77 Replies to “Reader Tips”

  1. ET,
    It might help your crediblity if once in a while you admit when you are wrong. As stated, the article is front page in today’s Post and the RCMP is investigating for possible criminal charges.
    Do you place your opinion above the RCMP when it comes to what falls under the criminal code? Do you place your opinion above the Post as to what constitutes front page news?

  3. defending irwin daisy, quoting:
    “Canadian soldiers in Canadian soil who are training to go to Afghanistan or Iraq are legitimate targets to be killed. … Now it is POSSIBLE AND LEGITIMATE!! … believe me, if we could have enough of our soldiers killed, then we’d be forced to withdrawn from Afghanistan.”
    Sounds like clear incitement to murder to me. And sedition.
    Way worse than a pie in the face.
    He’s not just expressing hatred — which should be protected speech — he’s advocating murder and sedition.
    We don’t ignore incitement ‘cos it comes from a loser. This is clear incitement in my politically incorrect mind.
    Wondering: anybody heard any more about the Toronto 17. I’m wondering if this case is just going to fade away. Am I the only one who thinks that not only do we not have freedom of speech, adequate MSM news, but also inordinate delays in our justice system?

  4. irwin daisy – you haven’t answered my question. I’ll ask it again. “could you provide some evidence that my comments are ’emotional comments’? Thanks in advance.”
    Now, with regard to your post – you are coming up with ‘appeals to authority’ (a fallacious tactic) to substantiate your conclusion that this blogger’s rants fall under the criminal code. I questioned, based on the Section of the Code itself, whether they do. My opinion, is that they don’t.
    Your rebuttal, which I presume is trying to claim that they DO fall under the criminal code, is that the RCMP is ‘investigating for possible criminal charges’ and, an assertion of authority of the RCMP about the laying of such charges. But, if you read the article, it says that both no charges have been laid, and that the RCMP wouldn’t comment.
    So, your claim of ‘possible criminal charges’ and your suggestion that I put my opinion being ‘above the RCMP with reference to criminal code violations’ is invalid.
    And, the NP article also includes a debate about whether such rhetoric does, or does not, fall under the net of freedom of speech, and the nature of that speech with reference to violence. I agree with Prof. Wark – it’s a rant but not a violation of free speech nor the criminal code.
    As for the National Post’s putting it on its front page and website – so what? That doesn’t mean that it’s a violation of free speech or the criminal code.
    So, yet again, Irwin Daisy, we’ll have to ‘agree to disagree’. Obnoxious and ignorant as this young man’s rants are, I don’t see that they are a violation of our criminal code, and, since I accept free speech, they are such..and the best thing to do is either ignore them, or, expose them as rants. Mock them, criticize them, sneer at them for juvenile ignorance. That’s it.

  6. ET: “…I don’t see that they are a violation of our criminal code…”
    Unless and until some moron acts on the Islamofascist’s incitement (presumably by murdering a Canadian soldier) and the facts satisfy the other statutory requirements: Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 22 (counselling offence).

  7. “irwin daisy – what is your point of posting these emotional rants? There are people like him, in any group, which includes religion, ethnicity, etc, etc. People who, as individuals, hate other people as ‘collectives’. So?”
    Sound pretty emotional to me. Almost sounds like you are responding to some sort of personal attack.
    “Remember, there IS such a thing as freedom of speech in this country”
    Use of caps, always a sign of emotion.
    “You cannot legislate emotions. You cannot legislate the individual’s right to FEEL an emotion, both hatred and love. A society has no right to legislate the expression, in words and images, of these emotions. The only thing it has the right to legislate is ACTIONS.”
    Are you railing against me posting this? Or the Post printing it? Perhaps, the RCMP investigating it? More caps, more emotions. You might try screamers as well (!!!) Very effective.
    As for the rest of your post, you are incorrigible. We’ll leave it up to the RCMP to decide, of course. And we’ll leave it up to Canadians to decide as well. That’s if it’s ok with you.

