"Niceness" or "Even-handedness" or "Multi-culturalism"
-
Ezra Levant is making a different point than I am, and that's OK: Ezra Levant: The Christians are going to save the Jews[^]
There was an anti-Semitic protest at Stephen Harper's riding office in Calgary the other day. ... There was precisely one counter-protester, with a tiny Israeli flag: At one point, the police told that counter-protester that if he didn't leave, he'd be arrested for "inciting civil disorder". I'm not making that up -- the lone pro-Israeli protester was told that, not the 175 people trespassing on the parking lot of a private mall. Maybe that's why the cops were too busy to station someone inside. ...
-
Ezra Levant is making a different point than I am, and that's OK: Ezra Levant: The Christians are going to save the Jews[^]
There was an anti-Semitic protest at Stephen Harper's riding office in Calgary the other day. ... There was precisely one counter-protester, with a tiny Israeli flag: At one point, the police told that counter-protester that if he didn't leave, he'd be arrested for "inciting civil disorder". I'm not making that up -- the lone pro-Israeli protester was told that, not the 175 people trespassing on the parking lot of a private mall. Maybe that's why the cops were too busy to station someone inside. ...
That one person was making himself a threat of getting himself hurt, the police asked him to move to prevent 175 protesters into turning into 175 mobsters. Three days ago, protests went on in New York in support of Palestinians, and violence broke out when pro-Israeli protestors showed up. Let us demonstrate, but let us do it separately to keep some peace here.
-
That one person was making himself a threat of getting himself hurt, the police asked him to move to prevent 175 protesters into turning into 175 mobsters. Three days ago, protests went on in New York in support of Palestinians, and violence broke out when pro-Israeli protestors showed up. Let us demonstrate, but let us do it separately to keep some peace here.
EliottA wrote:
That one person was making himself a threat of getting himself hurt, the police asked him to move to prevent 175 protesters into turning into 175 mobsters. Three days ago, protests went on in New York in support of Palestinians, and violence broke out when pro-Israeli protestors showed up. Let us demonstrate, but let us do it separately to keep some peace here.
And thus we see both why modern western "civilization" does not deserve to survive and why it will get exactly what it deserves.
-
Ezra Levant is making a different point than I am, and that's OK: Ezra Levant: The Christians are going to save the Jews[^]
There was an anti-Semitic protest at Stephen Harper's riding office in Calgary the other day. ... There was precisely one counter-protester, with a tiny Israeli flag: At one point, the police told that counter-protester that if he didn't leave, he'd be arrested for "inciting civil disorder". I'm not making that up -- the lone pro-Israeli protester was told that, not the 175 people trespassing on the parking lot of a private mall. Maybe that's why the cops were too busy to station someone inside. ...
Paragraph Quote: Not all Jews are that way. I think a lot of Israelis here in Canada still have a survival instinct. And, probably because they grew up in Arab lands and had to fight every day, I think Sephardi Jews still have that identity, confidence and fire in them. :laugh:
-
Paragraph Quote: Not all Jews are that way. I think a lot of Israelis here in Canada still have a survival instinct. And, probably because they grew up in Arab lands and had to fight every day, I think Sephardi Jews still have that identity, confidence and fire in them. :laugh:
-
That one person was making himself a threat of getting himself hurt, the police asked him to move to prevent 175 protesters into turning into 175 mobsters. Three days ago, protests went on in New York in support of Palestinians, and violence broke out when pro-Israeli protestors showed up. Let us demonstrate, but let us do it separately to keep some peace here.
EliottA wrote:
but let us do it separately to keep some peace here.
Because it is way too much to expect people to OBEY the friggin LAW? :omg:
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Dave
-
EliottA wrote:
but let us do it separately to keep some peace here.
Because it is way too much to expect people to OBEY the friggin LAW? :omg:
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Dave
-
No, because there is never a need to boil the water that much. Just because it's allowed doesn't mean it's the smart thing to do!
So if there is a threat of violence you fold? Every time? That is what extremists everywhere are hoping to get from the rest of the people. And it is what allows a few who are willing to use violence for their ends to dominate whole societies (like Hamas does over Gaza).
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Dave
-
So if there is a threat of violence you fold? Every time? That is what extremists everywhere are hoping to get from the rest of the people. And it is what allows a few who are willing to use violence for their ends to dominate whole societies (like Hamas does over Gaza).
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Dave
-
EliottA wrote:
but let us do it separately to keep some peace here.
