sda2.jpg

February 11, 2009

Just Don't Call Them "Mosquitos"

The Ontario Human Rights Commission's position on honour killings;

"There are thousands of things that happen in the province of Ontario on a daily basis and we don't comment on all of them," she said.

But, I spluttered, women are being murdered.

"As I said, we are a small commission.

"There are many problematic things that happen in our community and we have to make choices because we can't respond to everything," [Barabara] Hall said.

So honour killings are merely "problematic"?

Here's a woman who's advocated for years on behalf of women's rights. She found time to crucify Steyn and Maclean's, but she's too busy to raise the issue of women who are being murdered over some hideous interpretation of "honour"?

Well, yes! They're females being murdered by brown males. Hello??

When determining equality as it applies under human rights codes, "female" trumps "male", but only when there isn't "brown". It's works the same way as "sex" trumps "religion", but only when there isn't "muslim".

You folks in media are kind of slow to catch on.


Posted by Kate at February 11, 2009 12:00 PM
Comments

Fire. Them. All.

Posted by: Elizabeth at February 11, 2009 12:17 PM


Rule #1. There are no negative comments allowed about Islam. Rule #2. Ever.
Rule #3. See Rule #1

Posted by: billypaintbrush at February 11, 2009 12:18 PM

Hello, Judy Rebick, Libby Davies, etc., where are you now?

Posted by: Barbara at February 11, 2009 12:20 PM

I smell some "vilifying" in the air.

Posted by: ducktrapper at February 11, 2009 12:22 PM

Hey this is fun!

Sort of like White can't take from brown, but brown can take from red. Mexico wants the western US back, but the indian's prior claim is irrelevant.

Sure there is the claim that Mezo-Americans have indian blood, but it's not North American indian blood.

Democrat woman VP with no experience (Geraldine Ferraro) Good, Earth shatteringly good! Republican woman VP who is a popular governor of a significant US state who has negotiated an important to the nation pipeline deal with a foreign govt, killed the Bridge to Nowhere, and threw out a corrupt incumbent? Bad! All time unbelievably bad.

Posted by: Tim in VT at February 11, 2009 12:23 PM

Of course killing women isn't hate like saying you want an equal opportunity to be hired is.


Trudeaupia,.......

Racist is as quota does.

Posted by: dinosaur at February 11, 2009 12:23 PM

Barely on topic...
http://mickhartley.typepad.com/blog/2009/02/the-consortium-of-pubgoing-loose-and-forward-women.html

Posted by: DaninVan at February 11, 2009 12:24 PM

The leftist relativist mindset doesn't see people as individuals but as members of a group. There are no individuals in a group only members who all share the same beliefs and behaviour.

As a relativist, these beliefs and behaviour are valid to the group. To analyze and evaluate them is considered an 'external', objective and 'imperialist' action. So, whatever goes on in the group, is valid to the group. Period.

Leftists/relativists reject any notions of common humanity, common ability to reason and think, and universal standards of human rights (hmm, thus rejecting their beloved UN).

So, inequality of women, bigamy, child marriages, and so on, are not considered violations of human rights (even if they are in our Charter) because the inviolate principle of the leftist HRCs is that 'whatever goes on in a group is valid to the group' and no-one can evaluate or judge it. Period.

Posted by: ET at February 11, 2009 12:24 PM

It all makes sense ET, but only if you use fuzzy logic. At least so far as my right wing mind will it to.

I wonder if leftists all require crackberrys to keep up to date on who is in, who is out and just a general who's who in the zoo? I mean, they gotta right?

Fur = BAD
Renewable = GOOD
FUR = RENEWABLE
BAD = GOOD

Posted by: AtlanticJim at February 11, 2009 12:35 PM

This attitude is so typical of bureaucrats at all levels -- it's a cost/benefit analysis of profile versus effort. Going after "honour" murders would be difficult, potentially risky and likely unpopular amongst the HRCs' core constituency so it's ignored. Persecuting someone for hurting another's feelings is easy, risk-free, high profile and popular with the core constituency. The result . . . !?