  8. ET:
    Well, I read the piece.
    Interesting how you only cite Wark but not Prof. Hoffman of Georgetown University, a leading international expert on terrorism who says “I don’t see how the right to free speech includes the deliberate incitement to violence”.
    But after diagnosing it as a mere rant, Wark does say, “On the other hand, there is always a worry that such speech could tip over into action by this person or others of like mind”.
    Heh, the “on the one hand, on the other hand” weasel phrase beloved by all stock market gurus and economists!
    That ET is clear incitement to violence, not a mere rant.
    Curiously you correctly cite Warman’s wink-wink nudge-nudge incitement telling his interlocutors the time and place and and his lawyerly a**-covering. “I’m not suggesting etc ….”.
    But our “ranter” after being warned and seeking legal advice continues to “rant” but now adds a caveat that “he is not inciting violence but merely “suggesting” scenarios and he is not responsbile if they actually happen”.
    And the piece is clear that counter terrorism officers are taking it seriously.
    Repeating: I read that as clear incitement to violence. He’s not just expressing hatred for soldiers — he’s suggesting that they be murdered, while making the laughable excuse that he wouldn’t do it himself personally.
    ET: This is not the way to do counter-jihad!

  9. “That ET is clear incitement to violence, not a mere rant.”
    Agreed. I fail to see why this is even an issue. And note he backed off suddenly.

  10. Sorry to be late to the game re: the photo of Palestinians bringing back carpets from Egypt. I just wanted to suggest the possibility there might be something rolled up inside those carpets. If I was going to smuggle, say, a rocket launcher, what better way to hide it.
    Or maybe it’s just my suspicious nature. I’m sure no weapons came across. That’s just not like Hamas.

  11. The elites/academics/Liberals/RedTories/MSM are telling Canadians what to think. Aunty-American is bloviating; Willy Graham is nuancing.
    The message from MSM: “It all revolves around the U.S.A.”
    BS. It’s around Canada and Canada’s self-interest in defending Western civilization from the Muslim Islamist murderers.
    The spin/nuancing is egregious. Here is a sample of Liberal/MSM spin: “But Flora MacDonald, a former Conservative foreign affairs minister”.
    Flora, the finest lady who ever walked the streets of Kingston*, was/is not a “Conservative”; Flora is a dinosaurus from the defunct/dead Progressive Conservative Party.
    …-
    United States at centre of Canadian self-interest in Afghanistan
    By Les Perreaux, THE CANADIAN PRESS
    http://tinyurl.com/2wsoj2
    *H/T John Diefenbaker, I am a Canadian.

  13. Irwin Daisy:
    I was attempting to make the point that the words posted by this insane blogger reminded me of the posts we used have to endure here by one so-called Robert Bollocks. I opined that this idiot was as insane as the aforementioned Bollocks.

  15. United States at centre of Canadian self-interest in Afghanistan
    at 16:27 on January 30, 2008, EST.
    By Les Perreaux, THE CANADIAN PRESS
    To: editorial@cp.org
    Subject: United States at centre of Canadian self-interest in
    Afghanistan
    What an egregiously smarmy headline!
    If you want to discuss the facts of the matter you might remember that the US went there on their own steam and that NATO only got involved afterwards as part of the NATO group that is supposed to recognize responsiblity to fellow allies under the NATO agreements.
    You must be so very proud of yourselves today.

  16. Detainees: Taliban Jack Layton-NDP style.
    At the end of the report:
    “Criminal groups have also been behind a rash of kidnappings in recent months and are sometimes believed to pass their hostages onto the Taliban.”
    Women in Taliban stronghold protest kidnap of US aid worker
    1 day ago
    KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AFP) — Hundreds of women protested on Tuesday against the abduction of a female US aid worker in southern Afghanistan and called on religious leaders to condemn the kidnapping.
    Cyd Mizell, 49, and her Afghan driver were seized while travelling to work on Saturday in the southern city of Kandahar. The extremist Taliban say they are trying to find out if any of their members were involved.
    Around 500 women gathered in an auditorium normally used for meetings and wedding ceremonies in Kandahar for a demonstration organised by the city’s women’s association.
    “We call on Kandahar religious council to condemn this act and encourage the public to help, call on the abductors to release her without any harm or conditions,” read a resolution passed by the meeting.
    They also called on tribal elders and the youth community of the province to “help find and release” Mizell. …-
    http://tinyurl.com/32ych8 (AFP)