Because it is way too much to expect people to OBEY the friggin LAW? :omg:
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Dave
DRHuff wrote:
Because it is way too much to expect people to OBEY the friggin LAW? :omg:
Persons of certain "protected" classes are not to be expected to be law-abiding. And certainly not in Canada (of course, in many European countries the crisis-point is even closer). Far too many in "the west" ... and here in the Sandbox ... imagine that we can satisfy Islamic blood-lust by tossing the Jews to them. And, of course, I must be silenced because I scoff at that rank foolishness [edit: both the immorality of it, which is one sort of deliberate foolishness, and the futility of it, which is another].
modified on Monday, January 12, 2009 7:28 PM
-
No, I didn't say that, but you pick your battles. Just because someone is goating you into it doesn't mean you have to take the bait. If you don't see that, then there'd be a lot more trouble if you where an elected official.
EliottA wrote:
but you pick your battles
This is a battle that I think should be picked. Freedom of speech is threatened across Europe and North America by fear of "offending" Muslims and sending them out into the streets in a violent mob (mmmm Car-b-que). If the police believe that a protest could turn violent they should be there in enough numbers to prevent it. Elected officials who never pick a battle is a large part of the problems we have today. Stand for something - anything.
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Dave
-
No, I didn't say that, but you pick your battles. Just because someone is goating you into it doesn't mean you have to take the bait. If you don't see that, then there'd be a lot more trouble if you where an elected official.
-
EliottA wrote:
but you pick your battles
This is a battle that I think should be picked. Freedom of speech is threatened across Europe and North America by fear of "offending" Muslims and sending them out into the streets in a violent mob (mmmm Car-b-que). If the police believe that a protest could turn violent they should be there in enough numbers to prevent it. Elected officials who never pick a battle is a large part of the problems we have today. Stand for something - anything.
I'm pretty sure I would not like to live in a world in which I would never be offended. I am absolutely certain I don't want to live in a world in which you would never be offended. Dave
-
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote:
:laugh:
Are you really as dense as you pretend to be? Why do you bold part of the thought/speculation and ignore the rest, the important part?
-
No, I didn't say that, but you pick your battles. Just because someone is goating you into it doesn't mean you have to take the bait. If you don't see that, then there'd be a lot more trouble if you where an elected official.
EliottA wrote:
No, I didn't say that, but you pick your battles. Just because someone is goating you into it doesn't mean you have to take the bait.
You fight your enemy where you find him.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote:
We all see what we want to see. I prefer smelling myself.
No doubt. But isn't the important question whether anyone else shares this preference? edit: And isn't it odd that you intend to simultaneously assert that there is no objective truth, or at least that objective truth cannot be known if it does exist (which assertion is a self-contradiction), with the assertion that what you see, or choose to see, is objectively true?
-
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote:
We all see what we want to see. I prefer smelling myself.
No doubt. But isn't the important question whether anyone else shares this preference? edit: And isn't it odd that you intend to simultaneously assert that there is no objective truth, or at least that objective truth cannot be known if it does exist (which assertion is a self-contradiction), with the assertion that what you see, or choose to see, is objectively true?
I think this opinion and its counter, and every other argument, has plenty of advocates for either side. Otherwise, there wouldn't be conflicts in the world. Now if you went by numbers, you'd probably be in the minority. If you went by "I'm right because I think so", you'd be in the majority, but both sides would fall in the same category. It's too bad they all can't be right. Damn leftists.
-
EliottA wrote:
No, I didn't say that, but you pick your battles. Just because someone is goating you into it doesn't mean you have to take the bait.
You fight your enemy where you find him.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
EliottA wrote:
No, I didn't say that, but you pick your battles. Just because someone is goating you into it doesn't mean you have to take the bait.
You fight your enemy where you find him.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
DRHuff wrote:
Because it is way too much to expect people to OBEY the friggin LAW? :omg:
Persons of certain "protected" classes are not to be expected to be law-abiding. And certainly not in Canada (of course, in many European countries the crisis-point is even closer). Far too many in "the west" ... and here in the Sandbox ... imagine that we can satisfy Islamic blood-lust by tossing the Jews to them. And, of course, I must be silenced because I scoff at that rank foolishness [edit: both the immorality of it, which is one sort of deliberate foolishness, and the futility of it, which is another].
modified on Monday, January 12, 2009 7:28 PM
Ilíon wrote:
And, of course, I must be silenced because I scoff at that rank foolishness [edit: both the immorality of it, which is one sort of deliberate foolishness, and the futility of it, which is another].
No, you should be silenced because you are a hemorrhoid that has learned how to type.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface