NYC Muslim Group Warns U.S.

[Doryman]

Y'know, once upon a time I may have agreed with some of this. But I see no problem in deporting extremists who argue that our society should be destroyed. I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I'm really coming to believe it.

Similarly, I cannot truly believe that Muslim countries and their culture are mostly peaceful, with a few bad apples. It's starting to seem like it's the other way around.

To reiterate, I see nothing wrong with deporting those who have violent, extremist tendencies, or barring entry to those with ties to violent, extremist groups.

 

[Jay]

To reiterate, I see nothing wrong with deporting those who have violent, extremist tendencies, or barring entry to those with ties to violent, extremist groups.

Some people would leave us at the mercy of our enemies.

 

[FiveParadox]

Jay, perhaps you have missed the point of some of these arguments; Muslims, as a whole, are not our enemies. Take this for example: I do not care if, say, ninety-eight percent of Christians are Hell-bent on the destruction of Canada (theoretically speaking); if I have a Christian friend, and they, individually, are not extremist, then they should not be deported and to threaten otherwise is unacceptable.

For greater certainty, I mean to say that individual extremists should be deported on an individual basis; we cannot, and should not, be deporting anyone en masse or "clumped together."

 

[Jersay]

Y'know, once upon a time I may have agreed with some of this. But I see no problem in deporting extremists who argue that our society should be destroyed. I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I'm really coming to believe it.

Similarly, I cannot truly believe that Muslim countries and their culture are mostly peaceful, with a few bad apples. It's starting to seem like it's the other way around.

To reiterate, I see nothing wrong with deporting those who have violent, extremist tendencies, or barring entry to those with ties to violent, extremist groups.

There are just as many Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddist, and other extremists that are just as bad. The most deadly attack on a Canadian interest was by Sikh terrorists. So you should be willing to deport all of the other peoples as well, because they have extremist in their population as well. So you will have no one left.

Leave us at our enemies. Our enemies are peaceful people in Canada protesting peacefully. I guess they deserve to go back to a country they fled from. Yeah right :roll:

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: NYC Muslim Group Warns U.S.

Jay, perhaps you have missed the point of some of these arguments; Muslims, as a whole, are not our enemies. Take this for example: I do not care if, say, ninety-eight percent of Christians are Hell-bent on the destruction of Canada (theoretically speaking); if I have a Christian friend, and they, individually, are not extremist, then they should not be deported and to threaten otherwise is unacceptable.

For greater certainty, I mean to say that individual extremists should be deported on an individual basis; we cannot, and should not, be deporting anyone en masse or "clumped together."

The comments from the NYC muslim group would be considered hate speech in Canada, advocating the destruction of the US, how would you go about addressing this issue? Just curious.

 

[Jersay]

The comments from the NYC muslim group would be considered hate speech in Canada, advocating the destruction of the US, how would you go about addressing this issue? Just curious.

Case to Case basis.

Depending on prison terms for some, and maybe deportion for others. And maybe even the dismissal if the member was only there to say, yeah I joined the organization but never went except for once.

 

[FiveParadox]

My Strategy

I think not, if such a thing were to have taken place in Canada, and I were to believe that they had advocated the genocide of a people, then I would have pressed charges under Section 318(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada ("Advocating genocide").

318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

Click here to view the entire Act.

I would push for the Crown to seek sentences of up to five years for the leaders of the group, in particular; lesser sentences could be handed out at the discretion of the Justice-in-question to others involved in any such advocating protests.

I am not sure if there is any sort of parallel law that could apply in the United States.

:!: (Revision)

In addition, I would be in favour of orders for deportation for the most extreme members of such groups — however, only where the Government of Canada and the Justices of whatever Court is being exercised were able to ascertain that such action is necessary in the interest of the security of the country.

 

[Doryman]

Y'know, once upon a time I may have agreed with some of this. But I see no problem in deporting extremists who argue that our society should be destroyed. I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I'm really coming to believe it.

Similarly, I cannot truly believe that Muslim countries and their culture are mostly peaceful, with a few bad apples. It's starting to seem like it's the other way around.

To reiterate, I see nothing wrong with deporting those who have violent, extremist tendencies, or barring entry to those with ties to violent, extremist groups.

There are just as many Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Buddist, and other extremists that are just as bad. The most deadly attack on a Canadian interest was by Sikh terrorists. So you should be willing to deport all of the other peoples as well, because they have extremist in their population as well. So you will have no one left.

I wasn't specifically arguing that you should bar entire populations, but I see nothing wrong in barring or deporting people with ties to extremist groups. i;e Khadr's. To my mind, families that donate money to Al-Qaeda, and send their children to Terrorist trainiing camps shouldn't be allowed in.

