18 Replies to “Media Smackdown Of The Day”

  1. So, the Northumberland News was the only rag to bite on Joan’s hypocrisy?
    Colour me surprised.

  2. I wonder what Jihadi Justin is saying now?? Or is he at the mosque studying for tomorrow’s exam??

  3. Joan Bryden: “…as backlash grows.”
    Backlash over what, exactly? The “none is too many” malapropism, Joe Biden-style, from you-know-who?
    The Peter Principle abounds, apparently: Joan can’t sell papers, and Justin can’t sell the LPC.

  4. There is no effing backlash.
    Just another contrived PR exercise from party operatives formerly known as the media.

  5. I knew it but I looked it up anyways. Just like the crappy rag in my little town, Northumberland News = Metroland Media = Toronto Star.

  6. Bingo.
    If the professional whiners have a problem leaving behind the backward and misogynist aspects of their culture because identification is somehow bigoted, then they can accept what happens in their former countries when they DON’T do as they are told.
    We mustn’t let that silly rule of law get in the way.

  8. Islamic backlash, indeed.
    None of us today have seen a true Islamic backlash. Not really. The Armenians in eastern Turkey 100 years ago did. Their soldiers tried to fight back to defend their people against Muslim Turkish soldiers murdering Armenians in various towns.
    The backlash from the Turks was horrific. 1.5 million dead civilian Armenians later … decapitated, shot, hung, and force-marched into northern Syria deserts.
    The Turks went after civilians.
    My grandmother siblings lost their heads to Muslim Turkish swords.
    That’s backlash.

  9. The progressive media leading the jihadi charge for little Justy (culture wars) Trubozo.

  10. I wonder how people in general would feel including all-inclusive Libs if men walked around in public with their faces covered? Wonder if they would feel comfortable walking past some big hulking face hidden dude some day on an empty street? Oppression of women aside for a moment there is something unfair and dishonest about having a “religious right” to publically hide your identity from other people. When a guy does such a thing in a bank for instance it’s usually not because he wants to throw a rug on the floor and kneel towards Mecca. If Canada is anything it’s about fair play. Facial coverings on adults that make visual recognition of an individual difficult to impossible is an unfair social barrier of privilege. Men can’t do it for obvious reasons – so why is it assumed women deserve such a right? In having that right they wield a social barrier that will isolate and prevent integration with other non-muslim Canadians. Religious separation is not what citizenship in Canada is about. It’s about standing together.

  11. The Liberals and the NDP love to say that they speak for all Canadians on very many issues. Here is Trudeau and Mulcair trying to vilify Harper, and Trudeau hauls out the numbers “1/2 a million Muslim women”, funny how Trudeau is leaping to the defence of all these Muslim women when they all don’t believe in wearing their “traditional dress”. And where was he when female genital mutilation was brought up, he was insulted by calling the practise ‘barbaric’, I guess we know where his true colours are. It’s about time he emulated his father only instead of the German helmet and a motorbike he should be wearing a “dishrag” and riding on a camel.

  12. It seems shiny pony will not have to wait for election debates to look like an asshat.
    That Islam is violent and misogynist is well within the General Knowledge…
    He speaks for Muslim MEN….not women…..

  13. I have seen a growing number of woman in Halifax, particularly at the university, who wear the niqab full-face-cover (often with neon running shoes, oversized jewellery, and a kind of oppressive perfume that would bring out the anti-scent police to complain if worn by anyone not from the Middle East). I can’t say it makes much difference to me how these women dress to attend class or what sort of relationships they have with their husbands, their co-wives, or their remarkably spoiled little boys. It doesn’t even matter much that their library cards show them in full-bag.
    Taking the oath of citizenship, testifying in court, appearing to vote in a Canadian election, however, are different matters. In this country and in its culture, it is perfectly appropriate that citizens be prepared to show their faces, if only, however briefly, to engage in these acts of citizens.
    The other commenters have noted how the media and other members of Justin’s fan-club are eager to equate the niqab with any type of scarf or hair-covering worn by a far greater number of practicing Muslim women.
    Are we prepared to administer the oath of citizenship or accept at the polls these Spanish Catholics?
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Capuchones.jpg
    Or the members of this fanatical religious sect?
    https://postmediacanadadotcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/483928877_31473403.jpg?w=660

  14. The “journalist” Milevsky sez “Justin Trudeau was on attack again”.
    Does anybody in this country actually thinks that Justin Trudeau has the capacity, wherewithal, ability, to do so?
    At times is seems that somebody is there for him to tie his shoes.

  15. I’m guessing Joan has her head, well…in the sand…. and isn’t aware of the treatment of women in Islamic countries where they are stoned to death or lashed for disobeying their male masters.
    This latest activist may be acting alone or being forced to make an issue of face covering. If she can’t show her face, she cannot become a Canadian citizen and that should be the end of it. We will not detain her,she can go back to the stoning fields and be treated worse than we treat our animals. I say God Speed.

  16. So wheres the UN HUMAN RIGHTS freaktards objecting to this barbaric pratice of these backward heathens? USELESS UNITED NATIONS(UNN) is what it should be called from now on

  17. Would CBC hire a woman with a bag over her head and just slits for her eyes?? Maybe rhetorical…

  18. I keep hearing these women “choose” to be marked as a chattel of a devout mohammedan, not to be touched by other devout mohammedans, and I have to wonder if this is the same sort of choice that they have should they “choose” to leave their “religion”, as the penalty is death. Coercion and compulsion and threatening murder are not Canadian values.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation