Has Justin Trudeau Finally Eaten Too Many Tide Pods?
Yes there are consequences of being too openly liberal.
@Jacobi - thanks for the link to the CBC article.
So Ahmad Hussen has finally relented and said the new document will include information on Canada's laws against FGM.
So, problem solved? Er, not quite. This same article says that 'the Criminal Code was amended in 1997 to clarify that FGM is a form of aggravated assault, and extended criminal liability to any health practitioner or other person who performs or participates in the procedure, or removes a child from Canada for that purpose' - so FGM has been a crime since at least 1997.
The article also says re FGM that no criminal convictions have been made. Not one in at least 21 years.
The situation is just as bad, if not worse, in the UK. Here, FGM was officially made a crime in 1988. In 2016 we at last saw the first case of FGM go to court. No convictions were made. Shameful.
And you're worried about the far-right ...
my question was about attituded towards terroism in Canada. Nobody is preventing you from talking about something else if you wish!
I would assume the attitude towards any kind of terrorism would be "its bad".
No, Muslims are not the only ones capable of committing terrorism, but as I said, the kind of hate that pushes a Muslim to commit violence, or a fundie Christian are all essentially radical right wing, so its all right-wing terrorism, the point... AGAIN... why would you invite people back to your country, who flew overseas to get a PhD in being a piece of shit radical? that has nothing to do with rightwing, left wing, blah blah blah. that's what everyone but you is talking about as you throw out a bingo card of logical fallacies.
Taking about something completely different, are you guys also annoyed by how the governing body will address very serious and complicated issues using emotionally loaded cartoons? Like the whole Sparlock and Caleb thing. Hogwash! Whenever I see someone do that, I think: Now there is someone who don't have a good argument.
Whenever I see someone do that, I think: Now there is someone who don't have a good argument.
Jacobi you are currently arguing on a sub -"Cathy Newman" level, I wouldn't snark so quickly
You bring up that there are groups with certain ideas that radicalize them to create terrorism. You bring up the need to curtail their free speech/free movement/civil rights in different ways; I agree this is a good thing, if done appropriately and with sufficient legal oversight.
I would just add this: The discussion often takes place in an Islamic context. However, recent events in Canada suggest that from a Canadian perspective, the discussion should include non-Islamic groups, such as whatever radicalized the person who carried out the Mosque attack. Keep in mind this is not a cherry-picked example, Breivik discuss in his "manifesto" how he was radicalized by UK extremists.
My point originally was to point out the discussion focuses a lot on muslims, even in a Canadian context, when I think it should be applied more generally and the discussion about limiting movement/censorship could just as well be had in the context of right-wing material.
You bring up the need to curtail their free speech/free movement/civil rights in different ways;
Cathy (jacobi) I am not saying that AT ALL, and I would never say curtail anyone's free speech ever. If you pay attention I am extremely pro-free speech even if its offensive. I believe in freedom of speech and freedom of wacky religion, I am not for making stupid political moves based on emotive leftists posturing. When and where did I ever say we should limit someones freedom of speech????? I have no clue where in the world you pulled that from but I did not and would not suggest that at all.
Anytime free speech is attacked whether the source is left wing or right, it leads inevitably to the slaughter of people and disaster. I would never condone that. And the fact you pulled that out of the air shows how you have zero grasps on this entire conversation, just trying to reinforce some idea of your own, that no one was talking about in the first place!
You are still avoiding what everyone is talking about, ISIS fighters returning to Canada with open arms, fortunately, there are no radical "right wing" countries others you are trying to equate have shipped off to, to fight start a caliphate and wage war on western values, sorry Jacobi, you are misdirecting over and over.
It's not a terrorism scorecard, it's about bad policy
You are coocoo my friend
Sorry, I accidentally assumed you agreed with me some forms of speech should be limited (such as propaganda encouraging domestic terrorism). I am sorry for making that mistake.
I would be interested to have a discussion about the limits of free speech (note all countries observe some limitations), however I don't think we are having a very factual discussion right now.
It is interesting for someone who is pro free speech my speech made you so upset you have to post cartoons as an outlet ;-). Sorry, but I don't really care to argue with people who behave in that manner. Have a nice day!
It is interesting for someone who is pro free speech my speech made you so upset you have to post cartoons as an outlet
I have posted NO cartoons, especially about anything you have said. Once again, you are pulling stuff out of your rear end. I have said nothing to limit your speech, just criticized your inability to coherently discuss or debate. Also, anyone who did post a cartoon was not doing anything to infringe on your free speech.
Banning speech is never right, bad ideas are sterilized in the light of day, not the dark, period.