  17. No, irwin daisy, the use of CAPS is not a Universal Sign of emotion; it’s a sign of conceptual emphasis. Not emotion. [You use bold for emphasis; I haven’t figured out how to use bold.]
    My description of people whose posts are filled with hate, is a description. Nothing emotional. Also, I suggest that you be careful about speculating about the intentions of others, eg, you said:” Almost sounds like you are responding to some sort of personal attack.” That’s speculation.
    So far, your attempt to ‘sully my posts’ by claiming that they are emotional (ie, rather than rational) is pretty weak.
    No, I’m not ranting or railing; I’m commenting. You, I suggest, don’t like it when people have opinions that are specifically different than you – and you try to denigrate their posts.
    me no dhimmi. I specifically referred to the National Post’s DEBATE. I wrote that it “also includes a debate about whether such rhetoric does, or does not, fall under the net of freedom of speech”. Kindly note that TWO alternate views are suggested (does or does not). I then mentioned the side of the debate that I agree with. Nothing nefarious or hidden agenda about that.
    I disagree that the blogger’s general hopes for violence is similar to Warman’s specific agenda of violence (nature of attack, person to carry out attack, person to be attacked, time, place).
    Did you watch Michael Coren’s show, with the excellent discussion by Ms Mendelsohn Aviv. She was supporting the right of free speech, even the most obnoxious and hateful speech, and differentiating it from ACTS. I agree with her. Free speech can’t just be about the soft and comfortable. And it can’t always be rational or moral or just.
    Again, I’ve seen plenty of posts on both left and right blog sites, wishing for the death of …Americans, Jews, Muslims…you name it; someone’s said it. I think these are rants and not criminal offenses.
    I have no intention of doing ‘counter-jihad’. I happen to think that, in the long run, reason and morality have great power – and will triumph.
    I think that Bush’s doctrine of introducing a civic governance among the tribal Islamic states was absolutely correct; and that they will graduatlly move out of tribalism.
    I think the West’s grave error was the introduction of multiculturalism which has allowed immigrants to settle as, effectively, tribes, but decontextualized tribes. Without economic or political connections to their new countries. That has enabled their ideology to develop as an isolate Dogma – and that’s extremely dangerous because an Isolate Dogma is pure Idealism. It has no connections to reality. Real life cannot affect and change it. So, it becomes more and more perverse, alien and pathological. The West has to fight this Dogma.
    How? First, by rejecting multiculturalism and insisting on assimilation. Second, by speaking out against this Isolate Ideal Dogma. Don’t force it underground (by denying free speech). Let it be out in the air, force it to be contextualized in real life experiences..and that will enable people to see how alien, how pathological it is.
    Just as that wise woman said about Icke…”Let him make a fool of himself..” But don’t, as those young cream pie punks attempted – just shut him up.

  18. Never smoke your pipe/cigar/ette recreationally. It’s gauche; and agin the law.
    …-
    Pot-linked ‘epidemic’ of lung cancer predicted
    Smoking one joint the same as 20 cigarettes in terms of risk, researchers in New Zealand warn
    “In the near future we may see an `epidemic’ of lung cancers connected with this new carcinogen. And the future risk probably applies to many other countries, where increasing use of cannabis among young adults and adolescents is becoming a major public health problem.”
    CP PHOTO
    A man smokes a joint recreationally in Toronto, Tuesday May 27, 2003.
    http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/298689

  19. Ralph R,
    I thought so. But coming on the back of ET’s original post I wasn’t sure if I was being accused of authoring this incitement to kill Canadian soldiers.
    Canada is at war. In the not so distant past, during war, this bastard, a supposed ‘Canadian’, would be charged with treason. And correctly so.
    Now we harbour and placate the scum. It’s disgusting.
    Hopefully, the RCMP will charge him and the courts convict and bounce him out of here.

  20. ET:
    I read the piece, not the comments if that’s what you’re talking about. Believe it or not, this is the only site at which I read/post comments.
    No need to lecture me. I too, as pointed out numerous times, am for protecting even the most obnoxious kinds of free speech. For example, despite being a strong Israel-supporter and a great admirer of the Jewish people, I am against “Holocaust denial” laws. I am against the prison sentence handed out to David Irving. I am against the persecution of that vile, clownish antisemitic Indian chief.
    BUT, this was not mere hate speech.
    This is incitement to violent — worse — seditious action.
    If this bastard is not a citizen, at the very least he should be deported. Notice his smugness and mocking attitude, continuing with the incitement despite the warning. This is what our coddling, too-often feminine, soft-headed idealistic thinking leads to ET!
    Reasoning with jihadists? Good luck with that ET.
    That is what Richard Landes calls liberal cognitive egocentrism; you got it bad, and that ain’t good!
    We need to get tough and unyielding with this kind of seditious behaviour OR we’re gonna be Islamicized like Europe.