And yes, there are thousands of Christian, Buddhist, Sikh, Jewish, Hindu, Libertarian, KKK, Marxist, Ugly Peoples Anonymous, Romper Room Allied Front, etc. people out there who are dangerous extremists. They should be banned/deported as well. If one of your lifes goals is to destroy the state you live in, the state should not have to merrily sit by and watch you do it.

Just out of interest, though, is there anywhere in Canadian law that states that Canada is required to take in immigrants, or that it is not allowed to refuse entry.

 

[Finder]

Re: My Strategy

I think not, if such a thing were to have taken place in Canada, and I were to believe that they had advocated the genocide of a people, then I would have pressed charges under Section 318(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada ("Advocating genocide").

318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

Click here to view the entire Act.

I would push for the Crown to seek sentences of up to five years for the leaders of the group, in particular; lesser sentences could be handed out at the discretion of the Justice-in-question to others involved in any such advocating protests.

I am not sure if there is any sort of parallel law that could apply in the United States.

:!: (Revision)

In addition, I would be in favour of orders for deportation for the most extreme members of such groups — however, only where the Government of Canada and the Justices of whatever Court is being exercised were able to ascertain that such action is necessary in the interest of the security of the country.

Here here!

 

[Jay]

Re: RE: NYC Muslim Group Warns U.S.

Jay, perhaps you have missed the point of some of these arguments;

No, I think your missing the point.....


I haven't read a single post in here suggesting Muslims being deported "en masse". I read, stop migration, expel extremists...but not round up into camps and onto boats. Your making that part up.

 

[EagleSmack]

Well Islam like Christianity has inside it's holy book that converting people to Islam is important and I would even say some may even read some passages that the world should be dominated by Islam. Christianity was like this in middle ages with Crusader Popes and armies being sent to the Middle East. Though the west didn't give up on dominating the Middle East after the middle ages with the on set of enlightenment the reasoning behind dominating the middle east change more into a legitimacy of Social Darwinism of the time's. Anyhow, that’s really going into another argument, I would have to say because of the enlighten and the weakening of the celestial order over that of temporal and the age of reasoning and the scientific revolution backing up these new philosophies and the industrial revolution making it possible for the "lower classes" to get educated in the philosophies at least to an extent, as well as the Spread of Liberalism in the upper classes and socialism in that of the lower classes helped remove the fanaticism from Christianity.

The Islamic world did not go though the same process as Western Europe, and even though in the middle ages the Middle East started off ahead of Europe in each of these camps by the 20th century it was fare behind. What needs to happen is a revolution of reasoning in the Middle East. I would argue for this to happen we can't be bombing them or exploiting them or anything else, which may bring further (nationalistic like) devotion to Islamic texts.

Now unlike some of you I do believe there is a pretty large Liberal, Socialist and Social democratic population in the Middle East but with the actions of the USA and a few other nations, have helped to discredit these people and the movements and bolster the conservative forces at work.

THIS POST IS RIGHT ON.

Although this post has gone unoticed but what Finder is saying is fact.

During the Middle Ages Christians were just as wired and violent as Muslims today. Crusades and Holy Wars within Europe itself went on for hundreds of years. Finally after the Hundred Years War had devastated Europe things began to change. I do not use the term devastated lightly. Europe was a vast wasteland caused by war between Catholics and other Christians.

After the Hundred Years war became the Age of Enlightement whereas the Nation States of Europe decided that religion and difference of religion CANNOT be a reason to go to war under any circumstance. That saw the decline of the Vatican in Europe and the belief the needs of the "State" or nation superceeded that of the Church.

The Muslims have yet to go through this phase.

 

[Gerald24]

Bring it on Muslims!!! The day is coming.

 

[the caracal kid]

A new power is rising in the East.....

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: NYC Muslim Group Warns U.S.

A new power is rising in the East.....

Ya, the NorthEast

 

[jimmoyer]

Well Islam like Christianity has inside it's holy book that converting people to Islam is important ...
------------------------------------Finder---------------------

Eaglesmack liked Finder's overall post of comparing
Christianity a 1000 years ago to Islam of today.

We all quite agree. In fact Islam has retained something
Christianity dropped: USURY LAWS.

Islam forbids loaning money for interest among
fellow followers of the faith, just as Christians a 1000
years ago forbid fellow Christians loaning out money
for interest.

In fact, the Magna Carta has two points concerning this.
It allowed Christian Widows to be exempt from paying
back money owed if their husband died owing a Jew
money. This also points out why Jews became the
first worldwide bankers because of this Christian outlawing of USURY, loaning money for interest.

But back to Finder's quote I posted above.

