Time to set up a legal defense fund...

Naturally, in this country, that would also be tantamount to being an 'accessory after the fact'.

Thanks for the update Kate.

Brava Kate for your gutsy statement (as per Kathy's suggestion).

Recall, a native Brit woman in the UK received a small settlement after complaining that she overhead two fellow employees complaining about immigration.

Which reminds me: this book might be worth getting:
"The Death of the Grown-up" by Diana West, mentioned at PowerLine:
powerlineblog.com/archives/018296.php

I don't think this will go anywhere, but I'll certainly contribute to a legal defence fund. A year or so ago I made a donation to Western Standard to help them with their defence against that Calgary imam who lodged a complaint with the Alberta Kangaroo Court after the publication of the Mo cartoons. Haven't heard anything about it since.

In case people don't know this: the complainant shoulders NO costs at all, no matter the outcome, while the "defendant" can face debilitating costs, no matter the outcome. State-subsidized harrassment.

I dunno, I keep hoping to hear about some dramatic developments in the realm of liberty in Canada like the shutting down of the gun registry and these Kangaroo Courts (which have gone way beyond what the promoters intended) but same old same old, I guess. PET lives?

I may not agree with this Bill fellow's religious leanings, but I must give him credit for having the courage for standing up to the islamonutjobs. I love how he finishes his piece with instructions on where to send the hate mail, etc. This is the only way to deal with the so called "religion of peace". Expose and call them on their s$%# every chance we get.
PS - I had the dis-pleasure of once facing the threat of a HRC process. But because I called my lawyer and the Toronto Sun, the whole thing magically went away. Idiots!

Amazing...Those who denounce throwing rocks at people's heads are denounced for denouncing it!?!

Can't HRC just be ignored?
What enforcement can they exercise?

Ive personally always wondered how Taliban Jack Layton can support Muslims and Taliban and such without offering to let them cut off half of his wife's twixt the legs nether parts?

You should be able to Aaron, but I think it's you against another government sponsored make work project. Who on high really wants to end that, I know I'm starting to wonder? Aaron there are loads of bureaucrats wandering about only to happy to rain on your parade and justifying their existence, in my work I swear I think it gets some of them off.

So let me get this straight; the Islamofascists are upstanding law-abiding citizens for advocating the stoning or beheading of gays, the mutilation of little girls and the oppression of women, and the complainee is a fascist, racist bigot for pointing it out?

I'm hoping most of the post on Islam here are not reflective of the general public....

She has been trained in a second class Canadian University and lectures in parasitology.

Obviously she knows of what she speaks and is testing a thesis on how to exist as a parasite on a malleable almost Marxist society.

Making third party claims in the hope of scoring $20,00 or so.

Thanks for staying on top of this, Kate.

SAD: I am hoping that one day the general public wakes up and and becomes reflective of what is posted here regarding extremist islamists. Whether you like it or not, they are our sworn(they do the swearing)enemies.

kingstonlad, the public will never wake up. we will have all out war here before the fools are brought to realize their folly. we will have to fight our own to keep them free.

Dear "Sad" (aw, goo goo):

I'm hoping the stuff I hear Muslim radicals say, about beheading us and instituting sharia law etc. are "not reflective of the general Muslim public."

But with each passing day I find it harder and harder to maintain that hope.

www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56751

Posted by: Me No Dhimmi at July 21, 2007 9:48 PM
"In case people don't know this: the complainant shoulders NO costs at all, no matter the outcome, while the "defendant" can face debilitating costs, no matter the outcome. State-subsidized harrassment."

Perhaps it's time for a few good souls to truck on down to a wharf on the waterfront in Toronto and throw some tea into the harbor? ;-)

Why don't people just ignore these letters when they get them? Seriously, the HRC aren't the cops. They're more like the old Ontario Censor Board or something. Who cares what they think?

We are seeing another fine example of why our "Charter of Right and Freedoms" is so worthless.

I have read the old Soviet Union's constitution. No kidding - it looks very similar to our own. All of the same rights that we see in our Charter are there (freedom of expression and all). I think religion is the only one that they didn't have.

But, just like with ours, there were a bunch of exceptions. The big one was along the same lines as the one we have about where rights can be curtailed by "reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society"

So, the Communist Party would simply declare anything they didn't like as being a "justified" restriction in their free and democratic society.

That is why the US Constitution is such a wonderful document. "Congress shall make no law..." has one hell of a stronger bite than our own little 'we will pat you on the head and tell you that you have rights - but these can be taken away at a whim because your intellectual betters say that they should."

"Why don't people just ignore these letters when they get them?"

If you need to ask this question you have an awful lot of reading to do.

http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/CityandRegion/2007/01/12/3320197-sun.html

http://www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/search/view_html.asp?doid=705&lg=_e&isruling=0

http://www.canadianfreespeech.com/portal/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=110&Itemid=46

To answer your question, the guy in the case cited above tried ignoring a CHRC ruling that he quit criticizing multiculturalism on the internet. He's in solitary confinement now.

The US constitution is indeed a wonderful document. It however does no good if the US government ignores it. This unfortunately in increasingly blatant amounts is the case. In Canada we have had a slow deterioration of our basic freedoms for decades. The current hate laws are just the latest manifestation of a larger government looking for a meaningful purpose. They take your money by force (taxes) and then use it against you and free speech.

Can you say Leftist Mental Disorder?

The HRC should be scrapped, total waste of money, this type of frivolity is a patent waste of resources and time.

I'm inclined to think like you, Kathy.

