A moratorium on immigration and refugee intake from terrorist-exporting countrie

[paracowboy]

When I talk to people that refuse to acknowledge that we are at war and then I see responses like this, it's just another reminder of what kind of role apathy and ignorance play in this conflict. This is the reason terrorists thrive in Canada.

CBC News: 38 dead, 700 injured in London blasts. Maybe you'll wake up, not if, but when this happens in Canada.

Push your heads back in the sand.

Oh! I forgot, its women that are being discriminated against, not men.

Were/Are you also in support of imposing Sharia law in Ontario.

So it doesn't really matter. Does it!

first of all, this post tells me that you haven't bothered to read the posts/threads on this site. You just decided to show up and start spouting off without learning anything about how it runs, or who hangs out here. Classic trollisms.
Secondly, it makes no damn sense.

Brad,
the Immigration system, flawed as it is, does

serve the needs of the nation

with the added little nicety of us saying "Dude, your country sucks, and you're gonna get whacked if you stay there. Hang with us for a while."

with the privilege of living in Canada come some obligations and expectations

this is also made very clear to immigrants, and they have to pass a number of stringent tests before being allowed to stay.

In theory. The problem, as I see it after being schooled by many members of this site over the past couple years, isn't whether we should allow certain nationalities in, it's just enforcing the damn standards that are in place. Kinda like the army.

 

[probum non poenitet]

This thread is interesting to me. Not so much the issue itself, but the 'meta-issue' if you will. That is, as this war develops, we will see Canadian culture change. How much, I can't say, but it will change. It is changing.

I think ultimately the most important battle of our times will be that we keep our freedoms.
That includes freedom from radicals of all description. Freedom from militant Islam, but freedom from excessive government restrictions.
Freedom from Canadian communities turning on other Canadian communities, and freedom from those who would incite that crap.
We must be good to each other, or we lose ... not the war itself, necessarily, but we lose.

Is there some merit to analysing our immigration system? Sure. Point taken.
Are there terrorist cells in Canada? Yes. Lock those buggers up for life if found guilty.
Should people immigrating from scheduled countries be looked at closely? I agree.

But I've been around the block too many times not to see where this argument can go, or where it often comes from. There's a sting to certain words that I can smell from a mile away.

Reilly, one characteristic that you have, is that you isinuate that those who don't agree with you aren't patriotic, or have their heads in the sand. That is Joe McCarthy reborn.

My dear boy, most of the people on this forum are military. I should think that as communities go, we are one of the better informed ones when it comes to the war in Afghanistan.
As for demonstrating patriotism, there are many ways to do it, but I should think serving in the armed forces in these troubled times is a fairly concrete one. Questioning our patriotism is ... unworthy of response.

What you represent to me, sir, is part of the inevitable fallout of war. You will wave the flag, beat the drum, and cry for blood. You will do so louder than those in uniform, because you are overcompensating.
"Some on this forum don't believe in freedom, blah, blah."

You are, I suspect, leaping on the coattails of the armed forces, and desparate to associate your political agenda(s) with us. I cannot claim to know your entire agenda, but I'm starting to form a clearer picture.

I dread hyper-patriots, and I expect to see more emerge as the violence in Afghanistan continues.

My father was a German speaking Canadian. Growing up during World War II, he remembers a lot of racist unpleasantries he had to put up with from 'patriotic' Canadians. He remembers a lot of injustice laid out on the Japanese-Canadians as well.
Despite the nobility of our country in World War II, there was an ugliness there as well. I hope it never repeats itself.

 

[reilly]

This thread is interesting to me.....My father was a German speaking Canadian. Growing up during World War II, he remembers a lot of racist unpleasantries he had to put up with from 'patriotic' Canadians. He remembers a lot of injustice laid out on the Japanese-Canadians as well.
Despite the nobility of our country in World War II, there was an ugliness there as well. I hope it never repeats itself.

Well said. Points taken to heart. My Grandfather was German and there was considerable ugliness.

 

[probum non poenitet]

Well said. Points taken to heart. My Grandfather was German and there was considerable ugliness.

Son ... is that you? 

 

[Hockeycaper]

Son ... is that you? 

Should we now move this to Personal Locator....

Reilly why did you change your name?

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Based on recent findings, terrorists can come from any source and increasingly are coming from second-generation muslims as opposed to the recent immigrants, so reducing overall numbers of immigrants from muslim nations in order to have a direct impact on lowering the risk of terrorism is an inexact science at best.

On the other side of the equation, I think it's nearly impossible to separate Islam from its tendency to want to dominate and have its rules applied whereever there exists a significant population.  It is with that in mind that we as citizens have not only a right but a responsibility to question the future make-up of our nation as it is being shaped by our immigration policies and look to Britain, Holland and France as our future if we do not begin revising our current policies.

Quite frankly until our domestic muslim populations starting holding rallies against Hezbollah, Hamas and state uncategorically that jihad against Dar al Harb is wrong (which isn't going to happen), I think we should follow the Australian lead, lay down the ground rules and invite those who want to play by other rules to leave at their convenience. 


Matthew. 

 

[cplcaldwell]

Do we want a country that excludes Muslims and thus is Dar al Harb?

Or do we want a country that validates the emerging idea of Dar al Amn?

(You are probably gonna have to google that one).

I think, under Bush, the Amuricans are definitely headed for Dar al Harb. What is the Canadian 'third way'?

We're going to have to fight the radicals for a long time.

Seems to me the real victory will be in removing the enemy from his will to fight? ( Oh, how very manoeuverist of me  : )

How to do this? Well, kill em when they offer for battle 'fersher'. But more than that, let's make them not want to fight us.. How to do that? let them in, under rules, conditions, same as the ones I live by, and show them.... Dar al Amn.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Do we want a country that excludes Muslims and thus is Dar al Harb?

Or do we want a country that validates the emerging idea of Dar al Amn?

(You are probably gonna have to google that one).

I think, under Bush, the Amuricans are definitely headed for Dar al Harb. What is the Canadian 'third way'?

We're going to have to fight the radicals for a long time.

Seems to me the real victory will be in removing the enemy from his will to fight? ( Oh, how very manoeuverist of me  : )

How to do this? Well, kill em when they offer for battle 'fersher'. But more than that, let's make them not want to fight us.. How to do that? let them in, under rules, conditions, same as the ones I live by, and show them.... Dar al Amn.

Sorry, but we're in Dar al Harb and will remain so until we become an Islamic Republic.  Drawing the distinction between us and the United States in that regard is disengenuous.

"House of Safety" as proposed by Western Muslim Philosophers?

Bottom Line:  If you know the term, you know the problem is that the Quran and Hadiths are deemed to be infallible.  There's no room for interpretation.  It's literal rules.  So if it isn't in the Quran or Hadiths, making up new "Houses" which contradict the edicts of Muhammed is downright foolish, and will only become fodder for the apologists.

I should add that Britain, Sweden, Belgium, France and Holland have all gone out of their way to create Dar al Amn....and how's that working out for them?


Matthew. 

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Or do we want a country that validates the emerging idea of Dar al Amn?

Some of the spokespeople, going back many centuries, have been refreshingly clear that any ploy is permitted to advance the cause.  Nothing less than Dar al Islam is a solution; everything else is just a wedge in the door to keep it from springing back or a pause to catch their breath before resuming.  When you engage in "dialogue", what is your basis for imagining that the other side is in any mode other than "transmit"?

 

[cplcaldwell]

Interesting comments. Not that I believe anything much different; just thought I'd throw it out there though....

Not much credence being given to Ijtihad in these parts then eh?