Posted by: DrD at February 11, 2009 12:38 PM

I understand Hall's position. We all have our priorities.

And, with those priorities, comes a degree of fallout from choosing which priorities get addressed

Right?

Posted by: Erik Larsen at February 11, 2009 12:41 PM

Barb Hall can't even get elected in Toronto, so Daltoon McSquinty gives her , GIVES HER, more power than she ever imagined.

She's an assassin of freedom.
She's a murderer of rights.
She's a pig from Orwells' Animal Farm, that broke out of the sty and into the farm house.
She's a fascist POS elitist from the Toronto blue blood ruling class without a clue of what she has wrought.
Who BTW just had her kingdom enlarged by liberal fiat: we are her serfs.

Posted by: richfisher at February 11, 2009 12:45 PM

Tim in VT - I think your comment is interesting - and we could get OT pretty easily, but if I remember correctly, there were three separate waves of migration across the Aleutian ice bridge according to genetic analysis from across North and South America, and also correlating with the three main language groups (Na-dene, Eskaleut, and Amerind). (It's been a long time since I read that stuff).

Perhaps the Inuit have a better claim to land in South and North America, because of the hardship that they faced as a result of discrimination and slaughter from their southern counterparts, who wanted to keep them out of their territory.

Posted by: Erik Larsen at February 11, 2009 12:52 PM

The Ministry of Truth expands and makes our lives "better"

Fire.
Them
All.

Posted by: Fred at February 11, 2009 12:54 PM

You know, maybe there's a reason why so many people are stocking up on guns right now.

Posted by: Irene Swain at February 11, 2009 1:08 PM

Yes Irene there is a reason.

Posted by: A storm is coming at February 11, 2009 1:15 PM

This woman is obviously in need of re-education as to just what should be a priority and what is not. Better yet she should be replaced with a Human Being.

Posted by: Ron at February 11, 2009 1:16 PM

D.I.S.E.N.F.R.A.N.C.H.I.S.E.D.

Posted by: Aizlynne at February 11, 2009 1:18 PM

Chritina Blizzard is usually worth a good read, however, this is just another example of the MSM showing up a day late and a doller short as usual.

and Barbara Hall is a left-wing looney (always has been)

Posted by: Brian M. at February 11, 2009 1:20 PM

uh, make that 'dollar'

Posted by: Brian M. at February 11, 2009 1:21 PM

“When principles that run against your deepest convictions begin to win the day, then battle is your calling, and peace has become sin; you must, at the price of dearest peace, lay your convictions bare before friend and enemy, with all the fire of your faith.”
- Abraham Kuyper, Dutch Theologian and Statesman

Posted by: Adam at February 11, 2009 1:23 PM

I like the end of her article where she says

"I think there is an important role for it to mediate in cases where people are refused accommodation based on the colour of their skin or where they didn't get a job based on their age or gender."


Course as a white male christian I'm sure they care about me. If only to fine companies for hiring too many white males.

How much money is wasted with racist CHRC audits?

Posted by: dinosaur at February 11, 2009 1:24 PM

I'm glad such a honorable and self-important self-serving idiot is making sure we speak/think correctly.

My god, uncontrolled free speach, why that just has to be bad, why someone may tell the truth about these life-sucking twits at the HRC.

More importantly someone may have to make a concerted effort to stop these honor killings, why that would expose the victim industry for what it is, a forum for ideology that is directly opposite of Canadian values.

I just have to see Elmo trying to justify killing in an open forum.

Posted by: robins111 at February 11, 2009 1:29 PM

I'm usually quick to defend against what I may consider to be unfair attacks on Muslims (for example), but this woman has lost all reason.

People like her are more than just a nuisance - they are as dangerous as those who believe honour killings are acceptable. She's not making our society better, she's making it far worse. In the fight against radical Islamists (who are in actuality more of a problem for Muslims than for the rest of us), people like her fight fire with gasoline.