There's a terrier club in Canada that has had a complaint filed against it by a Nova Scotia breeder whose application was denied because she couldn't provide the required sponsors.

She took it to the HRC alleging discrimination - she's black. Never mind that there's no place on the mailed in form asking for a photo or one's race...

Right. I mean: why not just treat a letter like this like you would an envelope from Publisher's Clearing House?

Who are these people? I don't recognize their authority over me. I didn't vote for them.

Why do people even respond when they get these summons or whatever they are? Am I the only person (besides Kate) who would just shrug and toss it in the shredder?

That strikes me as the real jujitzu thing to do, rather than giving the HRC more power by going along with the charade.

Kate: I can't figure out why women in academia are on the side of the Muslims, either. After all, Muslims who practice Sharia law tend to advocate executing women who learn to read, expose their ankles and appear in public in the presence of men who are not family members. I defy Islamic censorship and speak about what I believe is the truth about violent Islamism and its threat to womens' liberty in Canada.

What this "woman in academia" is taking issue with is the treatment of "Muslims" as though they're a monolithic group. Take your above statement. In three sentences, you go from "Muslims" to "Muslims who practice Sharia law" to "violent Islamism," leaving the impression that the three are interchangeable.

This is demonstrably untrue. Just as there's substantial diversity among followers of Christianity, so too with followers of Islam (and Judaism, and Hinduism...). Of course there are hardliners and fundamentalist leaders, but I suspect that most "run-of-the-mill" Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, etc. don't live their day-to-day lives in accordance with a strict and literal interpretation of their respective faiths. More likely, there's great variation in the degree to which religion influences their mundane, everyday choices and routines.

Already, many Muslim Canadians complain that they're threatened into silence by the more radical elements within their own communities. It doesn't help if outsiders demand that "moderate Muslims" speak out against extremism, on the one hand, while also indiscriminately lumping them together with those same extremist factions, on the other.

Even from a pure national security perspective, such "moderates" could serve as key allies by acting as the "eyes and ears" within the Muslim community. But the incentives to cooperate would be greatly lowered if they thought (as many currently do now) that wider Canadian society views them as no different from radical Islamists and terrorists).

For the record, I think the complaint to the CHRC is rather frivolous. I'm not advocating censorship or the denial of free speech. If you wish to engage in/condon generalizations and careless language about "Muslims," that's your prerogative. But you may wish to consider the possibility that, by doing so, you contribute in a small but real way to the problem.

Jesus A'dam, you're thick.

This is an obvious personal vendetta between the leftoid flake and Bill Wallcott....trying to get at him through Free Dominion took an impossible streach of reasoning that I'm sure even the dystopian CHRC will avoid.

This one will go no where....but I will support any legal fund for Connie and Mark to go after this flake in a civil action and retrieve their legal costs.

"To answer your question, the guy in the case cited above tried ignoring a CHRC ruling that he quit criticizing multiculturalism on the internet. He's in solitary confinement now."

Hey Andy....can't you just feel the love and tolerance of the left utopia in that move?

{personally I would ignore them by standing mute...if they can incarcerate you by simply standing mute to any call to a flakey tribunal with no constitutional right to make rulings on charter rights or provide criminal penalty...then it just proves the point that the CHRC is a quasi judicial tribunal that operates outside the oversight of fundamental justice as guaranteed in the charter and provided only in the legitimate courts.

As such its authority should not be recognized by any Citizen who values his charter legal rights and the legitimate rule of law.

I certainly agree with Kathy and Kate but I'm afraid when your in their sights , your guilty , your looked down upon, and your just a problem in Utopia. This crap is our form of a gulag without really leaving home.
This isn't much different then a kid saying their dad is aggressive in school just because it works in their favor,not because they have been beaten or seriously mistreated but because his or her life isn't fair - "a whole world of this can go easy or hard" suddenly appears on your front porch, and you have to decide if you lay it all on the line for whats right , or surrender and live with the insanity of it all.
Really how many people really care anymore when someone displays some guts? One here one there , until it gets bad enough a crowd forms and something really changes for the better (hopefully).
I'm not saying to be fear full , or its hopeless but its way more of a juggernaut in many ways than people realize, and it won't go away throwing notices in the garbage- a noble act but fruitless.

Adam everyone has idiots in their communities most chose not to party or associate with them.

It's also funny that its racist to generalize but when agency's like the HRC mobilize everyone on the receiving end are perceived as guilty, and basic respect is basically left on the wayside.

Related, and an explanation of the mindset:

http://www.doggerelparty.ca/2007/07/liberals-speaking-relatively.html

"For example, without using relativism, how could someone (rightly) believe that the Catholic Church and Catholics in general should be held accountable for the actions of pedophile priests, while simultaneously condemning the suggestion that Islam and Moslems be held accountable for their followers flying planes into buildings."

h/t, neo at http://hallsofmacadamia.blogspot.com/

Kathy said: "Who are these people? I don't recognize their authority over me. I didn't vote for them."

They are a machination of the social engineers in the bowels of the bureaucracy.

They have created a quasi-legal star chanber tribunal where the normal legal protections do not exist for a defendant...there is presumed guilt...just responding to them gives assumsit validity. Reverse onus, lack of due process...no jury, lack of crimal defense with the posibility of criminal penalty, legitimate rules of evidence do not apply...complaintant need not prove concrete damage.....this is a mechanism to essentially silence anyone who may speak out against the social engineered policies of the utopian left.....amy of which do an end run aroung the rule of law and constitutional/legitimate court oversight.

