Muslims face negative perception in Canada, study suggests

[willqccan]

" "I’m not saying we shouldn’t have programs” and policies in Canada to improve general perceptions of Muslims"
... and why should we do that? Where's the limit between "not discriminating" and trading our own beliefs? Should we help the people in need whoever they are, or Muslims? If I go to Spain, will I ask every Spanish to speak my language or will I speak spanish? To help the Muslims integrate the society, should we change our laws (and what we believe in) or try to make them become a little more Canadian? By coming to our great countrty, they also accepted its main ideas, let us not forget it.

 

[mentalfloss]

No, I don't give a crap about the prototypical bigot troll that vists the site as he is, according to the same survey of Muslim opinion of Canada, an anomaly.

What is NOT an anomaly is Muslim support for terrorists.

No, what is not an anomaly is that you use that support to make a false equivocation between Canada and Afghanistan.

DUNK

 

[Spade]

Some people can't live without a boogy man. I think it's called "little dick syndrome".

They must have learnt to read using the "Dick and Jane" series.

"See little Dick get frightened, Funny, funny dick."

 

[Goober]

They must have learnt to read using the "Dick and Jane" series.

"See little Dick get frightened, Funny, funny dick."

I guess this would cause some to have a negative impression of Islam. Why, hard to figure that one out.

Christians thru stink bombs when a play and how it depicted Jesus the found offensive was played.

Now I will wait patiently for Imams across Western Europe, North America and the Mid East to condemn this violence.

Not the below condemnation and then trying to explain it away. But the real deal.

The head of the French Council of the Muslim Faith, Mohammed Moussaoui, condemned the attack.

“If this was a criminal fire, we firmly condemn it,” he told AFP.

But the council also said in a statement that it condemned “the newspaper’s mocking tone with regards to Islam and its prophet.”



Offices of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo set on fire after Mohammed issue: editor | News | National Post

PARIS — The offices of a French satirical newspaper that published a special Arab Spring edition with the Prophet Mohammed on the cover as “guest editor” were destroyed in a suspected firebomb attack Wednesday.

The attack came after Charlie Hebdo renamed the weekly newspaper Charia (Sharia) Hebdo for the occasion and featured a front-page cartoon of the prophet saying: “100 lashes if you don’t die of laughter!”

The newspaper’s website also appeared to have been hacked, with its regular home page replaced with a photo of the Grand Mosque in Mecca and a message reading: “No god but Allah”. The web site was later unavailable.

 

[Spade]

To generalize from the actions of some to the whole is a disservice to those being generalized and a indictment of the generalizers themselves.

 

[Colpy]

To generalize from the actions of some to the whole is a disservice to those being generalized and a indictment of the generalizers themselves.

To be concerned about the sympathy and support for our enemies shown by a significant portion of a immigrant culture is not a 'generalization".

To ignore the fact of Islamic support for both terror organizations and a culture that is the antithesis of western liberty is suicidal stupidity.

Salim Mansur: who's funding Canada's mosques? - YouTube!

 

[Goober]

To generalize from the actions of some to the whole is a disservice to those being generalized and a indictment of the generalizers themselves.

I did not generalize - Read the comment condemning this. Muslims themselves have to take action. Not equivocate as this fellow did. I had read a few days ago that the magazine was doing this. And I just guessed that something would happen. Guessed based upon past actions taken when Mohamed is not portrayed as Muslims prefer him to be.

Many would arrive at the same conclusion - Why - Past events - past experience - Is that racist or prejudiced - No - It is solely based upon past but recent events.

 

[mentalfloss]

To be concerned about the sympathy and support for our enemies shown by a significant portion of a immigrant culture is not a 'generalization".

To ignore the fact of Islamic support for both terror organizations and a culture that is the antithesis of western liberty is suicidal stupidity.

Supporting terrorist organizations (not financially) doesn't mean you're a terrorist or dangerous.

You have to understand that these tendencies are natural and become diluted with more exposure that immigrants have to western culture. Your own research (funded by a right-wing think tank) even shows that they value democracy and other western values.

Clearly there's a contradiction in the results of that research, but it's nothing that would affect national security in any significant way.

 

[Goober]

Supporting terrorist organizations (not financially) doesn't mean you're a terrorist or dangerous.

You have to understand that these tendencies are natural and become diluted with more exposure that immigrants have to western culture. Your own research (funded by a right-wing think tank) even shows that they value democracy and other western values.

Clearly there's a contradiction in the results of that research, but it's nothing that would affect national security in any significant way.

There are a number of ways that supporting Terror orgs is a crime under the Criminal code. But I take it that you also included what I have posted.



What is your impression of this???


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ancel-law-conference-in-dubai/article2222852/

One point - Supporting the mass killing of a particular segment - racial - religious etc - Is immoral to say the least.

 

[mentalfloss]

I'm just talking about people who tick off an answer in a poll which doesn't immediately condemn some terrorist organization. These people are free to have their prejudice.

It doesn't mean that they are actually dangerous or a threat.

The real threat depends on which supporters have access to substantial capital or weaponry and are willing to use either.

 

[Johnnny]

Hopefully muslims take it on a person to person basis of which of course we can thank them for their coperation. Thanks

 

[Colpy]

Christian Student Beaten to Death for Wearing Cross | Power Line

 

[captain morgan]

Christian Student Beaten to Death for Wearing Cross | Power Line

The religion of peace at it's finest

 

[Colpy]

Open Channel - Born in the USA, but now among Somalia's Islamist terrorists

 

[Goober]

Open Channel - Born in the USA, but now among Somalia's Islamist terrorists

Satire in Iran: Mocking the mullahs | The Economist

THEIR irreverent sense of humour is a source of pride to Iranians, a way to puncture the gloom of successive repressive regimes. It is no surprise that a satirical television programme called “Parazit” that delights in skewering Iran’s politicians is going down a storm.

“Parazit”, meaning “static” in Persian, itself a dig at the government’s tendency to block seditious broadcasts, came on the air shortly before the disputed presidential election of 2009. It is produced by Voice of America (VOA), the state-funded international broadcaster. Despite—or perhaps because of—its tie to the Great Satan, the programme has proved enormously popular in Iran.

Exact viewing figures are hard to gauge; most people watch it online through proxy servers or on bootleg DVDs, since satellite dishes are banned in Iran, though they sprout from many rooftops. “Parazit” has almost 750,000 fans on Facebook. Each of its videos posted online gets over 1m hits.

Raina Kumra, head of innovation at the broadcasting board of governors which runs VOA, says that most Iranians who watch the show either do not know it is produced by VOA—or do not care. “We’re just the holding company”, she says; “Parazit” is its own creature. The producers insist that it is not a tool of American propaganda. “Our job is to present the facts and highlight the hypocrisy,” says Saman Arbabi, one of the show’s presenters. “We’re not here to lead any movement, to lead any regime change.” If the people of Iran want to topple the regime, he says, they must do it themselves.

“Parazit” has not gone unnoticed by Iran’s government. Mr Arbabi and his co-host, Kambiz Hosseini, have been subject to character assassinations in state-run newspapers. Iran’s state television has started its own satire show called “Just for your information” to counter the invidious influence of “Parazit”. Its audience so far has been small

 

[Just the Facts]

Open Channel - Born in the USA, but now among Somalia's Islamist terrorists

Now THAT'S American imperialism!!

 

[Colpy]

I'm just talking about people who tick off an answer in a poll which doesn't immediately condemn some terrorist organization. These people are free to have their prejudice.

It doesn't mean that they are actually dangerous or a threat.

The real threat depends on which supporters have access to substantial capital or weaponry and are willing to use either.

Oh! No harm done!

Eritrea raising money in Canada, financing terrorists to attack Canada | News | National Post

 

[petros]

Libya: Al Qaeda flag flown above Benghazi courthouse - Telegraph

 

[Colpy]

U.S. warns of possible hotel bombings after more than 100 killed in Nigeria - The Globe and Mail

Libya: Al Qaeda flag flown above Benghazi courthouse - Telegraph

Quite seriously, who cares?

We owed Gadhafi. He has been paid.

We have handed the Libyans a CHANCE to create a just society, that is all we can do. We can not dictate their choices. If they choose to become yet another lunatic Islamic state, there is not much we can do. Should they become belligerent and dangerous, we still have military assets available.

that is the attitude we need to have.

 

[petros]

I'm glad you support al Qaeda.

Hooray for al Qaeda!