She's not doing Muslims any favour here. In fact, quite the opposite, she's enabling those that would enslave many Muslims, subjecting them to abuses clearly unacceptable to our society, and to any reasonable compassionate person. That she cannot see this raises questions as to her sanity, and that of those who support her.

She's a danger to all of us. She should be fired as soon as possible.

Posted by: Jimbo at February 11, 2009 1:33 PM

Barbara Hall is a Cultural Marxist.
The goal of Cultural Marxism isn't to obtain equality for women or the "oppressed", it's goal is the destruction of Western culture and society, because ONLY when it is destroyed, can it be supplanted. Once you get your mind around that reality, the entire picture becomes much clearer. Feminists, homosexuals, and visible minorities are nothing but useful idiots to Cultural Marxists and once they've served their purpose, of undermining the Judeo-Christian based culture and society of the West, they will be discarded, just like Bezmenov said they would.

Posted by: Edward Teach at February 11, 2009 1:34 PM

Ah yes, the great honour killing debate.

Its easy to forget that honor killings take place across all communities, including white ones. We just have a different name for it - domestic abuse/violence. 'Honor' killings are somehow deemed different or worse because of presumable religious or ethnic content, neither of which are always present in cases later described as 'honor' killings. The motives are often the same as in any other case of domestic abuse - jealousy, greed, outright hatred.

Its a tricky issue because of the way it is spun by the media, the 'backward' communities, and the well-meaning lot, not to mention the " we will find everything that is wrong with you" folk on this site, but at its heart, it is pretty simple - it is nothing more than domestic abuse.

Why is it different for a white man to beat up his wife to establish his domination, and for a brown man to do the same, albeit to his sister or daughter? I think its a bit of a stretch to say that domestic abuse is a cultural phenomenon - the women in one culture may take it more passively than the women of another culture, but if you really want to believe that it isn't a universal phenomenon, enjoy life in your platonic cave.

Posted by: Much Ado About Nothing at February 11, 2009 1:40 PM

Much:

What a great justification for killing women!

Congratulations.

Posted by: set you free at February 11, 2009 1:44 PM

Barbara Hall is the perfect person for the lynch job.

Sadly, the beaurocracy has recently been enhanced by McGuinty's leftist regime, so not even Christina Blizzard or Lorrie Goldstein will be able to bring about the destruction of the Ontario HRC monster currently in force and on the loose and with a massive budget to boot.
I give Christina three stars for at least broaching the HRC and Hall stupidity.

Posted by: Joe Molnar at February 11, 2009 1:46 PM

Kate sums it up beautifully: "When determining equality as it applies under human rights codes, "female" trumps "male", but only when there isn't "brown". It's works the same way as "sex" trumps "religion", but only when there isn't "muslim"."

The whole point being the entire human rights racket is underpinned by PC codes and all conversations or cases or policies or edicts either within or emanating from an HRC must be viewed through the dual lens filters of identity politics and PC.

Posted by: mark peters at February 11, 2009 1:52 PM

Fur = BAD
Renewable = GOOD
FUR = RENEWABLE
BAD = GOOD

Good logic AtlanticJim

Posted by: Orlin from Marquette at February 11, 2009 1:56 PM

Here's an idea I've been toying with. Why not bring back duels. If these brave menfolk think so much of their family's honour, let them put their own life on the line. Instead we have chicken shits murdering their wives, daughters and sisters. Sometimes those heinous dead white males got it right.

Posted by: jason at February 11, 2009 2:00 PM

Barbara Hall is a Cultural Marxist.
The goal of Cultural Marxism isn't to obtain equality for women or the "oppressed", it's goal is the destruction of Western culture and society, because ONLY when it is destroyed, can it be supplanted. Once you get your mind around that reality, the entire picture becomes much clearer. Feminists, homosexuals, and visible minorities are nothing but useful idiots to Cultural Marxists and once they've served their purpose, of undermining the Judeo-Christian based culture and society of the West, they will be discarded, just like Bezmenov said they would.

True:
It is only appropriate to the Cultrual Marxist to continue demonizing only that which is white. Therefor the white males shall be the only target of the Marxist. He is authoritarian, a wife beater, selfish, insencative and any other negatives that can be ladled against him. Cultural Marxist are the true breeders of hate to create division

Posted by: Shawn at February 11, 2009 2:19 PM

Bang on Kate!

And above all political correctness trumps truth.

Posted by: TJ at February 11, 2009 2:22 PM

The difference between domestic abuse and honour killings is much greater than Much would have you belive. The big difference is that abuse is quite different from being killed. At the end of the day the abused is still alive, if we were simply to compare them as matters of degrees.

The other major difference is that as a society and a culture we ABHOR domestic abuse. In a society that practices honour killing, it's barely frowned upon. It's not considered a crime. Typically they're "cooking accidents".

We are shocked by the depravity of honour killings. That's why we think it's barbaric. If you were to take the pulse of the nation I think you'd find that most people would probably want wife beaters castrated. SO what do you think our civilized response would be to a parent that MURDERS their child over some percieved "dishonour".

Posted by: Chris S at February 11, 2009 2:22 PM

I attended a mandatory Human Resources training course on harassment. We were supposed to print our name on a card. Pretty standard except I didn't. The trainer remarked, I remarked she didn't need to know. She proceeded to harass me for 5 minutes. The other trainer and the attendees caught on way before she did. Point made.

Posted by: Speedy at February 11, 2009 2:31 PM

If someone hurts your feelings you can be taken to the HRC, well, I think any woman killed has had her feeling hurt, permanently.
How long before some lawyer uses Defending his honor, when a wife or girlfriend is killed by her husband or family. Cheating women better watch out, you will soon be a victim of an honor killing.

Posted by: MaryT at February 11, 2009 2:32 PM

Barbara Hall is a Cultural Marxist.
The goal of Cultural Marxism isn't to obtain equality for women or the "oppressed", it's goal is the destruction of Western culture and society,..........

Posted by: Edward Teach at February 11, 2009 1:34 PM

---------------------------------------------
The only thing I have to say is............

What Edward Teach said.

Posted by: Mr.g at February 11, 2009 2:46 PM

I've often said that those who refer to women or minorities as "disadvantaged" are the REAL sexists or racists.

Posted by: Edward Teach at February 11, 2009 2:48 PM

I call it "Two Tier Feminism". It's a joke!

Posted by: Indiana Homez at February 11, 2009 2:49 PM

Seems Steyn is coming out of semi-hiatus to start writing for Macleans again very soon (Check out Five Feet of Fury). So good for Macleans. And good for their sales, too, I bet.
Much Ado: Your. Comparison. Is. Ridiculous. (And your monker, if meant to complement what you just wrote, is offensive. Couldn't you at least have gone with "Othello"?)

Posted by: Black Mamba at February 11, 2009 2:55 PM

Chris- The "cooking accidents" you mentioned are usually based on greed, not honour. They're common in India, where they allow the husband to remarry, and collect another dowry.

These honour killings bother me about as much as someone forgetting to signal when he turns right. They bother me about as much as hearing about one gangster shooting another in a distant city. They bother me slightly less than hearing about a cockfighting ring in Texas. Let them live in their own hell. When they feel like joining the rest of the human race, maybe I'll put some value on their lives.

Posted by: dp at February 11, 2009 2:56 PM

The enemy of my enemy is my friend - even if it kills me.

Posted by: ron in kelowna at February 11, 2009 2:56 PM

Ah yes Edward,

women = minority
men = majority
men minority = majority

Posted by: Indiana Homez at February 11, 2009 2:59 PM

Reminds me of the old story that I heard once - if you're responsible for handing out infractions for those who don't buy transit tickets, who are you going to stop and check?

A kind-looking, tired, well-groomed university student, or a 6'8" unkempt menacing looking type?

Posted by: Erik Larsen at February 11, 2009 3:01 PM

"What a great justification for killing women!"

There is a difference between stating reality, and providing justification. I did the former, you think I did the latter. You think wrong.

The irony of it all is that there are probably some disingenous men here who aren't too gentle to their women folk, who proudly proclaim their abhorence for such violence. How much do you want to bet?