Who are these kangaroos on the CRGC accountable to? Who will kick their ass when they make bad/wrong/unjust/unconstitutional descisions and policies...I'm not talking about an appeal process...I'm talking about personal responsibility for frigging up someone's life with their asinine witch hunts.

O would refuse to be dragged into their star chamber kangaroo trials...I would challenge them to make a information with the police and have the complaint investigated and a charge laid ny a crown prosecutor...IF the complain would not hold up in a legitimate court ( IE: lack of evidence to charge) then why in hell would I submit myself to some self styled parallel bizzaro "trial" system which does not respect my charter rights or the rules of fundamental justices as guaranteed by the charter?

I'll never understand people who consider solitary confinement punishment. Sounds like heaven to me. Where do I sign up?

And actually, millions of Catholics DO believe that they must speak out against pedophile priests (who make up an estimated 0.1% of priests.) When the American crisis was at its peak a few years ago, I spent hours on the web each day, visiting the approx. 100 blogs set up by distressed and angry Catholics left and right, condemning the Church bureaucracy that enabled these crimes. Should we refuse to put money in the collection plate? Should we picked the archdiocese? Etc.

American Catholicism is arguable stronger now because so many lay Catholics debated, condemned and grieved in public about these horrible crimes, and wondered what they could and should have done to stop them. Guilt is a Catholic thing, after all :-)

If anyone can find hundreds of similar blogs by Muslims condemning all violence in the name of Allah, please send me the urls. I said hundreds, not five.

I believe Andrew is right. You CANNOT ignore them. From my perspective in the investment business: I'm regulated by a securities commission: they make laws (literally); investigate breaches, make judgments, and decide on the punishments.

ACHTUNG. Never ignore the regulators -- ever. Fill in the forms, answer the letters, string them along, delay, play games, but do not ignore. EVER.

You are in for a huge disappointment if you take the proud but nutty view: "I don't recognize their authority."

Don't hate me for saying this: but be respectful and obsequious too. Hell hath no fury worse than a regulator ignored. They know deep down what they do is worthless and therefore will react violently if reminded.

You are in for a huge disappointment if you take the proud but nutty view: "I don't recognize their authority."

You right, but isn't that a sad statement especially the bonkers part?

Where is the limit of their authority whether it be a regulator in the securities business, a safetey inspector from the labor board,or a human rights crony? I hear guys say the same thing all the time,it's all BS but "just agree" for the very reason you state it's a "Who is John Galt?" moment.
It can be pretty demoralizing listening to an owner of a multi million dollar construction company complain about all the new ridiculous rules then just shrug his shoulders knowing full well many of them border on insanity.It seems there is no one at the top of these bureaucracy's that is willing to say wait a minute this is getting ridiculous.

What is more nuts, being willing to carry water with a sieve, or saying no way this is just plain a waste of time?

Are you sure you're No Dhimmi? You sound pretty timid to me. We're not talking the Securities and Exchange commission, just a bunch of goofs.

I'll pass on your advice if and when I need it.

Democracy is built on the principle of the citizenry interested in increasing the living standards in the country thru hard working, enterprise and culture. Islam is incompatible with those principles, as it is based on supermacy of one religion at the cost of slaughtering followers of every other religion who disagree. These two things don't work together.
Allowing muslims to come here and alter our laws and ways of life to suit their religion is suicidal for the democracy. Basically, once they are already here, we cannot continue to apply the old principles of democracy to them as well as we did apply them to ourselves for a few hundred years. This is just apples and oranges.

Mugs: Oh, I never said it wasn't a sad statement! But I'm not into martyrdom, and unlike Ms. Shaidle I'm not into solitary confinement.

Kathy: Well, no I'm not sure, just using an anaology from my own business experience going back to when you were 15 in 1979 (am I close?).

Timid? Well, in fact I'm a scrapper who has learned to understand power and how it works, i.e., when and how to be timid. Shall I dub it: tactical aggressive timidity?

And be sure, I never said they weren't goofs!!!

Um, I had my business shut down once when both of my daughters were in out of country universities mostly funded by me. On a technicality probably revealed by a jealous competitor. It got sorted out quickly with the help of a securities lawyer and at very minor cost. A truly terrfying experience.

Maybe HRC is not the same, but I wouldn't just casually bet on this.

Goofs? Well, that's what makes them so dangerous!

Kathy, I'm just as afraid of radical christians who call for the killing of homosexuals and believe it is okay to blow up abortion clinics. Maybe, we should fear radical Christians? Or maybe we could recognize that by far the majority of any religion are good peopl.e

As to Islam and Ilamofacists;not all Russians were KGB Communists,not all Germans were gestapo, but what all Russians and all Germans were,they had no defense against these thugs.The courts upheld laws to protect these agencies withbrutal force,transgressers against the state agencies were treated worse than hardened criminals (they were interred together as part of the punishment),and all forms of defence were first confiscated so that no uprising was possible.Muslims are in the same boat.

Oh, this is interesting: the complaint filed the complaint June 4, 2006, meaning there is a year plus lag between a complaint getting filed and the defendant hearing about it. So for those of you who have just been given 'er 24/7 for the past year to get one of these complaint thingies your wish may come sooner than you think.

spike 1 - Germans voted in Hitler and his party. Except for a few, they were accessories, not victims. 'Pure-bred' Germans allowed the Nazis to invade, kill and destroy with barely a murmur. Moderate Muslims should learn from history. As should the nations of the world.
And Sad... name 10 - worldwide. The facts don't support your idiotic claims.

