City Hall Racist Ad

lucky_blue

New member
Nov 23, 2010
749
0
0
Interesting article in the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/20/islamophobia-funding-cair-berkeley-report

Next fun step is linking where the 74 organizations who were behind this campaign got there money from.
Frankfooter - why do you want to be a mouthpiece for Hamas? Are you on the Hamas payroll?

"From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists." Assistant U.S. DOJ Attorney Gordon D. Kromberg

"Media in the United States is very gullible, ok? And they will see that if you have something, especially as a Muslim, if you have something to say, they will come running to you—and take advantage of that." CAIR's Vice Chair Sarwat Husain

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/site/cair-questions.aspx

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/06/...as-linked-cair-issues-new-islamophobia-report

In wake of Orlando massacre, Hamas-linked CAIR issues new “Islamophobia” report

Instead of announcing a program to teach young Muslims why they should reject the understanding of Islam held by the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and other jihad groups, the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) held a press conference today to unveil its latest cynical and deceptive report on “Islamophobia” in the U.S.

The whole “Islamophobia” enterprise is designed to intimidate people into thinking there is something wrong with opposing jihad terror, and this new report is no different. A few seconds of thought would expose the deceptiveness of it to anyone, but Hamas-linked CAIR is banking on the fact that most people, especially on the Left but not limited to it, will not give the report even that much thought, but will take it at face value, anxious to avoid being stigmatized themselves with the “Islamophobe” label.

For those willing to consider the facts, however, here are some of the problems with the new report:

1. “Thirty-three Islamophobic groups had access to $205 million between 2008 and 2013 to spread fear and hatred of Muslims.” Are these groups part of one umbrella organization? No. Are they collaborators? Some are and some aren’t. Do they share funding? No. So $205 million (if that figure is even accurate, which it probably isn’t) over six years spread out among 33 different and quite disparate organizations actually averages out to a bit over a million a year per organization — a figure that is actually not a large operating budget for a major organization, and doubtless much smaller than that of Hamas-linked CAIR itself. (And for the record, Jihad Watch has never had anything close to a million dollars in any given year.)

2. “…to spread fear and hatred of Muslims.” That is not my objective, and I would venture to say it is not the objective of any of the other people or organizations mentioned in Hamas-linked CAIR’s report. CAIR’s entire premise is false: that to call attention to jihad terror activity, and to call for effective lawful responses to it, is tantamount to spreading “fear and hatred of Muslims.” Hamas-linked CAIR and its allies have spread this Big Lie so insistently for so many years that it has entered the American mainstream, but that doesn’t make it any more true than it was when they first advanced it. If Hamas-linked CAIR had ever provided even one example of a foe of jihad terror who was simultaneously not an “Islamophobe” in their eyes, this charge might have more credibility. But they never have. As far as Hamas-linked CAIR is concerned, any opposition to jihad terror at all is “Islamophobic” and spreading “fear and hatred of Muslims.”

3. “Attacks on mosques have increased, with 78 recorded incidents in 2015.” Have I or any of the others mentioned in this report ever called for attacks on mosques? No. Have any of the people who attacked mosques ever invoked any of us to explain why they attacked the mosques? No. Have Muslims faked “hate” attacks on mosques? Yes. Which is more likely: that any actual attack on a mosque by a non-Muslim vigilante idiot was provoked by our reporting about jihad terror, or by jihad terror itself, against which the mosques in the U.S. have not acted in any strong fashion? Hamas-linked CAIR would have you believe that this alleged cabal of “Islamophobic” individuals and groups is responsible for Americans’ suspicion and distrust of Muslims, when in reality the people who are responsible for any actual such suspicion and distrust are Omar Mateen, Syed Rizwan Farook, Tashfeen Malik, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, Nidal Malik Hasan, etc.

5. In an introduction to the report itself, Hamas-linked CAIR’s Nihad Awad says: “This report makes a case that those who value constitutional ideals like equal protection, freedom of worship, or an absence of religious tests for those seeking public office no longer have the luxury of just opposing the U.S. Islamophobia network’s biased messaging.” But I don’t oppose “equal protection, freedom of worship, or an absence of religious tests for those seeking public office,” and again, I’d venture to say that none of the others mentioned in the report do, either. This is a straw man designed to demonize opponents of jihad terror, and opposition to it in general. In reality, we’re just trying to do all we can via legal means to stop jihad activity in the U.S. But Hamas-linked CAIR cannot acknowledge that, as to do so would reveal its actual agenda. So it has to mischaracterize our aims.