Posted by: Much Ado About Nothing at February 11, 2009 3:05 PM

Maybe the OHRC should put out a truth in advertising sign: Only those being "victimized" by whites, males or Christians need apply.

Posted by: lynnh at February 11, 2009 3:05 PM

much ado - I agreed with your initial comment that domestic abuse certainly isn't limited to any particular group - but your statement at 3:05 is kinda odious.

The important thing to consider is outcome, and inputs leading to that outcome.

Is alcohol abuse a contributing factor to domestic abuse? Yes, in some instances for sure, so perhaps there are ways of addressing this.

Is childhood exposure to domestic abuse a risk factor for its propogation through generations? I'm sure it is, so maybe ways should be explored to break that chain.

Are religious beliefs responsible for contributing to domestic abuse? If so, an honest exploration of same is warranted.

Posted by: Erik Larsen at February 11, 2009 3:13 PM

How much do you want to bet Much Ado is a victim of forcible lobotomy?

"The irony of it all" - my god, what an ironic choice of words from one blind to irony. The deeper they go down the Memory Hole, the crazier they get and the more jaw-droppingly NUTS their worldview becomes. We are now in an era when people who call themselves "liberals" are defending Nazis, murderers, and abusers of women and children. Who the hell could have guessed it?

Well, me for one. I predicted an overt alliance between Fascists, leftists, and ecotards in the very near future. I never imagined it would be so quickly, or so overtly - but why not? Removal of freedoms is what every one of these groups is and always has been about. They have found their common ground, and God help us all as they try to assimilate everyone into the hive through the coercive powers of the State.

Posted by: Michael H Anderson at February 11, 2009 3:14 PM

I can't believe how stupid that Hall of horrors is. The left could use her for the prototype for their brownshirts.

Posted by: Honey Pot at February 11, 2009 3:22 PM

I can't believe how stupid that Hall of horrors is. The left could use her for the prototype for their brownshirts.

Posted by: Honey Pot at February 11, 2009 3:22 PM

I can't believe how stupid that Hall of horrors is. The left could use her for the prototype for their brownshirts.

Posted by: Honey Pot at February 11, 2009 3:23 PM

"Its easy to forget that honor killings take place across all communities, including white ones. We just have a different name for it - domestic abuse/violence."

That statement is as idiotic as that smirking woman who thinks she's the better and enlightened one...

Posted by: ldd at February 11, 2009 3:25 PM

Trudeaupia created a tyranny of the minority.

Tyrannies usually take time to come to fruition.

Rome wasn't created in a day. Rome was a totalitarian state that eventually imploded due to corruption, laziness, and an inflated government, but that can't happen here, right?

Posted by: Glen at February 11, 2009 3:25 PM

The "left" have really tried to equate honour killings with domestic abuse so that they can now blame men all over the country for a despicable act by a crazy Muslim in Montreal. Beating women is frowned upon in Canadian society. Honour killings are encouraged in Muslim countries.

I've lived in what would be termed "bad neighborhoods" for most of my life. I've seen lots of violence in my time. There's a golden rule we have that women can follow that would eliminate most domestic violence. Don't marry and A-hole.

Posted by: gord at February 11, 2009 3:30 PM

Rome was a totalitarian state that eventually imploded due to corruption, laziness, and an inflated government, but that can't happen here, right?

Rome was first a republic. It later changed to a somewhat democracy than to totalitarian state. Like what is happening to the US.
Bring back Ron Paul

Posted by: Shawn at February 11, 2009 3:37 PM

I'm surprised Barb hasn't taken Clint Eastwood to task for the script of Gran Torino.

Posted by: Brent at February 11, 2009 3:40 PM

straight from the horses a$$

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bePfSeh2ZDs

Posted by: cal2 at February 11, 2009 3:45 PM

This is worth reading, if you're interested in how Honour Killings actually happen. I've whined before, and I may whine again, about how the links on the threads don't take, at least not at my end - but:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_2_when_Islam.html

Posted by: Black Mamba at February 11, 2009 3:47 PM

I'm going to start filing human rights complaints as a lesbian, against Islamist who advocate the death penalty for me.

Let's get this whole biased procedure right our into the open, shall we?

Posted by: Kyla at February 11, 2009 3:47 PM

http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_2_when_islam.html

That would be "islam" with a small i.

Posted by: Black Mamba at February 11, 2009 3:54 PM


Hmmm, comparing Domestic Abuse to Honor Killings is a far stretch if not a long haul.

Besides, I agree with everyone else, how long before you start blaming the White Man ?

You know, here awhile back when my Brother was living in Rock Springs, Wyoming he called me late one nite and was telling me during the long Wyoming Winters that 72% of the Women there were battered. I was astonished and said pretty plainly how could that be. He simply said they don't listen. ;-)
,

Posted by: Ratt at February 11, 2009 3:55 PM

"Why is it different for a white man to beat up his wife to establish his domination, and for a brown man to do the same, albeit to his sister or daughter?"
Posted by: Much Ado About Nothing

Apparently not much thinking going on in 'Nothing's mind. The first instance is universally abhored, condemmed and generally, prosecuted. The second is excused as a cultural norm which is not ours to judge.


"The irony of it all is that there are probably some disingenous men here who aren't too gentle to their women folk, who proudly proclaim their abhorence for such violence. How much do you want to bet?"

Posted by: Much Ado About Nothing

Presumptuousness in order to justify his beliefs. 'Nothing' knows exactly that about any of us, but it gives him comfort to believe we 'men', simply due to our gender, are 'likely' to beat our 'women folk'.

I'd wager that more of us than the 'general population' would step into the breech in defence of women, whether they happen to be our 'women folk' or someone else's.

But then again what do I know? I'm just a middle aged white conservative man with a loving wife and two successful well-adjusted daughters.

Posted by: No Guff at February 11, 2009 4:00 PM

Interesting point ET about leftist moonbats seeing people as members of a group rather than individuals. The only thing I can't figure out is how they decide which groups are good and which are bad. I'm a member of the white-male libertarian redneck SUV-driving gun-nut group and I've never understood why members of my group are considered to be so much more dangerous than members of the muslim wifebeater group. Why there hasn't been even one redneck driving a pickup filled with explosives into a government building.

Any attempt to analyze HRC statements with logic leads to immense frustration and I think Ezra Levant has it right when he says that HRC's are making it all up as they go along. Sort of what a TV series written by a psychotic screenwriter with Alzheimers would be like.

Posted by: loki at February 11, 2009 4:00 PM

much ado...hate men because..?
I have hit my husband more than he has hit me.That's reality.

If the victims of those honour killings were white men would that make you feel better?

Posted by: anonion at February 11, 2009 4:02 PM

Go for it Kyla. There is a case before the Hrc right now that pits a lesbian couple against an islamic gyno.

Posted by: wallyj at February 11, 2009 4:03 PM

Gord good advice thirty years ago, people learned from consequence, now we have progressives handing out hugs instead of hints to life lessons, or like Much ado here laying out a smoke screen for things to come so they can't be dealt with honestly and possibly offend someone, while being openly offensive themselves.

Cave reference for example, oh and lets not forget dragging women by the hair into the cave lol. I think mainly though its mostly guys out west that still do that :)


Posted by: Mugs at February 11, 2009 4:08 PM

The "irony" comment sems to have sparked some kind of angry response. The flip side to it, of course, is that you have any number of Muslim men (and women), who claim that Islam is 'good' to women, 'good' for women's dignity etc. They are, by choice, blind to the darker reality of their own community.

I have simply applied that same blindness by choice to some here, and predictably earned their wrath.

Erik,

Agreed. The role of religion has to be explored, but dare I suggest a western coherent approach to the overly reactionist approach we see here. The automatic assumptioon for most of the people reading this post, and correct me if I am wrong, is that religion is guilty until proven innocent. I prefer an innocent until proven guilty approach. That is the western way. Reactionaries remind me of communists - anger at the way things are without any real idea of how to fix it, minus some vague ideas of utopia.