Who are the judges/justices that are on the Sask. Human Rights Tribunals? What are their names? Who is the top bureaucrats that oversee it's operations (by this I don't mean the minister but rather the top 3 or 4 paper shufflers). What is the office phone number? These are all questions that could be useful.

For evil to triumph,it just needs good men,and women,to do nothing.Kudos to these two good women. Gellen;Hitler persuaded Hindenburg to sign a law "for the protection of the people and the state" which allowed him to jail anyone without trial.The end result was that the gestapo could jail or shoot anyone being opposed to his regime.

Gallen it is not idiotic since it has happened before and will continue to happen. Does not matter if it is worldwide or at home. Actions are actions.

You have the army of god, Timothy McVeigh, National Liberation Front of Tripura, Lord's Resistance Army.

This kind of thing happens fairly frequently to sites on both the far right and the far left. Someone complains and someone else is obliged to investigate. Usually nothing comes of it - don't get your knickers in a twist.

Thank "God" (sorry to offend any of my Canadian brothers or sisters -- you guys are the best neighbors possible and I respect Canada.... )but at this time I'm glad to be an American -- can't believe you have been duped into this type of argument and problem from your political system. I hope your politicians can figure it out -- and soon. God Bless Canada. I sure hope I can still visit you in Canada for a good fishing trip -- perhaps I'll be on a terrorist list and be denied entrance. ...Orlin from Marquette Michigan.

To note I do not, as a Christian, condone killing anyone.

@Andrew, WL Mackenzie Redux, Kathy Shaidle (and others):

There might be a crucial nuance in the case of that fellow that was put into solitary confinement. He might have gotten the six month for contempt of court by showing explicit contempt for the real court that the tribunal dragged him into.

If anyone here decides to go the ignore route and winds up in a real court - not a tribunal, but the real thing - I urge you to be very respectful while in there, and to make it clear that you consider a real court to be above any reproach by contrasting it to any HRC tribunal.

Doing so would give you good grounds for an appeal if railroaded by a real court in that scenario. You can save your complaints against any real court for the appeals process.

Test cases always have to be conducted with no procedural missteps, as the courts are well inured to criminals and scofflaws using 'unjust' as an excuse.

Sad,

Oh no, TIMOTHY MCVEIGH! Every leftist's favourite Christian. Never mind that Timothy McVeigh's paster kicked him out of the church for spouting his violent, unChristian opinions.

What, you didn't know that, sad? Know why? Because according to the paster, every single time a reporter interviewed him and was told that, the reporter... hung up. Didn't fit in with his template, or yours.

Never heard of those other groups, loser. They have a membership of, what, 50? I actually think one is a fictional group from an old Law & Order episode dude.

You. Are. A. Moron.

Oh and before you add the inevitable: the IRA was condemned by the Vatican and all decant Christians for decades, and the conflict in Northern Ireland was an ethnic land dispute, not a religious conflict.

Unlike you I don't get my talking points from Daily Kos.

Sad, please tell me the details about these "radical" Christians who call for the killing of homosexuals. I'm waiting. Don't say Fred Phelps; Phelps is no more a "Baptist" than I am and is actually a heretic in terms of Christian doctrine.

And again, don't just type in a bunch of Law & Order episode recaps. Name five contemporary Christians who have called for the death of gays. Not criticized the gay rights movement, but called for their deaths.

You can't because you are a retarded leftist dupe. What are you, 15? 16?

More abortion clinics have been blown up on TV crime dramas and in movies than in real life. And those clinic bombers are hunted down and brought to justice, as well as roundly condemned by real prolifers, the Pope etc.

Why not get angry about the millions of children actually killed in hundreds of non-blown-up abortion clinics? Oh wait: that congnitive dissonance would make your tiny head explode.

Go back to your Nintendo and leave the grown ups alone.

Thanks Kathy, glad to see you have the ability to debate without going into insults.

"Never heard of those other groups, loser. They have a membership of, what, 50? I actually think one is a fictional group from an old Law & Order episode dude."

Wow.... Kathy has not heard of them so they must not be real..... Do you have the ability to debate like a normal sane person? In your daily interactions with other individuals, if somebody disagrees with you do you begin to call them morons?

As for advocating killing homosexuals, well, we will start with Fred Phelps. I know I know you said do not use him but you saying he does not count does not change the fact as a Baptist he has called for the deaths of homosexuals.

Kathy, are you saying you are an adult? I hate to be the one to point it out to you but you act like an irrational child who does not get his or her way when somebody raises a different view.

Sad:

There is one big difference between Christianity and Islam. It may have escaped your notice but Christianity does not have a "rule book" like Islam. A Christian lives by the Spirit not the law. A Muslim lives by the law not the spirit.

To be honest most 'Christians' don't practice their faith anymore than most 'Muslims' practice their faith. Going to church/mosque and going through the rituals does not equate with practicing their respective faiths. Practicing the faith means trying to live life according to the tenets of the faith.

Rabid anti gays will attempt to corrupt the Christian faith into a call for the death of gays or the subjugation of women. Christians will rebuke and repudiate the individual(s) by explaining that these practices are not Christian and thus those who would so practice are likewise not Christian. The proof of a Christian is not the claim by the individual but the acknowledgement by fellow Christians. If a man were to stand up in Church and say that he being a Christian is calling on fellow Christians to kill gays, there would be an immediate repudiation of the man with an acknowledgement that the man is not a Christian and the killing of others is not Christian. If the man were charismatic enough he may gather a small following of like minded individuals but the Christian community would not recognise the group as Christian.