6. The report says: “Islamophobia is a contrived fear or prejudice fomented by the existing Eurocentric and Orientalist global power structure. It is directed at a perceived or real Muslim threat through the maintenance and extension of existing disparities in economic, political, social, and cultural relations, while rationalizing the necessity to deploy violence as a tool to achieve ‘civilizational rehab’ of the target communities (Muslim or otherwise).” Cut through this pseudo-academic gobbledegook and you will see that it is saying that “Islamophobia” as a “contrived fear or prejudice” fomented in response to a “real Muslim threat.” So Hamas-linked CAIR admits that there is a “real Muslim threat,” but claims that the “Islamophobic” individuals and groups in its report have a wrong response to it, and indeed are representatives of the “existing Eurocentric and Orientalist global power structure.”

The idea that the “global power structure” today is anything but fully in line with Hamas-linked CAIR’s point of view today is wildly absurd. But even aside from that, nowhere does Hamas-linked CAIR bother to explain what a proper response would be to this “real Muslim threat.” Apparently it would be nothing more or less than to surrender to it, since its “Islamophobia” report is designed to defame and discredit those who are standing against it, thereby clearing the field so that the jihad can advance unopposed and unimpeded.

Corey Saylor

“Mosque Attacks, Apparent Anti-Islam Spending Up: Report,” by Frances Kai-Hwa Wang, NBC News, June 20, 2016:

Thirty-three Islamophobic groups had access to $205 million between 2008 and 2013 to spread fear and hatred of Muslims, according to a new report by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Center for Race and Gender at the University of California, Berkeley. “Confronting Fear: Islamophobia and its Impact in the U.S. 2013-2015” documents the ways this and other funding has made Islamophobia manifest in America, as well as a new national strategy to improve American understanding and acceptance of Islam. The report also found that mosque attacks had reached an all-time high in 2015.

The number of Islamophobic groups in America has increased from 69 groups in 2013 to 74 groups in 2015, according to the report. Thirty-three of these groups are considered the inner core of the American Islamophobic network because their primary mission is to promote hate and prejudice against Islam and Muslims. Among the report’s other findings: Attacks on mosques have increased, with 78 recorded incidents in 2015. Ten states have passed anti-Islam laws. Two states have changed the way textbooks are approved in order to change the way Islam is taught in schools, law enforcement trainings on handling anti-Islamic crime has decreased, and a new phenomenon of “Muslim-free” businesses and armed anti-Islam demonstrations has developed.

The report also presents a national strategy to increase American understanding of Islam by increasing the participation of Muslims in community issues, establishing Islamophobia as the same as other types of prejudice and one that undermines American ideals, empowering a diverse range of Muslim voices to contribute to public discourse, and increasing the participation of Muslims in politics through public service and voting….
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
88,981
21,132
113
Frankfooter - why do you want to be a mouthpiece for Hamas? Are you on the Hamas payroll?

"From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists." Assistant U.S. DOJ Attorney Gordon D. Kromberg
Hamas is about the same as Netanyahu's Israel, neither of which I like and both of which should be charged for their terrorism/crimes.

Lets take a look at your source, Jihadwatch.
Its run by Robert Spencer.

Spencer is linked in with Pamella Geller, inspiration for Anders Breivik, and part of what the Department of Homeland describes as 'right wing extremism'.
In other words, he's pretty much a mouth piece for right wing domestic terrorism.

He was banned from the UK for his hate mongering, along with Pamella Geller.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-23064355

According to the CBC, Spencer came to Calgary to speak and was backed by the group, Jewish Defence League, who the FBI accused of terrorist plots in 2001.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/robert-spencer-calgary-1.3558485

Who is the one backing terrorists here?
 

lucky_blue

New member
Nov 23, 2010
749
0
0
Hamas is about the same as Netanyahu's Israel, neither of which I like and both of which should be charged for their terrorism/crimes.

Lets take a look at your source, Jihadwatch.
Its run by Robert Spencer.

Spencer is linked in with Pamella Geller, inspiration for Anders Breivik, and part of what the Department of Homeland describes as 'right wing extremism'.
In other words, he's pretty much a mouth piece for right wing domestic terrorism.

He was banned from the UK for his hate mongering, along with Pamella Geller.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-23064355

According to the CBC, Spencer came to Calgary to speak and was backed by the group, Jewish Defence League, who the FBI accused of terrorist plots in 2001.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/robert-spencer-calgary-1.3558485

Who is the one backing terrorists here?
Frankfooter your anti semitism is clearly on display. The simple principle has been utterly forgotten, but it is nonetheless still true: no one bears responsibility for anyone else’s actions, unless that person is being coerced.

Take a good look at what is happening in the UK.

 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
88,981
21,132
113
Frankfooter your anti semitism is clearly on display.
Lets take a look at what the ADL says about your pal, Robert Spencer and his jihadwatch blog.
Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) called Spencer and Geller American anti-Muslim writers because their writings "promote a conspiratorial anti-Muslim agenda under the pretext of fighting radical Islam. This belief system parallels the creation of an ideological — and far more deadly — form of anti-Semitism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries." He continued, "we must always be wary of those whose love for the Jewish people is born out of hatred of Muslims or Arabs."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Spencer_(author)

According to the Anti Defamation League, you are the one who is quoting and backing anti-semitism here.
 

lucky_blue

New member
Nov 23, 2010
749
0
0
Hamas is about the same as Netanyahu's Israel, neither of which I like and both of which should be charged for their terrorism/crimes.

Lets take a look at your source, Jihadwatch.
Its run by Robert Spencer.

Spencer is linked in with Pamella Geller, inspiration for Anders Breivik, and part of what the Department of Homeland describes as 'right wing extremism'.
In other words, he's pretty much a mouth piece for right wing domestic terrorism.

He was banned from the UK for his hate mongering, along with Pamella Geller.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-23064355

According to the CBC, Spencer came to Calgary to speak and was backed by the group, Jewish Defence League, who the FBI accused of terrorist plots in 2001.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/robert-spencer-calgary-1.3558485

Who is the one backing terrorists here?
Equating Israel and Hamas is simply anti semitic. Why is it so hard to just admit that you hate jews?

http://thefederalist.com/2014/07/18/...ael-and-hamas/

Sorry Vox, There’s No Equating Israel And Hamas

Not long ago, Vox’s Max Fisher argued that Israel was liable for the entire conflict in the Middle East. He then accused Israel of welcoming Hamas’ execution of three Jewish teenagers as a pretext to engage in the vengeful massacring of Arab civilians. And then he lamented the fact that Hamas’ rocket barrage was met with Israel’s technological superiority and, consequently, a lopsided outcome.

Nowadays, as Hamas ignores cease-fires and is caught using children as human shields by the United Nations, many apologists have given up. Not Fisher, who attempts to whip up some moral equivalency in a new piece titled “Yes, Gaza militants hide rockets in schools, but Israel doesn’t have to bomb them”:

This is the one thing that both Hamas and Israel seem to share: a willingness to adopt military tactics that will put Palestinian civilians at direct risk and that contribute, however unintentionally, to the deaths of Palestinian civilians. Partisans in the Israel-Palestine conflict want to make that an argument over which “side” has greater moral culpability in the continued killings of Palestinian civilians. And there is validity to asking whether Hamas should so ensconce itself among civilians in a way that will invite attacks, just as there is validity to asking why Israel seems to show so little restraint in dropping bombs over Gaza neighborhoods. But even that argument over moral superiority ultimately treats those dying Palestinian families as pawns in the conflict, tokens to be counted for or against, their humanity and suffering so easily disregarded.