Islam does not look at proselytizing and evangelizing
in the Christian way. This is how it works: A Muslim
cleric IS NOT ALLOWED to go out to the street to
preach and convert people. Rather, the people are
quietly encouraged to seek out the Inmam, the cleric.

Think about it.

This might not sound different, but it really is.

It might even sound like a technical loophole to
Christians.

But reread that sentence on how it works.


And Muslims hate how Christians go about this.

 

[Finder]

Re: RE: NYC Muslim Group Warns U.S.

Well Islam like Christianity has inside it's holy book that converting people to Islam is important ...
------------------------------------Finder---------------------

Eaglesmack liked Finder's overall post of comparing
Christianity a 1000 years ago to Islam of today.

We all quite agree. In fact Islam has retained something
Christianity dropped: USURY LAWS.

Islam forbids loaning money for interest among
fellow followers of the faith, just as Christians a 1000
years ago forbid fellow Christians loaning out money
for interest.

In fact, the Magna Carta has two points concerning this.
It allowed Christian Widows to be exempt from paying
back money owed if their husband died owing a Jew
money. This also points out why Jews became the
first worldwide bankers because of this Christian outlawing of USURY, loaning money for interest.

But back to Finder's quote I posted above.

Islam does not look at proselytizing and evangelizing
in the Christian way. This is how it works: A Muslim
cleric IS NOT ALLOWED to go out to the street to
preach and convert people. Rather, the people are
quietly encouraged to seek out the Inmam, the cleric.

Think about it.

This might not sound different, but it really is.

It might even sound like a technical loophole to
Christians.

But reread that sentence on how it works.


And Muslims hate how Christians go about this.

True but in the Koran (i've actually read it all, though it was a few years ago), that both Christians and Jews worship the same god and are to be tolerated and allowed to worship in Islamic lands and basically not bothered. For the most party while Christians where murdering Jew's and Muslims in europe sects like the Coptic Christians in Eygpt where relitively left alone.


This is just histoic facts though. My argument is there has to be a type of enlightenment which seculerizes the islamic work or at least a good portion of it. Now the Koran has more of a blue print of church and state being one. But as rationalism got ahold of Europe those Christines who did not became agnotic with all the holes in the bible, such as those brought about by Dawrin, they started to see the bible as more of an abstrat bible, such as, the earth was created in 7 days. Well this was shoot to hell, so those who chose to be christine and rastional said "well 7 billion years ago while the earth was being formed and a day now is considered the amount of time it takes the earth to go around the sun, while without the earth forumed a day could be any amount of time". So just as many christines took new steps in legitimising the bible so will the muslims.

 

[jimmoyer]

Yo Finder, man you're great to talk to, but dammit man
could we get the admins or moderators here put
on an online spellchecker ???

And if the public cries out for it, a riddle killer for
me ???

And yes, Finder, I think most of the western world
agrees with your assessment.

In fact Mohammed was in love with an older Jewish
business woman who held with him through thick and
thin of abuse toward's Mohammad's inspirations.

It's one of the all time great love stories.

 

[zoofer]

The day is coming when British Muslims form a state within a state'
By Alasdair Palmer
(Filed: 19/02/2006)

For the past two weeks, Patrick Sookhdeo has been canvassing the opinions of Muslim clerics in Britain on the row over the cartoons featuring images of Mohammed that were first published in Denmark and then reprinted in several other European countries.

"They think they have won the debate," he says with a sigh. "They believe that the British Government has capitulated to them, because it feared the consequences if it did not.

Patrick Sookhdeo
Dr Patrick Sookhdeo

"The cartoons, you see, have not been published in this country, and the Government has been very critical of those countries in which they were published. To many of the Islamic clerics, that's a clear victory.

"It's confirmation of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British Muslims threaten what they call 'adverse consequences' - violence to the rest of us - then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a very dangerous precedent."

Dr Sookhdeo adds that he believes that "in a decade, you will see parts of English cities which are controlled by Muslim clerics and which follow, not the common law, but aspects of Muslim sharia law.

"It is already starting to happen - and unless the Government changes the way it treats the so-called leaders of the Islamic community, it will continue."
.
.
.
Click for rest of source

 

[zoofer]

Referring to the British government’s response to the cartoon protests, many Islamic clerics believe they have already won.

"The cartoons, you see, have not been published in this country, and the Government has been very critical of those countries in which they were published. To many of the Islamic clerics, that's a clear victory.
"It's confirmation of what they believe to be a familiar pattern: if spokesmen for British Muslims threaten what they call 'adverse consequences' - violence to the rest of us - then the British Government will cave in. I think it is a very dangerous precedent."

Link to source.

Scary stuff.

 

[outspoken2]

Pig fat and a .45 and no paradise for mindless twits.