On the other hand the Muslim faith is one of hard and fast rules. This makes it attractive to many who seek a set of rules to guide them in life and by which they can measure their progress as a human being. Some of the Muslim rules are an anathema to the kind of society we live in and treat as normal. Also the rules that are followed are not simply in the Qur’an as there is a whole other code that is interpretations of the Qur’an. Many of these rules are based in the norms of 7th century Arab culture. A gay was stoned to death. Women were chattels to be kept out to sight from other men. Female sexuality was to be controlled, just as land was to be conquered and peoples subjugated. All of these practices are part of the written code of Islam.

As I said many Muslims don't follow the code that closely but they would never say that a man claiming to be Muslim and calling for the death of gays is not a Muslim. A Muslim spokesman was asked after 9/11 is Osama bin Ladin was a Muslim or a heretic. The spokesman said that bin Ladin was indeed a devout Muslim who tries to follow the Qur’an. Compare that to Timothy McVeigh who was pronounce 'non-Christian' before he did anything other than speak of doing damage to his perceived enemies.

Like any religion, you have those who follow and interpret things differently. The issue of homosexuality is a prime example. Some in Islam and in Christianity call for the death of those who practice homosexuality well others have no problem with it. Some Christians do live by the bible as if it is a rulebook and others do not.

There really is no Muslim spokesperson in Islam just like there is no one spokesperson to speak on behalf of all Christians. One individual confirmed the obvious Bin Laden was a devout follower of Islam. Just like Timothy McVeigh viewed himself as a Christian. Like after 9/11 and after the Oklahoma, bombing individuals from both religions denounced the acts and said the individuals involved did not represent the entire religion but were part of an extreme element.

We will be sending Ms. Gentes this link (ht Kathy Shaidle) just as a reminder of those she appears to defend.

http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/?p=3302

Ah-h-h-h, Jeez...

It's the shootout at the OK Corral, and somebody brought a knife to a gunfight. That is pretty sad.

"Kathy, I'm just as afraid of radical christians who call for the killing of homosexuals and believe it is okay to blow up abortion clinics. Maybe, we should fear radical Christians? Or maybe we could recognize that by far the majority of any religion are good peopl.e"

Huh? Could you let us all know how many people at abortion clinics and homosexuals have been killed by 'radical Christians,' in say the last year? How about 100 years?

Now, lets compare that to how many innocent people radical muslims killed, say, today.

Lets not even consider the millions they have killed over the last century. Yes, millions, my dear twit. 1.5 million Armenians massacred alone. Another 1 million plus Hindus butchered in East Pakistan in the early seventies. How about the daily savagery against Christians and athiests and, and...

As for the comment that there are many diverse groups of Muslims. Perhaps so. However, there is not a diversity of Qurans is there? Hmmm. Seems to me every Quran commands Muslims to kill infidels.

How about a diversity of mass-murdering Mohammads? Nope, not there either.

It does not matter what 'branch' or sect of Islam a Muslim belongs. All are based on following the commands in the Quran and emulating Mohammad's life example.

Violence is foundational to Islam.

Ignorant fools should get an education before commenting.

Violence is foundational to Islam?

Irwin when you can debate like a rational human being and when you get that education you talk about let me know.

Sad since you missed the point of my previous post let me try again and I promise to keep it short. No matter how much they claim to be Christian people who behave in ways contrary to the core writings and principles of the Christian faith are NOT Christian. Matthew 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Since you will not find an injunction to kill gays in the core Christian writings or principles those who call for the death of gays are NOT Christians.

The core Muslim writings do call for the death of gays. Therefore anyone who kills gays in the name of Islam is Muslim.

No, what you find in both the bible and the Qur'an are written text which different individuals have interpreted. Some christians use the bible to explain their actions just like some Muslims use the Qur'an to explain theirs.

I eagerly await Bill Whatcott 'Guest Blogging' here at sda. Should be quite interesting. When can we look forward to his first post here?

Irwin Daisy: Did you leave the side of the crib down again? Sad is back on the computer trying to sound learned. Too bad that everything he has to say sounds like the ramblings of a kindergarten entrant. I'm sure that the solution of such learned kids as Sad is about 40 or 50 more years of living. I only hope that he is able to last that long without having a radical brain-ectomy performed with a rusty knife by a surgeon yelling Allah Akbar as he saws away at Sad's neck. Maybe though through dimming eyes Sad will see the risen Saviour and at long last realize the futility of his petty little ideology.

Sad,

Maybe you can explain where this fits into your world:

(From the Quran)
9:29, Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Then maybe you can show me an analog in the Christian bible?

Then go to this site:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Scroll about half way down to the list of Islamic terror attacks from just the last three months. Then maybe you can provide the location of a similar list of terror attacks carried out by Christians that will equal even 0.001% of that list (especially any that are called for within the bible).

Your ignorance of world-wide events is shocking. Your ignorance of history is jarring. But your ignorance of the history of Islam and the contents of the Quran is downright dangerous.

Oh yes the website religion of peace. I am not suprised that has come up...... Yoop, your hatred for one religion scares me.

If we are going to toss up random quotes fine. This is a stupid game but meh I have nothing better to do at this moment.

"You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."-- Exodus 20:17 (AV), The Tenth Commandment

Should females be still viewed as property of men?