A “partisan” writing about a conflict as if he was an honest broker is distracting, but read it again. You might note that one of the institutions he’s talking about is the governing authority of the Palestinian people in Gaza, which, applying even the most basic standards of decency, should task itself with safeguarding the lives of civilians. Instead, it makes martyrs out of children and relies on the compassion of Israelis to protect its weapons. This is a tragedy, of course, but Israel does have to bomb caches of rockets hidden by “militants” in Mosques, schools, and hospitals. Since Hamas’ terrorist complex is deeply embedded in Gaza’s civilian infrastructure there is really no other way. And that only tells us that one of the two organizations mentioned by Fisher has purposely decided to use Palestinian as pawns and put civilians in harm’s way.

It is also preposterous to claim that Israel is showing “little restraint in dropping bombs over Gaza neighborhoods.” Actually, Israel is far more concerned with the wellbeing of Palestinians civilians than Hamas. This week, 13 Hamas fighters used a tunnel into Israel and attempted to murder 150 civilians in Kibbutz Sufa, with Kalashnikovs and anti-tank weapons. On the same day, Israel issued early warnings before attacking Hamas targets – as it often has throughout this conflict in an effort to avoid needless civilian deaths Hamas is hoping for. It was Israel that agreed to a five-hour cease-fire so that UN aid could flow into Gaza last week. It is Israel that sends hundreds of thousands of tons of food to Gaza every year, millions of articles of clothing and medical aid. That’s more than restraint.

As this Vox card helpfully clarifies, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005, offering Palestinians a chance to form any brand of government they chose. Israel instituted a blockade only after Hamas (which has a peaceful political wing, according to Fisher) began importing and smuggling armaments from Iran and elsewhere rather than concerning itself with the humanity and suffering of Palestinians. So if Israel ignored the 11,000-or so rockets and missiles Hamas has stashed in hospitals and kindergartens and God-knows-where, those weapons would continue to pose a threat to its civilian population, and thus continue to pose a threat to Palestinian population. Though I’m skeptical such a result is possible, the best outcome for the average Gazan today, is for Israel to decimate Hamas (and other Jihadist groups) that put them in this dangerous position.

I often hear people claim that the Israel-Palestinian situation is complex. It isn’t. It’s difficult to solve, indeed, but it’s not complex. One side refuses to engage in any serious efforts to make peace with modernity and with Jews. So, for those like Andrew Sullivan and some of the folks at The American Conservative, who argue that Israel is the one drifting from Western ideals, I think Douglas Murray has the best retort:

A gap may well be emerging. But not because Israel has drifted away from the West. Rather because today in much of the West, as we bask in the afterglow of our achievements — eager to enjoy our rights, but unwilling to defend them — it is the West that is, slowly but surely, drifting away from itself.

In Israel, there is wide-ranging debate about the ethics and morality of war and occupation. The military is accountable to the government and the courts, and the government is held accountable by the people. Israel, with all its mistakes, exhibits all the characteristics of an ethical liberal state. It concerns itself with the human cost of war, but it also – and much of this has to do with its history and the proximity of its enemy – vigorously defends the lives, security and property of its citizens from barbarism. In other words, it “shares” nothing with Hamas.

Follow David Harsanyi on Twitter.
 
Last edited:

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,839
2,840
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Lets take a look at what the ADL says about your pal, Robert Spencer and his jihadwatch blog.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Spencer_(author)

According to the Anti Defamation League, you are the one who is quoting and backing anti-semitism here.

the same ADL also claims that ((( ))) is anti-semitic

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...nti-defamation-league-echo-hate-symbol-chrome

and was sued for defmation

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n3p18_adl.html
 

luckyjackson

Active member
Aug 19, 2001
1,505
2
38
I admit, I am islamaphobic. Why wouldn't I, or any other rational person not have a revulsion towards the teachings of this worst of all religions? Not only because its holy book teaches horrible shit. The Bible does too. But Muslims are locked into their beliefs in a way Christians are not because of the double whammy that says the Koran is the perfect unchangeable word of God and that Mohammad was his last prophet. even moderate Muslims acknowledge the Koran's perfection. Reform is difficult. As long as Muslim societies lag behind the West, they will feel threatened. And as lon g as that's true, a minority will turn to violence.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
88,981
21,132
113
the same ADL also claims that ((( ))) is anti-semitic
You aren't doing yourself any better here.

You keep quoting Spencer's jihadwatch blog, the guy would was brought to Canada by a group the FBI identifies as terrorist and the same guy who was banned from entering the UK.

All you're doing is proving the need and effectiveness for the city of Toronto ad.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,839
2,840
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
You aren't doing yourself any better here.

You keep quoting Spencer's jihadwatch blog, the guy would was brought to Canada by a group the FBI identifies as terrorist and the same guy who was banned from entering the UK.

All you're doing is proving the need and effectiveness for the city of Toronto ad.
this from somebody who is a Hamas Apologist and and an admitted anti-semitic and too chicken and a coward to condemn islamic hatred
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
88,981
21,132
113
this from somebody who is a Hamas Apologist and and an admitted anti-semitic and too chicken and a coward to condemn islamic hatred
Calling for equal rights makes you a Hamas apologist around here?
Backing Bernie Sanders makes me an antisemite?
Condemning all religions makes me a coward?

Really, just buy yourself a mirror.
jihadwatch and its ilk are the really disgusting and racist end of the right wing spectrum.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,839
2,840
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Calling for equal rights makes you a Hamas apologist around here?
Backing Bernie Sanders makes me an antisemite?
Condemning all religions makes me a coward?

Really, just buy yourself a mirror.
jihadwatch and its ilk are the really disgusting and racist end of the right wing spectrum.


you never condemned radical islam, you constantly bring up christian hatred you only hate christianity

your constant anti-israeli postings while making excuses for hamas whose goals is to kill jews makes you anti-semitic.

Jihad watch quotes mainstream news sources if you bothered to read the website you would know.

and you don't support equality. you never condemned islamic homophobia and misogyny.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,839
2,840
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com

rhuarc29

Well-known member
Apr 15, 2009
9,643
1,271
113
Bullshit.

The people who get offended by it being a white guy are the type who are already so set in their ways and many posters here quite routinely show they have pathetically ridiculous views about Muslims and other ethnicities. Those people won't change their minds so offending them means nothing.
So if this ad isn't aimed at convincing the anti-Muslim crowd to reform their ways, what exactly is its use? To make progressive people feel all uppity? To polish Canada's reputation?

Besides which, I'll say again: "Muslim" is not a race. It's a choice. People are judged on their choices.

I take a tolerant view of beliefs, but one thing I won't tolerate is intolerance. And the Muslim religion is rife with it.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,839
2,840
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Are you asking for advice? Pretty sure we all know which race you'd convert to, given the opportunity.
don't be a smart ass
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,839
2,840
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Well, you keep asking, "how do you convert to a race?".
i will stop asking until the leftists here stop calling criticism of islam racist
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
88,981
21,132
113
i will stop asking until the leftists here stop calling criticism of islam racist
Racism isn't based only on biological differences. When you call an Italian a 'wop' or a Polish person a 'pole' or use some other racist language you aren't basing that on biological differences, you are basing that on cultural differences. Attacking all Muslims is just using another form of cultural differentiation. Its the same idea, its racism.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,839
2,840
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Racism isn't based only on biological differences. When you call an Italian a 'wop' or a Polish person a 'pole' or use some other racist language you aren't basing that on biological differences, you are basing that on cultural differences. Attacking all Muslims is just using another form of cultural differentiation. Its the same idea, its racism.

islam is not biological


Full Definition of racism
1
: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2
: racial prejudice or discrimination
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
88,981
21,132
113
I take a tolerant view of beliefs, but one thing I won't tolerate is intolerance. And the Muslim religion is rife with it.
So you won't tolerate Muslims?

Mennonites, Doukhobors, Amish, Mormons...
They all some pretty wacked out ideas that we've learned to tolerate.
Just as we don't tolerate christians who shoot doctors that provide abortions and we don't tolerate extremist Islamicists.
But they are in the minority as are Christians who are violently against abortion.
Second generation Muslims are pretty much like any other second generation Canadian, moderate.
All religions are pretty stupid, and most are on their way out, though very slowly.

But we don't go out and ban all Christians from entering the country just because a few wingnuts are out there shooting abortion clinics, do we?

Tolerance means letting them follow their stupid religion unless it impacts others negatively.
But given time, most religious folks living in Canada learn to moderate their actions to fit in, Muslims and Christians.
The number of really devout people of any religion in Canada is dropping.
 
Toronto Escorts