  21. Islam: a religion of “peacefulness”.
    Code: “accompanied by his fellow healers,”.
    Naseer Ahmad, aka Man From Atlan, to Salman Hossain:
    …-
    “Salman, here’s my e-mail if you want to contact me: manfromatlan@rogers.com. and my name’s Naseer Ahmad.
    (Last time I published my e-mail and name here I did get a flood of spam, so any penis enlargment companies trolling this site, I’m already on your list
    Man From Atlan | 06.14.06 – 11:44 am | #”
    http://tinyurl.com/2kagah (haloscan)
    …-
    Naseer Ahmad, Atlan Healing Centres:
    “HEALING YOUR SELF – Naseer Ahmad, MD (MA), D.Sc.
    Naseer Ahmad, MD (MA), D.Sc. of Atlan Healing Centres, accompanied by his fellow healers, will be giving a talk and demonstration of Spiritual Healing in the Way of Atlan, a new healing method and philosophical way of life. All who attend will receive a healing, which is not only powerful but also leaves a feeling of peacefulness.
    Available afterward at ATLAN HEALING CENTRES booth 118, 119.”
    http://www.wholelifecanada.com/expo2002/speakers-hallsun.html

  22. me no dhimmi – I’m certainly not talking about ‘reasoning with jihadists’! You misunderstand me.
    I’m talking about the triumph of reason over ignorance and superstition in a general sense. It is utterly useless to ‘reason’ with an individual whose mind is ‘made up’, so to speak, and who comes to conclusions based on emotion, on authority, on tenacity etc. That’s not what I mean.
    I mean, that in the long run, over generations, Reason (capitalized) will triumph over ignorance.
    By Reason, I mean the basic cognitive capacity of our species to think. It exists and in the long term, despite the actions of individuals who reject rationality and morality – Reason is stronger.
    As I’ve said many times, the West has to firmly and totally, reject multiculturalism, reject dilution of its civilization, stand by its principles and knowledge. I agree with your ‘tough and unyielding’ stance. What are we tough and unyielding about? The results of Reason over the centuries – that have given us such documents as the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence and the Amendments – and all that science has enriched us with.

  25. I have no intention of doing ‘counter-jihad’. I happen to think that, in the long run, reason and morality have great power – and will triumph.
    ET: Perhaps I did misread you here. But as Keynes said “in the long run, we’re all dead”.
    And perhaps you misread me; by counter-jihad I was referring to being intellectually armed against the cultural jihad, which is far more dangerous than the physical variety.
    We agree 100% on multiculturalism.
    Still, however, I feel very strongly that you were wrong to characterize this story as just hate speech/rant and to refer to irwin daisy’s post as emotionalism. To me, this is a very clear case of incitement. I’m very worried about our whitewashing this, and frankly I’m quite worried that the Toronto 17 case is just going to fade away. You’ve noticed, I’m sure, that the Bangladeshi Islamist has taken our measure and isn’t very worried!

  26. If he’s a product of our education system, MND, no wonder he isn’t very worried. The worst offenders, especially if they belong to protected groups–being Muslim is definitely one of them–are let off the hook all the time. In fact, I can’t think of any consequences I know of that are a deterrent of any kind.
    Sometimes, in order to keep the statistics “clean”, even for really serious misdemeanours, like having a weapon and threatening someone, there are no consequences at all. I kid you not.
    This “bastard” has learned his lessons well.
    I altogether agree with you: we’re in trouble.

  27. I believe in free speech in Canada.
    Therefore the quotations attributed to the “student blogger” should not be covered-up or otherwise,hushed up. Others may not agree with me.
    I’ll go as far as promoting his right to speak, as well as the right to publish his address and phone number, and place of employment, if I knew that information.
    There, is that an unqualified endorsement of a Taliban sympathizer’s right to speak? He knows these views are not popular, especially with military folks (some, who I call friends).
    Who am I to dissuade him/her. It’s a free country.
    And I don’t plan on personally visiting this individual!

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation