How do they produce progeny over the phone?

This is wrong on so many fronts! We have friends who have trying to get out of Pakistan for months. He's Canadian, married her in Canada after they met at college, their baby was born in Canada just before they went back to Pakistan to help her family. She is being refused entry to Canada.
They are Christians.

How could marriage by telephone be legal under Islamic law, when these laws were written in the 7-8th centuries and...telephones..weren't..

AS ET mentioned,how could this be? Easy. The Islamofacisits will do absloutly ANYTHING to advance their world take over. Why isn't our immigration dept. all over this? Nevermind. You don't have to waste Kate's bandwidth explaining it.I all ready know the leftards answer.

*
"genetic fallout is actually the smallest part of the problem...

"While Woolas has raised the question of birth defects,
the most serious concern is that cousin marriage
blocks assimilation".

"(I show how in "Assimilation Studies" and
"Assimilation Studies, Part II.")"

*

Yesterday there was a post re: beaurocracy and the SWC spending and now this...
Are Liberal appointees still running the departments? Why is this kind of immigration so easy,when others are being harassed? Is this a deeply imbedded beaurocratic problem? Are the CPC pretending to not see these situations? We used to blame the Libs? What the heck is going on??

Jeepers...why isn't Steve fixing these problems for you guys? Does he just pander to his base with empty platitudes, and then govern like a Liberal?

Sure seems that way. He's doing nothing about the HRCs, he renewed funding for the SWC, and has acknowledged climate change exists. He also accepts floor crossing Liberals into his cabinet, and appoints party hacks to the Senate.

Oh well. Steve DID make sure that there's a lot of blue on the Government of Canada website. That's got to count for something. Plus, you guys are so quick to defend him all the time, he knows he can get away with shafting his base on these issues. I mean, what, are you going to vote for the Librano$? Are you going to stay home on election night? Are you going to throw a vote to the Greens? Are you going to help Dion get a minority government?

Go CPC!

ET said,

How could marriage by telephone be legal under Islamic law, when these laws were written in the 7-8th centuries and...telephones..weren't..

Well that is the thing with those people,

they pick what they like from our civilization, what helps them with their medieval lifestyle and they categorically reject the rest of what Western civilization has to offer,

while we have to tolerate everything that comes with them, medieval beliefs, medieval rituals et cetera...

It is a "we give they take" kind of deal...

Johnnyringo said,

why isn't Steve fixing these problems for you guys?

To fix these problems he would have to fire thousands of liberals apointees that along the years have "invaded" every nook and cranny of Canada.

How do you feel about that solution?

Exponentially? 2 to 3 percent increased risk is exponential?

Somebody needs to revisit high school math, methinks.

2 ti 3 percent is about the same increased risk as a baby birthed by a woman over the age of 40.

Some ideas, are just bad. Some cultural experiments are horrible failures. Some are dead ends. Some have grotesque outcomes - ask any Cambodian.

Once can embrace diversity and still reject attitudes and practices that are not constructive, or a direct threat.

Equating all cultures is a cop-out. Unable to, or unwilling to apply judgement, better just to whitewash the whole spectrum and throw a dart. When you apply judgement, suddenly, you become accountable. Accountability is the kryptonite of the left.

As I posted here before in comments, it is behavior that matters. If a culture motivates an unacceptable behavior, it is entirely prudent to reject that culture - and embrace another that does not. To choose, in other words.

The smear received so often here by leftist trolls is that by applying judgement, and rejecting what one judges as destestable behaviors and attitudes, that one is a racist.

But, think about the company one keeps personally. Friendship is a free process of selection. You choose your friends. You judge people. Not everyone is your friend. I dare say that if you befriended a drug addict who repeatedly helped themselves to your wallet's contents, you might be inclined to strike them off your Holiday Season salutation list.

The day the those on the left abandon their own personal judgement and selection of their circle of friends and throws open the field to all comers, regardless of attitude or behavior, is the day that I accept blinkered multiculturalism hook line and sinker.

Until then, we can debate whether the practice of marriage to first cousins is OK or not. There was a logic for this taboo in the west. Is it still valid?

Speaking as a minister in a religious organization, I say I am all in favour of the state and church and mosque being totally separate in their functions concerning marriage. I say, let the state have its proscriptions regarding marriage determined by the people, and let the religions have theirs. However, it is the general population, through their elected representatives that have the final say about what is acceptable by law. The religions should practice what they believe as a subset of this general will.

Marrige to relatives is IMHO not the story here. Why is it so easy for these 'cousin brides' to get in to Canada?

*
"friend of usa says... he would have to fire thousands
of liberal appointees... how do you feel about that
solution?"

well... i think i could probably find some way to live
with it.

*

Well one thing is for sure, they do it because we let them.

Johnny Douchebag regales us with his infinite wisdom once again.

He either is a total moron, and has no idea how heavily the libranos filled the ranks of the civil service with their lapdogs.

Or, he just comes here to get us all going.

I think I will go with option A - MORON!

Bluetech at February 17, 2008 11:13 AM

* * Are Liberal appointees still running the departments? Why is this kind of immigration so easy,when others are being harassed? Is this a deeply imbedded beaurocratic problem? Are the CPC pretending to not see these situations? We used to blame the Libs? What the heck is going on?? * *
===================

YES! Liberal appointees and extended family ARE still running immigration.

Call me a racist if you like, but the truth is that Muslims, Indians and Pakistanis are SOLID Liberal votes.

The motivation to fast track, regardless of consequences, is obvious.

How many Canadians live in a dream world and never crack open a newspaper?

Page A5 of the National Post has two alarming items about the spread of **British Disease** here in Canada.

[1] Said Namouh, who makes bomb instruction videos *Caliphate Voice Channel*, a branch of al Qaeda*s * Global Islamic Media Front *, [GIMF]. This in Mt. Mauricie area, north east of Montreal Quebec.

[2] Salman Hossain, writes on a Toronto forum, Canadian soldiers training here are legitimate targets to be killed. ** Now it is possible and LEGITIMATE **, he writes in one post.

** When do I get to shoot a few Jews down . . . etc **

RCMP told Hossain he is under investigation for incitement of terrorism.

Hello RCMP? That is incitement! What the hell are you waiting for? Back to Bangladesh where he came from!... Now! = TG

Exponentially? 2 to 3 percent increased risk is exponential?

Somebody needs to revisit high school math, methinks

high school math.
Q1.what is the exponent on a 2 to 3% increase per generation?
A1the exponent is 1.02 to 1.03
Q2.how many generations required to get to 10% birth flaws?
A. 5 at 1.02 , 3 at 1.03

exponential, say it again.

Johnny ringo - You don't sound very intelligent or knowledgeable.

Do you seriously think that our govt operates as a dictatorship? Can Harper, just because he doesn't like the way various civil service departments operate - can he

1) fire all these civil servants?
2) rewrite their rules of operation?

No - he can't. He has no legal or political authority to do this.

Do you know that the civil service in Canada is about 90% Liberal? Do you know that the majority of govt authority in Ottawa is by APPOINTMENT? And these civil service can't be fired; they can be, possibly, with great difficulty 're-assigned' but usually - it's impossible.

So, your flippant and utterly ignorant complaint that 'why doesn't Harper fix everything' is because, in our governmental and legal system, he has no such power to do so.

Do you want to deal with this problem? You could first try to obtain some FACTS.

Go to realwomenca.com
You'll find there, the tale of how the SOW got their funding. Remember, Harper can't act as a dictator in our country; we don't allow, legally, the PM such authority. It has to go through Committee Review.

The SOW stacked the Committee. Real Women had a very difficult time there.

The HRCs? Again, Harper may, and does, dislike them. But, I know you'd prefer him as a dictator, but, he can't - legally - do it.

With a civil service in Ottawa that is predominantly Liberal. AND UNIONS that govern them that are totally socialist....what we would like done - can't be done.

Do you have anything intelligent to say?

political correctness is designed and intended to destroy western society - there can be no other explanation for this insanity

." he would have to fire thousands
of liberal appointees... how do you feel about that
solution?"

"well... i think i could probably find some way to live
with it."

Could you live with the thousands of six figure settlements require to give all these guys a "golden handshake".

And don't for a moment imagine that some of them are not competent administrators, and their dismissal would be a loss to government service.

Change in the civil service has to be done slowly, over a period of years,the new guys have to be trained in the ways of that particular jungle, lest they perish by poisonous snake bites.

The Libs had 13 years in charge,and they must have been frustrated by Mulroney appointees in some bureaucracies.

As for the marriage by phone thingy, wasn't the telephone invented by Ali-Akhbar Graham Bell?

Well, these stories are getting awfully predictable eh?
What I'm finding MOST interesting now is their apparent confidence and unabashedness in making these announcements of applied shari'a law and rubbing our noses in it. Now that's civiliational confidence! Too bad we can't get some of that, eh?
And notice the bureaucrat's unembarrassed admission that they know about these "telephone marriages."

Did you see that pic in one of the big UK newspapers of that beaming Muslim surrounded by his wife and 11 children. He was a certified teacher but found it all a spot of bother, what with the commute and all, and decided to stay home and live on permanent welfare. He also had some very strong opinions on condoms which he tried once and found most unsatisfactory. I dunno, I'm way way past rage now, just enjoying the re-emergence of Monty Python's Flying Carpet, er, Circus.

Have you noticed that the UN (EU?) wants to disappear the word immigration and replace with with mobility.

I don't blame Muslims anymore than I blame lottery winners. They gotta be rubbing their eyes, shaking their heads in amazement.

Since when have Muslim "leaders" been given the green light to take Canadian law unto themselves to bastardize? Oh, forgot, it's allowed through Trudeau Charter rights under freedom of religion.
We may not officially have Sharia law but our Charter pretty well awards it defacto.

Kind of gives the term "telephone sex" new meaning.

It is not illegal to marry your first cousin, at least in Manitoba, I havent checked all provinces, it is in about 26 states in the US.

As another commentator said here there is another story, and that is the immigration story. Is it a wholesale conspiracy for immigration? Existing law means that immigration canada can decide if the marriage is one of convenience.

whether someone has met their bride/groom, is one of the criteria they could and should use.

The red flag being used here is likely a response by the immans to the immigration criticism....oh yes right they have never met, ulm sharia...oh yeah this is allowed under sharia..."

Of course being married by Elvis in Vegas is also accepted as a marriage.

It all comes down to the question of how much does the state want religous institutions to conduct state functions and what credentials outside of your own countries do you want to recognize and for waht purpose.

Sharia or no, Pope's blessing or no what will be recognized by the state for the purposes of guardianship of children, communal property, inheritance and benefit distribution.

Very complex problem, flows all the way to taxes etc. this is the states interest.

As for Sharia...in this case it strikes me that it is being used to justify why a potentially questionable marriage is considered "legal".

This is about creeping sharia, this comes up any time an accepted religous authority says someone is married. The double complication here is that the marriage is being granted outside the country.

A misleading headline to the story. Should be "Sharia Being Used As Cover For Questionable Immigration Marriages."

Sucks to be the expendable vote bank, don't it?

Sucks to be the expendable vote bank, don't it?

Posted by: JohnnyRingo

No what really sucks is that there are so many people like you out there too blind and too dumb to know you are helping your own civilization commit a slow suicide.

I wonder if the polygamous households that are sucking our tax dollars were created over the phonelines. It would be difficult to immigrate with a litter of wives,but a foot in the door and a twenty dollar phone card and,voila,your own little harem.

All a Muslim male has to do to divorce his wife is chant some stupid word three times and he's divorced her. He can do it via the internet or blackberry all perfectly legal under Sharia Law. Will this be the next evolutionary step in Canada divorce by blackberry?

It seems to me allowing marrages over the phone to be reconized as legal is a gross violation of a "Females Charter of Rights to Equality" but hello the left place no value on women and children. Their true great love is OTHER Cultures, women and children are worth nothing to the left. Zip nadda. My biggest fear is Muslim Men could be selling little girls over the telephone under the guise of an Islamic Marrage, a pedophile's wet dream. Of course no one will investigate if Muslims are running a pedophile scam and using Sharia Law to hide it.

Allowing polygamy, arranged marrages vis vie the phone and reconizing a Sharia Divorce are we Crazy? The PM could put a stop to these Human Rights Violations against Female immigrants, it's not as if the females know they have legal rights in Canada and are refered to as "Freshies" for their lack of knowledge. Allowing the above opens a door for unlimited abuse by Muslim Men and Muslim leaders or Imams.

If the Harper government doesn't take action we will have what amounts to the practice of Sharia law. If a challenge hits the highest court of the land, the challenger will win. What more could they want? We pay for all their court challenges as well.

OH CANADA!!

Jon-the-Dumbest-Beatle -- "He also accepts floor cross[ers] into his cabinet[...]"

1.) Is the Air Force General Mr. Khan in cabinet, Jon Aussie-mad-dog? 2.) Is Mr. Emerson seriously going to be re-elected?

"and appoints party hacks" [who then agree to resign and run in the next election, because, after all, they serve with his permission ...] "to the Senate."

"We pay for all their court challenges as well."

Not since we canned it!! (Seriously, couldn't you hear the screeching from NAC? /sarc)

Jon-the-Dumbest-Beatle -- "He also accepts floor cross[ers] into his cabinet[...]"

1.) Is the Air Force General Mr. Khan in cabinet, Jon Aussie-mad-dog? 2.) Is Mr. Emerson seriously going to be re-elected?