"If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. [a] He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives."
Deuteronomy 22:28-29

"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid."
Deuteronomy 21:18-21

All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered. 2Those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers. Instead, they are to serve them even better, because those who benefit from their service are believers, and dear to them. These are the things you are to teach and urge on them.
I Timothy 6:1-5

34"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -
36a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'[a]

37"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
Matthew 10:34-38

... thou shalt take an [awl], and thrust it through his ear..., and he shall be thy servant for ever.
-- Deuteronomy 15:17

God did tempt Abraham, ... And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest ... and offer him there for a burnt offering...
-- Genesis 22:1-2

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
-- I Corinthians 14:34-35

Dearest SAD,
Ah you remind me of the eager student raising his hand in grade school(oh, oh, oh pick me pick me!) wanting to impress his teacher by asking the most silly idiotic questions possible.
You are predictable and boring like the rest of your lefty friends.
So sad!

Posted by: Sad... at July 23, 2007 12:29 AM
"Yoop, your hatred for one religion scares me."

I posted a quote from the Quran that accurately states what the Quran says. And you read that as a "hatred for one religion" on my part?

You confuse situational reality with hatred. You got a problem.

BTW, it is not a *random* quote. It is the basis, from the Quran, that the Islamic Jihadists use as their *permission and duty* to kill non-believers.

Mr(s)., you have a very serious problem with basic comprehension and cognition. Maybe if enough people can convince you of that you might seek professional help and guidance.

Yep, you showed analogs in the bible. Now, how about a list of Christian terror attacks in the last three months that use those bible passages as an excuse for killing, like the list of Islamic terror attacks and killings over the last three months. I noticed that you failed to comment on that EXTENSIVE list of terror attack and killings carried out in the name of a Allah.

Do you think there might be some connection between that list and Quran 9:29?

Thanks for contrubuting Cliffy!

People are using one religion to perform terrorist attacks. They do not represent the entire religion. Just like if one were to use the bible quotes to stone a child to death would not represent the entire religion despite following the law or the spirit of the bible...

Yoop, thanks for caring but honestly stick to the issue at hand. You seem to only believe on religion has been used for extreme acts. Sadly, you lack the ability to understand that.

"Yoop, your hatred for one religion scares me."
Posted by: Sad... at July 23, 2007 12:29 AM

OTOH, perhaps I should have thought a little longer before I responded.

Maybe you are correct to be scared of me.

You see, I am one of those types who refuse to let the wistful beliefs a willfully ignorant person get me killed.

They can have my rosary when they take it from my cold dead hands.

Go Bill, tell 'em what's true:

Jihad is for pussies.

Sad: do I call idiots idiots when debating them in real life?

Yes! What would be the fun otherwise?

Now we have the Attack of the Random Bible Quotes. Sad, you are the last person on earth to have been told that Christians and Jews don't consider everything in the Bible to still be "valid" in the sense that if there is a part in the Old Testament where the Israelites are fighting People X, then that war is still in play.

However, the Koran IS read that way by millions and as others have pointed out, there are passages in it that demand the death of infidels. Like you, might I add.

I don't even understand why you selected some of those New Test. passages to illustrate your point. You must be a complete Biblical illiterate to think that Jesus really meant "sword" when he said "sword". It's called a figure of speech.

And the story of Abraham and Isaac (see you have to read the whole thing dear) ends with God telling him not to sacrifice his son. It is meant to be a message to non-Jewish tribes that God does not approve of human sacrifice, which was practiced at the time.

I could go on but you are such a biblical illiterate it would take hours. this is what our educational system has come to, alas.

We're still waiting for you to give us the membership of those half-assed Christian militias you mentioned.

And for you to name 5 Christian leaders who have called for the murder of homosexuals. Again, Fred Phelps is NOT a Baptist. He can call himself one all he wants but the real Baptists have condemned him numerous times. It has been explained to you why he is not following Christian injunctions, by Joe. Just keep reading Joe's post until it makes sense to you.

I also want the death toll for those exploding abortion clinics you keep bringing up, which again are a figment of your fevered little brain. Stop getting your ideas from TV shows or Bill Maher and think for yourself.

When was the last time an abortion clinic was bombed? Eric Rudolph? Google his name and read about how much he dispises Christians and calls himself an atheist.

I've already given you the death toll for intact abortion clinics but you have chosen to ignore that.

near the top of our Charter of rights

Fundamental Freedoms

Fundamental freedoms 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

a) freedom of conscience and religion;
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
d) freedom of association.

Sounds to me like they don't like Bills thoughts which alone is a charter violation.

furthermore

7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

allowing people to immigrate here when was it 18% want to practice jihad violates section 7 of the charter when it comes to the Majority of Canadians.

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/

Sad, a violent drunkard can hardly be described with a word 'child'. You need reality training.

Both Muslims and Christians believe in taking up the sword in the defence of their faith.

However, the Christian's sword is the sword of the Spirit, the word of God. Muslim's use a sword of a different sort, as the various pictures of beheadings floating around cyberspace attest.

Human Rights Tribunals and goodie-goodies in Canada view the Christian's sword as a far greater threat.

Ummm. I would not recommend ignoring a letter from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. They are a quasi judicial body established by statute to investigate complaints referred to it by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. They have the power to levy fines and issue an order to cease a practice. Their orders have the same power legally as court orders, therefore ignoring such an order is punishable by contempt of court. Their rulings, like those of other administrative tribunals, can be appealed to the Federal Court of Canada. Anyone who thinks they can refuse to acknowledge their authority, as some have said on this thread, would do well to consult a text on Administrative Law. You may not like it, but if you ignore a court order and end up in prison for contempt of court you are an idiot, full stop. For those interested, they have a website http://www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/index_e.asp. You can read all their rulings, and find out about the status of any active cases. Tomasz Winniki, who was one of two individuals who have been convicted of contempt of court for ignoring CHRT rulings, appears from my reading of the CHRT's decision in his case to be a pretty loathesome variety of white supremacist, I am not overwhelmed for sympathy for him. I expect the CHRT will rule against the complainant in the present case, it appears frivolous to say the least. However the CHRT is obliged to investigate any case referred to it. A number of cases are settled, as is routine in court proceedings, but the parties are certainly not obliged to do so. I do have a number of problems with the whole system, but I think there have been some pretty silly and uninformed comments made in this thread.

