[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Oexmelin]

Nothing wrong here.  Absolutely nothing.  Besides, it's not like the MB has commited terrorist acts in Egypt, is committing terrorist acts in Egype, has funded and still is funding the Hamas.

Where did I write there was nothing wrong? We can certainly condemn the MB for a variety of reasons, but I maintain the nature of the MB warrants a different political (and perhaps even ethical) analytical treatment than the knee-jerk "muslim-terrorism". This article just thrives in innuendo. 

[crazy canuck]

Nothing wrong here.  Absolutely nothing.  Besides, it's not like the MB has commited terrorist acts in Egypt, is committing terrorist acts in Egype, has funded and still is funding the Hamas.

Where did I write there was nothing wrong? We can certainly condemn the MB for a variety of reasons, but I maintain the nature of the MB warrants a different political (and perhaps even ethical) analytical treatment than the knee-jerk "muslim-terrorism". This article just thrives in innuendo.

Judging from the reaction of the usual Languish suspects at least we can say the author of the article knows his audience.

[Valmy]

Nothing wrong here.  Absolutely nothing.  Besides, it's not like the MB has commited terrorist acts in Egypt, is committing terrorist acts in Egype, has funded and still is funding the Hamas.

Where did I write there was nothing wrong? We can certainly condemn the MB for a variety of reasons, but I maintain the nature of the MB warrants a different political (and perhaps even ethical) analytical treatment than the knee-jerk "muslim-terrorism". This article just thrives in innuendo. 

That I can agree with.

I mean if Trudeau was visiting a radically conservative Christian congregation something would probably be said about that right? But nobody would act like those guys were going to go bomb all the abortion providers tomorrow.

[crazy canuck]

Judging from the reaction of the usual Languish suspects at least we can say the author of the article knows his audience.

CC is so awesome and we are all so stupid! Thanks CC!

Hey if you want to lump yourself in with the Ancient one and Grallon you do a good job of self identifying   

and thank you for the compliment.  Normally you are a bit more passive aggressive.

[viper37]

Let's see.
a gender-segregated mosque
Right there, for a guy who feels compelled to name 50% women on his cabinet, regardless of their relative merit, that stinks of hypocrisy.  "We're in 2016".  Oh yeah.

whose imam is a member of a group considered a terrorist organization abroad.

Now let's see what we're talking about.
International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) (also International Union for Muslim Scholars; Arabic: الاتحاد العالمي لعلماء المسلمين‎‎ al-Ittiḥād al-ʻĀlamī li-ʻUlāmāʼ al-Muslimīn), and formerly translated as the International Association of Muslim Scholars, IAMS) is an organization of Muslim scholars headed by the ideological leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi,[1] founded in 2004, and headquartered in Qatar. (Wikipedia).
So it was founded and his headed by the ideological leader of the MB.

Now, who is this charming fellow?
Some of al-Qaradawi's views have been controversial in the West:[11] he was refused an entry visa to the United Kingdom in 2008,[12] and barred from entering France in 2012.
So, for France and the UK, this guy is persona non grata because of his views, but in Canada, he would be welcome with open arms.
And that does not strike you as wrong?

Some more:
On the other hand, Al-Qaradawi himself has been accused of extremism for denouncing Jews for their "corruption" and describing Adolf Hitler as having put Jews "in their place".
So, what we have here is an Imam in Ontario who shares the views of this organization.  I assume he shares the views, because if he didn't, he wouldn't be an Imam for such an organization.  Again, totally fine.  It's like inviting Rudolph Hess for dinner in 1941, there's a six degrees of nazism seperation here.

In 2008 warned of the "Shiitization" of the Middle East, saying Shiite Muslims were "invading" Sunni societies.
Again, totally fine as far as ideologies goes.  It's like warning our people that Muslism are invading western societies.  So Trudeau would have no problems shaking hands with Marty or Grallon.  6th degree of seperation and all.  Just because you have the same ideas as the founder of the movement you belong to does not make you a bad person like the guy who said such thing.  You're just following, so, no big deal.

