them equally. Logic forces us to conclude that the Qur'an therefore enjoins monogamy. Yet in spite of that, Tunisia is the only Muslim state (Turkey doesn't count since it's technically a secular state) that prohibits the contracting of a polygamous marriage on its soil precisely on the basis of 4:3 and 4:129. All other Muslim states seem to downplay it by suggesting the Qur'an just intended to discourage polygamy, not ban it outright. Sorry, but the Qur'an says what the Qur'an says.
 
ZulFiqar786
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by White_Unifier View Post

Another argument against immigration is crime. Research shows others, and again, a simple solution if it were a problem would be what a friend of mine is proposing in a book she's writing and that I've had a chance to preview and advise on. Make anyone entering the country without a visa and without legitimate refugee status sign a teetotaler contract prohibiting that person from consuming alcohol, gambling, even fornicating, etc. etc. etc. or face a fine for doing so with the fine doubling for each repetition of the offence for fornication. This way, the prosecution would not need to prove drinking and driving, but merely drinking to at least make the person pay a fine. No need to prove that he's operating an illegal gambling den. he'd pay a fine just for gambling money. No need to prove paying or taking money for sex or sexual assault. just the act of fornication itself would make him pay a fine. etc.

In short, if he wants to be free to consume alcohol, etc. he'll need to get a visa. Otherwise, he just needs to sign a teetotaler contract. The choice would be his. Bingo. No more legitimate argument about crime as if there ever was one to begin with.




Crime has drastically fallen and continues to fall. There is no correlation between crime and immigration. Most of the immigrants who come to Canada are highly skilled, education and even quite wealthy. They are the cream of the apple of their source countries and only serve to further enrichen and strengthen Canada.

 
White_Unifier
+1
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolf View Post

Damn you like to be ruled.... Are you into whips and chains too?

Nah, just chastity cages

Quote: Originally Posted by ZulFiqar786 View Post



Crime has drastically fallen and continues to fall. There is no correlation between crime and immigration. Most of the immigrants who come to Canada are highly skilled, education and even quite wealthy. They are the cream of the apple of their source countries and only serve to further enrichen and strengthen Canada.

I agree. I'm just saying though that if concern for crime is the argument (which is already an illegitimate argument to begin with), then a teetotaler contract would solve that problem. The real reason for such arguments is simply prejudice. They just don't want immigrants in Canada and so search for a problem to be solved and insist that closing the border must be the solution. Totally unscientific and illogical.
 

Similar Threads

64
Ayn Rand - Right Wing Hypocrite
by gopher | Feb 9th, 2011
119
Another Hypocrite Bites Dust!!!
by SirJosephPorter | Jun 22nd, 2009