"Yoop, thanks for caring but honestly stick to the issue at hand. You seem to only believe on religion has been used for extreme acts. Sadly, you lack the ability to understand that."
Posted by: Sad... at July 23, 2007 1:41 AM

Sad, You seem to have problems connecting dots, so lets take it a bit slower.

Dot One: The Quran REQUIRES the infidels and non-believers be killed.

Dot two: The Islamists are acting upon that, as attested by the unbelievably long list of terrorists attacks and killings, in the name of Allah, that was provided to you.

Dot three: You provide biblical quotes that *require* stonings and burnings, and other mayhem.

Dot four: ?

Regarding Dot four, you were asked for a contemporary list of Christian reactions similar to the Islamic list in Dot two. The clock is ticking away and you have yet to provide Dot four.

Is that on issue? Do you have a problem finding Dot four? Or, has the Google Search engine been overwhelmed by your computer literacy?

Simple enough? Please provide a contemporary list of terrorists attacks and killings presently being carried out in the name of God by Christians.

Then we can put the lists side-by-side and compare numbers.

In order for Islam to become a religion of peace those who follow it must recognize that terrorism is the will, not of allah, but of the same guy they try to cast out. We know it as SATAN in the west. If we in the west start calling terrorists and all the multitude of muslim terrorist groups as Satanists we may be able to get muslims to realise the evil in their midst. By not casting out, as they are supposed to do, they are paving their road to H*ll not to paradise.
Lets label all terrorists as Satanists and be done with it. All satanists know they are not really doing gods work.( As if god needs our help) Remember the reaction to Salman Rushdie's work the Satanic verses? That sure hit araw nerve of truth didn't it. The war on Terror is really the war against Satan and the followers of Satan.

Dear poor SAD, you said
"Thanks for contrubuting Cliffy!"
Yep and big Canuck thank you right back at ya, eh?

Sadly you are so typical.
I guess it's perfectly reasonable for you to stereotype a whole group of folks as you have, based on the actions of one or two criminals,but G_D forgive us should we point out the thousands + of acts of terror by one demented group of religious zealots! Then you get all sanctimonious and victim like.
Talk about ignoring the truth when it is presented to you.

So where do you get your talking points? CAIR?

I think this makes a good point.....

"Regardless of what his birth certificate may or may not have said, Timothy McVeigh was not a religious man. At no time did he credit his deeds to religion, quote Bible verses, or claim that he killed for God.

The so-called “members of other faiths” alluded to by Muslims are nearly always just nominal members who have no active involvement. They are neither inspired by, nor do they credit religion as Muslim extremists do, and this is what makes it a very different matter.

Islam is associated with Islamic terrorism because that is the association that the terrorists themselves choose to make.

Muslims who compare crime committed by people who happen to be nominal members of other religions to religious terror committed explicitly in the name of Islam are comparing apples to oranges.

Yes, some of the abortion clinic bombers were religious (as Muslims enjoy pointing out), but consider the scope of the problem. There were five deadly attacks over a 35 year period in the U.S. Seven people died. This is an average of one death every five years.

By contrast, Islamic terrorists have staged over seven thousand deadly attacks in just the five years following September 11th, 2001. If one goes back to 1971, when Muslim armies in Bangladesh began the mass slaughter of Hindus, through the years of Jihad in the Sudan, Kashmir and Algeria, and the present-day Sunni-Shia violence in Iraq, the number of innocents killed in the name of Islam probably exceeds five million over this same period.

In the last six years, there have been perhaps a dozen or so religiously-inspired killings by people of all other faiths combined. No other religion produces the killing sprees that Islam does nearly every day of the year. Neither do they have verses in their holy texts that arguably support it. Nor do they have large groups across the globe dedicated to the mass murder of people who worship a different god, as the broader community of believers struggles with ambivalence and a radical clergy that supports the terror.

Muslims may like to pretend that other religions are just as subject to "misinterpretation" as is their “perfect” one, but the reality speaks of something far worse."

from www.thereligionofpeace.com

Sad (ham),

Perhaps you're another islamist interloper, who doesn't know their own ideology? Or, simply offering another example of taqiyya? Or just a typical brain-dead leftard?

Packwood's Law: Sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from evil.

We know how Jesus dealt with the adultress, "Let he without sin cast the first stone." He saved her life.

Now, how about Mo? 600 years later he was faced with the same thing and here's how he dealt with it:

Do not stone the adulteress who is pregnant until she has had her child. After the birth she was put into a ditch up to her chest and the prophet commanded them to stone her. Khalid came forward with a stone, which he threw at her head, and there spurted blood on the face of Khalid and he cursed her. The gentle prophet prayed over her and she was buried. – Hadith No. Muslim 682

That's just one case of foundational violence in Islam.

How about how Mohammad treated the Jewish tribe at Trench? He personally presided over, some say did a lot of the work in chopping off the heads of 600-900 men, all for refusing to join his army of brigands and murderers. He then coached his men on the finer points of rapine. The women and daughters were later sold into slavery, except for the most beautiful one, whom Mo kept for himself. But not before forcing her to watch her husband, father and other male family members butchered. (Hadiths)

It goes on and on - Like the contract killing of the two poets in Mecca for insulting him, etc. etc.