"and appoints party hacks" [who then agree to resign and run in the next election, because, after all, they serve with 'the dictator's' permission ...] "to the Senate."

"We pay for all their court challenges as well."

Not since we canned it!! (Seriously, couldn't you hear the screeching from NAC? /sarc)

Rose @ 4:01 PM makes a good point about using this telephone marriage scam as a way of engaging in the criminal activity of child sex slavery. Bringing them in four at a time would create quite an industry.

With same sex marriage and poligamy also acceptable practices, we could have a whole new crop of terrorists over here in no time. No wonder the Imams are so gleeful. Another round for Sharia.

I would like to see a moratorium on immigration and take the time to first round up and deport the thousands of illegals ordered to be deported who are running around loose already, then a vetting process for those who are issuing threats and stirring up trouble, then some rational rules put in place - and yea, fire all of the immigration beurocrats.

the sharia- not only four wives ,but they can be 13 yrs old as well.(and younger) , I copied the rest to show how twisted this is. where is Jack Layton on this issue? hiding? and Borat Dion, off with his sheeple.?

What are the traditional sharia laws governing personal status issues?
Marriage: Islamic marriage is a contract between a man and a woman. In the broadest of terms, the husband pledges to support his wife in exchange for her obedience, Brown says. Women can demand certain rights by writing them into the marriage contract, but the man is the head of the family, and traditionally, a wife may not act against her husband's wishes. (The Quran permits men to use physical force against disobedient wives in some circumstances, Powers says.) Traditional practices still have significant impact on modern law: in Yemen and other nations, a woman cannot work if her husband expressly forbids it. In Syria, a wife can work without her husband's consent, if she renounces her claim on him for financial support. Undersharia, a Muslim woman cannot be married legally to a non-Muslim man, but a Muslim man can be married to a non-Muslim woman. Marriages can traditionally take place at young ages--in Iran, the age of consent is 13 for females and 15 for males, and younger with a court's permission. In Yemen, the minimum marriage age is 15.
Divorce: Under sharia, the husband has the unilateral right to divorce his wife without cause. He can accomplish this by uttering the phrase "I divorce you" three times over the course of three months. If he does divorce her, he must pay her a sum of money agreed to before the wedding in the marriage contract and permit her to keep her dowry, Powers says. Classicalsharia lays out very limited conditions under which a woman can divorce a man--he must be infertile at the time of marriage; insane; or have leprosy or another contagious skin disease. Most Islamic nations, including Egypt and Iran, now allow women to sue for divorce for many other reasons, including the failure to provide financial support.
Polygamy: The Quran gives men the right to have up to four wives. There are some traditional limitations: a man must treat all co-wives equitably, provide them with separate dwellings, and acknowledge in a marriage contract his other spouses, if any. A woman cannot forbid the practice, but can insist on a divorce if her husband takes a second wife. Polygamy remains on the books in most Islamic countries, but some countries limit it through legislation. It is banned in Tunisia and Turkey, though reportedly it is still practiced in some areas of Turkey.
Custody: In a divorce, the children traditionally belong to the father, but the mother has the right to care for them while they are young, Powers says. The age at which a mother loses custody differs from nation to nation. In Iran, the mother's custody ends at seven for boys and girls; in Pakistan, it's seven for boys and puberty for girls. Many nations, however, allow courts to extend the mother's custody if it is deemed in the child's interest

JohnnyRingo... do humanity a favour and jump in front of a speeding bus. You are quite obviously too stupid to be allowed to reproduce. Lefties like you are parasites.....

I just watched "The Battle of Britain' on Canadian History channel. Te editors cropped the smoking scenes (everyone smoked in England in the 1940's - esp the pilots who were not very worried about death by Cancer) thus confusing the story line to the point that you could not follow it unless you had seen the original. This struck me and I thought how stupid PC is - then I realized that I had not seen ONE Burka fluttering bat like to the underground. It was a shock to see only English faces - IN ENGLAND!! I pity the next generation.

Like the item on collecting welfare for multiple wives, I sent a note about this one also to my MP. And they just keep throwing this stuff in our face. What the heck happened to this country?

Read Culture Warrior, The Cell and of course many others, but then I'm speaking to the converted. What we need to do is get organized, because until we do we can flap our lips all day and nothing will be accomplished. And as I said on a different post Canadians are too well off, lazy and apathetic to do anything until it actually affects that individual. A leftard will be a leftard until some mohamed tries to stone cut his hands off for downloading pics of chicks etc. Get my drift.
Only then will JohnnyRingo get it. And I hope he gets it first. Me I'll be waiting with my registered golf clubs.