In May 2008, al-Qaradawi told visiting Rabbis from the Haredi, Anti-Zionist Neturei Karta sect, "there is no enmity between Muslims and Jews.... Jews who believe in the authentic Torah are very close to Muslims." He has also expressed his belief that relations between Muslims and Jews became strained with the emergence of Zionism and the establishment of Israel. "Muslims are against the expansionist, oppressive Zionist movement, not the Jews." Reportedly, in 1998 the Associated Press quoted al-Qaradawi writing, "There should be no dialogue with these people [Israelis] except with swords."
Again, nothing wrong here, it's not like opposition to the existence of Israel is a bad thing.  Put them all to sword, let God sort 'em all, and all that.  Anyone saying that can be engaged in a reasonable dialogue, as you certainly know.


O Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. O Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors. O Allah, take this profligate, cunning, arrogant band of people. O Allah, they have spread much tyranny and corruption in the land. Pour Your wrath upon them, O our God. Lie in wait for them. O Allah, You annihilated the people of Thamoud (An early pagan Arab tribe) with an overpowering blast, and You annihilated the people of 'Aad with a fierce, icy gale, and You destroyed the pharaoh [of Exodus] and his soldiers – O Allah, take this oppressive, tyrannical band of people. O Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish Zionist band of people. O Allah, do not spare a single one of them. O Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one.[61]
That's worsds any Catholic priest would be comfortable hearing from the Pope, or his bishop, most certainly

While he is against terrorims, there is a specific exclusion:
He denies that Palestinian suicide bombing attacks constitute terrorism, claiming, "when Palestinians face such unjust aggression, they tend to stem bloodletting and destruction and not to claim the lives of innocent civilians," but qualifies that with "I do agree with those who do not allow such martyr operations to be carried out outside the Palestinian territories."

"An Israeli woman is not like women in our societies, because she is a soldier."
"I consider this type of martyrdom operation as an evidence of God's justice."
"Allah Almighty is Just; through His infinite Wisdom He has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do.

Again, nothing wrong with the movement.  They're Israelis, they're fair game.  Women and children, they all deserve to die, so long as one draws breath in a Jewish State.


If he's such a genuine nice guy, why belong to such a movement?

Why would Trudeau show support for such a movement and not attend a 9/11 ceremony the day before?  He doesn't work on Sunday because it's God's will?

[viper37]

Nothing wrong here.  Absolutely nothing.  Besides, it's not like the MB has commited terrorist acts in Egypt, is committing terrorist acts in Egype, has funded and still is funding the Hamas.

Where did I write there was nothing wrong? We can certainly condemn the MB for a variety of reasons, but I maintain the nature of the MB warrants a different political (and perhaps even ethical) analytical treatment than the knee-jerk "muslim-terrorism". This article just thrives in innuendo. 

It's not the same as ISIS, the objectives and the methods are different, I'll grant you that.
But a Prime Minister showing up in a mosque linked with this movment is not "allright" in my book.
Hamas and ISIS may be very different beasts, but it does not make one more acceptable than the other.
It's like saying the Heritage Front is better than the Skinheads.  Imho, it's a choice we don't have to make.

[viper37]

Nothing wrong here.  Absolutely nothing.  Besides, it's not like the MB has commited terrorist acts in Egypt, is committing terrorist acts in Egype, has funded and still is funding the Hamas.

Where did I write there was nothing wrong? We can certainly condemn the MB for a variety of reasons, but I maintain the nature of the MB warrants a different political (and perhaps even ethical) analytical treatment than the knee-jerk "muslim-terrorism". This article just thrives in innuendo. 

That I can agree with.

I mean if Trudeau was visiting a radically conservative Christian congregation something would probably be said about that right?

Actually, there is a lot of talk about a certain judge coming from such an organization...  (Robin Camp)

But nobody would act like those guys were going to go bomb all the abortion providers tomorrow.

That's not what the article says either.

[Malthus]

Let's see.
a gender-segregated mosque
Right there, for a guy who feels compelled to name 50% women on his cabinet, regardless of their relative merit, that stinks of hypocrisy.  "We're in 2016".  Oh yeah.

whose imam is a member of a group considered a terrorist organization abroad.

Now let's see what we're talking about.
International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) (also International Union for Muslim Scholars; Arabic: الاتحاد العالمي لعلماء المسلمين‎‎ al-Ittiḥād al-ʻĀlamī li-ʻUlāmāʼ al-Muslimīn), and formerly translated as the International Association of Muslim Scholars, IAMS) is an organization of Muslim scholars headed by the ideological leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi,[1] founded in 2004, and headquartered in Qatar. (Wikipedia).
So it was founded and his headed by the ideological leader of the MB.

Now, who is this charming fellow?
Some of al-Qaradawi's views have been controversial in the West:[11] he was refused an entry visa to the United Kingdom in 2008,[12] and barred from entering France in 2012.
So, for France and the UK, this guy is persona non grata because of his views, but in Canada, he would be welcome with open arms.
And that does not strike you as wrong?

Some more:
On the other hand, Al-Qaradawi himself has been accused of extremism for denouncing Jews for their "corruption" and describing Adolf Hitler as having put Jews "in their place".
So, what we have here is an Imam in Ontario who shares the views of this organization.  I assume he shares the views, because if he didn't, he wouldn't be an Imam for such an organization.  Again, totally fine.  It's like inviting Rudolph Hess for dinner in 1941, there's a six degrees of nazism seperation here.

In 2008 warned of the "Shiitization" of the Middle East, saying Shiite Muslims were "invading" Sunni societies.
Again, totally fine as far as ideologies goes.  It's like warning our people that Muslism are invading western societies.  So Trudeau would have no problems shaking hands with Marty or Grallon.  6th degree of seperation and all.  Just because you have the same ideas as the founder of the movement you belong to does not make you a bad person like the guy who said such thing.  You're just following, so, no big deal.

In May 2008, al-Qaradawi told visiting Rabbis from the Haredi, Anti-Zionist Neturei Karta sect, "there is no enmity between Muslims and Jews.... Jews who believe in the authentic Torah are very close to Muslims." He has also expressed his belief that relations between Muslims and Jews became strained with the emergence of Zionism and the establishment of Israel. "Muslims are against the expansionist, oppressive Zionist movement, not the Jews." Reportedly, in 1998 the Associated Press quoted al-Qaradawi writing, "There should be no dialogue with these people [Israelis] except with swords."
Again, nothing wrong here, it's not like opposition to the existence of Israel is a bad thing.  Put them all to sword, let God sort 'em all, and all that.  Anyone saying that can be engaged in a reasonable dialogue, as you certainly know.


O Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. O Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors. O Allah, take this profligate, cunning, arrogant band of people. O Allah, they have spread much tyranny and corruption in the land. Pour Your wrath upon them, O our God. Lie in wait for them. O Allah, You annihilated the people of Thamoud (An early pagan Arab tribe) with an overpowering blast, and You annihilated the people of 'Aad with a fierce, icy gale, and You destroyed the pharaoh [of Exodus] and his soldiers – O Allah, take this oppressive, tyrannical band of people. O Allah, take this oppressive, Jewish Zionist band of people. O Allah, do not spare a single one of them. O Allah, count their numbers, and kill them, down to the very last one.[61]
That's worsds any Catholic priest would be comfortable hearing from the Pope, or his bishop, most certainly

While he is against terrorims, there is a specific exclusion:
He denies that Palestinian suicide bombing attacks constitute terrorism, claiming, "when Palestinians face such unjust aggression, they tend to stem bloodletting and destruction and not to claim the lives of innocent civilians," but qualifies that with "I do agree with those who do not allow such martyr operations to be carried out outside the Palestinian territories."

"An Israeli woman is not like women in our societies, because she is a soldier."
"I consider this type of martyrdom operation as an evidence of God's justice."
"Allah Almighty is Just; through His infinite Wisdom He has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do.

Again, nothing wrong with the movement.  They're Israelis, they're fair game.  Women and children, they all deserve to die, so long as one draws breath in a Jewish State.