Since all Muslims are commanded to follow Mohammad as the perfect man and final prophet of allah, it stands to reason that violence is modus operandi in Islam.

But here's how one of their great scholars describes the Islamic Jihad plan:

Thus the jihad may be regarded as Islam’s instrument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the belief of God…Until that moment is reached the jihad, in one form or another will remain as a permanent obligation upon the entire Muslim community. It follows that the existence of a dar al-harb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order; that the dar al-Islam permanently under jihad obligation until the dar al-harb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order…until the dar al-harb is rduced to non-existence…The universality of Islam, in its all embracing creed, is imposed on the believers as a continuous process of warfare, psychological and political if not strictly military. – Professor Majid Khadduri, treatise on jihad, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, 1955

Oh, and more on the perfect man and prophet of allah, who's life example every Muslim is to follow:

Muslim (8:3309) - Muhammad married Aisha at the age of nine.

Bukhari (62:18) - Aisha's father, Abu Bakr, wasn't on board at first, but Muhammad explained how the rules of their religion made it possible. This is similar to the way that present-day cult leaders manipulate their followers into similar concessions.

Muslim (8:3311) - The girl took her dolls with her to Muhammad's house (something to play with when the "prophet" was not having sex with her).

Bukhari (6:298) - Muhammad would take a bath with the little girl and fondle her.

Muslim (8:3460) - "Why didn't you marry a young girl so that you could sport with her and she could sport with you, or you could amuse with her and she could amuse with you?" Muhammad posed this question to one of his followers who had married an "older woman" instead.

And, allah's apostle said, "I have been given five things which were not given to any amongst the Prophets before me. These are:

1. Allah made me victorious by awe (Or, through terror by frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey.

2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum (purification with dirt when water isn’t available) . Therefore my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due.

3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me (and was not made so for anyone else).

4. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation exclusively but I have been sent to all mankind.

5. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection.)

(Source: Bukhari Vol. 1, No. 429)

I don’t think any Islamic scholar would defend that statement in the context of today’s values. Gift #1 is an acknowledgment of the effectiveness of terrorism. Gift #2, that one can purify oneself with dirt, defies common sense. Gift #3 contradicts the Eighth Mosaic Commandment – thou shalt not steal --, and it is expressly prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention on Warfare and Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. And the final two “gifts” were actually copied from Jesus’ own words – see Acts 1:8, and Matthew 10:33.

Also, keep in mind (that's if you have one) young Sad, that the Quran is abrogated from the least offensive verses to the most. This is because, as Mo was writting it, he necessarily needed to be humble in order to build up his following to critical mass. After that, he arrogantly and monsterously did what he had planned to all along - the imperial and bloody, military expansion of Islam for his own vain glory.

Kind of like what all Muslims do today in taking over a country. Witness the different stages of takeover. From Canada and the US (a religion of peace). To Europe (demands for shariah, ongoing violence, threats). To Indonesia, Pakistan and the Phillipines (Outright civil war). To Sharia states (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, etc)

That's the lesson for today.

Easy on the facts there Irwin ... you'll get HRC'd !!

It's only a matter of time when SDA goes crosses the line and is shut down for similar hate crimes. I'll celibate with a nice cold Heineken when that day comes. I guess I should stick one in the fridge because it's going to be any minute now.

Not considering myself as either a 'leftie',(whatever in hell that is)- nor a 'Christer', ( thank you, Gore Vidal), on the subject of Timothy McVeigh: McVeigh claimed, that when the feds used MILITARY EQUIPMENT against the harmless jesus-freaking whackjobs at the 'Branch Davidian' complex in Waco, (That is pronounced 'Waykoo'- not Wackoh'- by the way).
McVeigh claimed that the bombing of the Edward R. Murrow bldg in Oklahoma City was a reprisal for the United States Governdment declaring war on it's own citizens, (in defiance of the 'something Comitas act.')
Timmy was a lot better self-educated than you think, and he was essentially correct. (Too bad- he got sucked into a 'false flag' thing that involved the American government.
The truth about Timothy McVeigh, will probably show up- at the same time we find out where JFK's brain went.................

I will add my 2-bits to this. I had to convert to Islam to marry my wife (so much for no compulsion in Islam) I did this so her family would not disown her and cut off contact with her. When I go to Malaysia I am subject to Sharia law, needless to say I am very careful over there not to get into trouble. Many of the Muslims I meet over there are decent people, but they do nothing to prevent their religion from being used for terrorist ends, and we know what happens when good men do nothing.
Islam was an attempt to wrestle away tribal control of the Arabs, it failed as the tribal customs overtook Islamic practices and use Islam to proliferate. Before Islam there was no protection for people or women, Islam was the first attempt to codify the rules for Arabs. Although it is harsh by our standards today, it was a major improvement at the time. The problem has been that development of the religion and it’s followers has been stifled by the powerful forces within. The religion is based upon submission, first to god and then to authorities, religious or otherwise. It is not a religion that encourages critical thinking, in fact most of the development during the golden age was done by imported talent from Persia and Greece.
The west is the only place where the various versions of Islam can practice side by side in peace, nowhere in the Islamic world can the other versions practice unmolested by the dominating sect. In Malaysia it is a crime to preach the Shitte teachings, it’s also a crime to even attempt to convert a Muslim. A person born a Muslim must remain that way for life, even attempting to renounce the religion is a crime and this is in a very moderate Islamic state!