If he's such a genuine nice guy, why belong to such a movement?

Why would Trudeau show support for such a movement and not attend a 9/11 ceremony the day before?  He doesn't work on Sunday because it's God's will?

This adds up to a whole lot of "meh".

1. "Gender segregated" worship isn't unusual, though personally I'm against the practice. Orthodox Jews do it, for example. Would Trudeau be a hypocrite if he "associated" with an Orthodox Jew?

2. We've already discussed the notion that this group is a "terrorist movement". Only in the United Arab Emirates, who are clearly using their designation in ways that are questionable, to say the least.

3. Listing such an organization on one's website doesn't mean that one subscribes to each and every position of the founder of that organization. Most of what you quoted is pretty bog-standard stuff in the ME: Jews aren't the "enemy", Israelis are; romanticization of Palestinian terrorism, etc. There is no indication this particular fellow Trudeau met cares whatsoever about ME politics (as opposed to, say, Muslim scholarship - the ostensible reason for the organization).

4. The appropriate analogy isn't "shaking Grallon's hand", it is "shaking Viper's hand, because he's a member of Languish, and so is Grallon, and so presumably he believes everything Grallon believes" - that is, assuming Grallon happened to found this place. 

5. The notion that X politician deliberately slaps Y group in the face for not attending Z function is even lamer than the attempt at guilt-by-association-by-association. I'm not a big Trudeau fan, but these attacks aren't even approaching touching him.

[Valmy]

We are funded by a radical Concretist.

[Malthus]

We are funded by a radical Concretist.

Death to the users of all natural materials!

[Barrister]

KEvin O'Leary, who keeps flirting with running for the Conservative Party leadership, wants a national referendum on pipelines.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/kevin-oleary/its-time-to-end-canadas-p_b_12008776.html?utm_hp_ref=canada

What a dumb idea.  For starters I'm not sure the "yes" side would win.  But more so it doesn't solve the numerous jurisdictional issues that have slowed pipeline development to a glacial crawl over the last decade.

[Ancient Demon]

3. Listing such an organization on one's website doesn't mean that one subscribes to each and every position of the founder of that organization.

Yeah, just like not every member of the KKK agrees with everything David Duke says. Seriously Malthus, you wouldn't be making these excuses for a church with white supremacist ties, and you know it.

Do you think there are so few Muslims and mosques in Canada with no ties to pro-terrorist organizations that it would be unreasonable to expect the prime minister to go to one of them instead?

[viper37]

1. "Gender segregated" worship isn't unusual, though personally I'm against the practice. Orthodox Jews do it, for example. Would Trudeau be a hypocrite if he "associated" with an Orthodox Jew?

Depends on the context.  If he were to visit a Jewish Temple owned by Lev Tahor, I would disaprove.  If he went to a Synagogue affiliated with an organization advocating the removal of all Palestinians and Arabs from the Greater Israel, yes, he would be.

3. Listing such an organization on one's website doesn't mean that one subscribes to each and every position of the founder of that organization. Most of what you quoted is pretty bog-standard stuff in the ME: Jews aren't the "enemy", Israelis are; romanticization of Palestinian terrorism, etc. There is no indication this particular fellow Trudeau met cares whatsoever about ME politics (as opposed to, say, Muslim scholarship - the ostensible reason for the organization).

Yes, he says Jews aren't the ennemy, but then he proceeds to call on the extermination of the Jews and praise Hitler's work.  And then, 3000km away, you have an Imam associating with this movement.
I find it... peculiar.

But who cares?  I'm not Jewish, I don't live in a big city, so it's not like I'll be a target for radical islamism anytime soon.  So, keep fanning the flames of extremis, by all means.

4. The appropriate analogy isn't "shaking Grallon's hand", it is "shaking Viper's hand, because he's a member of Languish, and so is Grallon, and so presumably he believes everything Grallon believes" - that is, assuming Grallon happened to found this place. 

Hmm, no, not exactly.
Grallon and I are both members of Languish.  Languish is a diverse community, but what unites us is our passion, at one time or another, for grand strategy games.
If we were both active members of a neo nazi board, you could presume certain things of us, about our interests, our views of the world.  I mean, would you join Stormfront just because there's a couple of cool dudes whom you exchange with at one time or another on Paradox OT?  Most likely not.

5. The notion that X politician deliberately slaps Y group in the face for not attending Z function is even lamer than the attempt at guilt-by-association-by-association. I'm not a big Trudeau fan, but these attacks aren't even approaching touching him.

It's the notion of not attending Z function while freeing time for Y function.
It shows your sense of priority, that's all.

[Malthus]

3. Listing such an organization on one's website doesn't mean that one subscribes to each and every position of the founder of that organization.

Yeah, just like not every member of the KKK agrees with everything David Duke says. Seriously Malthus, you wouldn't be making these excuses for a church with white supremacist ties, and you know it.

Do you think there are so few Muslims and mosques in Canada with no ties to pro-terrorist organizations that it would be unreasonable to expect the prime minister to go to one of them instead?

That isn't a good analogy. The ostensible reason for the group isn't to promote terrorism, but to promote Muslim studies.

The better analogy is to a politician visiting some Christian minister who listed on their website that they were a member of an international evangelist Christian study group whose founder happened to also be a member of some terrorist anti-abortion group. That politician: tainted forever by association? 

[Malthus]

1. "Gender segregated" worship isn't unusual, though personally I'm against the practice. Orthodox Jews do it, for example. Would Trudeau be a hypocrite if he "associated" with an Orthodox Jew?

Depends on the context.  If he were to visit a Jewish Temple owned by Lev Tahor, I would disaprove.  If he went to a Synagogue affiliated with an organization advocating the removal of all Palestinians and Arabs from the Greater Israel, yes, he would be.

So you only disapprove of "gender segregation" by people you disapprove of for other reasons? 

3. Listing such an organization on one's website doesn't mean that one subscribes to each and every position of the founder of that organization. Most of what you quoted is pretty bog-standard stuff in the ME: Jews aren't the "enemy", Israelis are; romanticization of Palestinian terrorism, etc. There is no indication this particular fellow Trudeau met cares whatsoever about ME politics (as opposed to, say, Muslim scholarship - the ostensible reason for the organization).

Yes, he says Jews aren't the ennemy, but then he proceeds to call on the extermination of the Jews and praise Hitler's work.  And then, 3000km away, you have an Imam associating with this movement.
I find it... peculiar.

But who cares?  I'm not Jewish, I don't live in a big city, so it's not like I'll be a target for radical islamism anytime soon.  So, keep fanning the flames of extremis, by all means.

4. The appropriate analogy isn't "shaking Grallon's hand", it is "shaking Viper's hand, because he's a member of Languish, and so is Grallon, and so presumably he believes everything Grallon believes" - that is, assuming Grallon happened to found this place. 

Hmm, no, not exactly.
Grallon and I are both members of Languish.  Languish is a diverse community, but what unites us is our passion, at one time or another, for grand strategy games.
If we were both active members of a neo nazi board, you could presume certain things of us, about our interests, our views of the world.  I mean, would you join Stormfront just because there's a couple of cool dudes whom you exchange with at one time or another on Paradox OT?  Most likely not.

Therein lies your problem: you have no evidence whatsoever, other than the unpleasant opinions of the founder, that this group isn't what it claims to be - that is, a Muslim study group. In short, to extend the analogy, is it possible that "what unites [them] is [their] passion, at one time or another, for [Muslim studies]? Or is it their "passion" for creating havoc in the ME?

You assume the latter. That could be, but you haven't proved it (or tried to). Other than by reference to its founder.

Our current leader is obsessed with concrete  , but you can't assume everyone on this board is.

5. The notion that X politician deliberately slaps Y group in the face for not attending Z function is even lamer than the attempt at guilt-by-association-by-association. I'm not a big Trudeau fan, but these attacks aren't even approaching touching him.

It's the notion of not attending Z function while freeing time for Y function.
It shows your sense of priority, that's all.

Again, lame attack.