"I'd wager that more of us than the 'general population' would step into the breech in defence of women, whether they happen to be our 'women folk' or someone else's."

History tells us most of us will ignore the victims (regardless of gender) plight. Remember that lady who got stabbed to death in New York, despite thousands of people living in buildings within earshot? A lot of people heard her. Nobody did anything. SOmething about not wanting to get involved in other people's personal issues.

I am not blaming the white man, nor am I justifying domestic abuse. I just fail to see the point of demonizing one community for its rather pathetic antics, when similar actions take place in every community. If honor killings are a far stretch from domestic abuse, please explain how. Declaring it in as many words, does not make it so.

Posted by: Much Ado About Nothing at February 11, 2009 4:20 PM

"I have hit my husband more than he has hit me.That's reality."

Thats not a healthy relationship, no matter which community you are from. I would suggest ending it, or seeing a psychiatrist.

"Gord good advice thirty years ago, people learned from consequence, now we have progressives handing out hugs instead of hints to life lessons, or like Much ado here laying out a smoke screen for things to come so they can't be dealt with honestly and possibly offend someone, while being openly offensive themselves."

Forgive me for saying "fight domestic abuse" instead of saying "fight muslim domestic abuse only".

Posted by: Much Ado About Nothing at February 11, 2009 4:22 PM

Shawn @ 3:37 Rome was never a democracy. It started as a monarchy, became an aristocratic oligarchy ruling a republic, became a limited constitutional autocracy and finally ended as a military dictatorship which created the feudal economic caste system. It failed for a host of reasons, but the two most important were: 1) that people no longer had any reason to support a system which no longer worked to their benefit, and 2)that Rome was outright defeated on the battlefield by superior military technology.

Posted by: cgh at February 11, 2009 4:36 PM

The fight against domestic abuse has been going on with success for quite some time, where have you been?

We've been fighting child abuse as well, have you not noticed?
That's not to say it's perfect and no one dies or gets abused, but it's far better than it was, it was a far more punitive society where, for example teachers could administer corporal punishment on the spot without any national headlines.

Woman have choices here. I do understand that a Muslim women here, has less and it's presumptuous to assume she can walk away from it as easily as a Canadian woman of many other 'colours' here can.
It's a religious or cultural practice, not ignorance practiced by a immature bully to the point of murder.

Get a grip.

Check out France on how well your line of thinking worked or not working rather, there.


Posted by: ldd at February 11, 2009 4:36 PM

Much ado:

I think the Kitty Genovese story, to which you allude, is an interesting point of reference. Her tale is awful (although some of the details remain fuzzy, and are not exactly as thought by many)

I grew up with the rhyme about Lizzie Borden - that tale of horror was imprinted out many young memories, but now, who remembers the names of the Lethbridge family killed by their daughter? Or her name? Or her boyfriend's name? Just another bunch of statistics.

The level and brutality of violence in North American Society has increased - and I don't think it's just due to a change of awareness or reporting.

My big concern is that the Barbara Halls of the world seem not to want to tackle the really difficult questions - because they know that the results will not be either pleasant or simple.

It's much easier, and lazier, for them to harm the relatively harmless - and it's a good gig that pays well - why make one's life more difficult than it has to be?

So, it's her hypocrisy that I despise.


Posted by: Erik Larsen at February 11, 2009 4:48 PM

Much save your apologies for when people in this country finally (if ever) figure out why we are in such sad shape in many ways. A little hint; I feel its groups of people that muddy the waters of reality, and the useless bureaucracies they willingly feed.

They've grown to need each other to survive.

Otherwise, I leave it there as we'll just have to disagree.

Posted by: Mugs at February 11, 2009 5:09 PM

Everything you think you know about Kitty Genovese is wrong.

Why do "progressives" insist upon using outdated faux history to prop up their dubious arguments?

http://www.mindhacks.com/blog/2006/06/remembering_kitty_ge.html

Posted by: Kathy Shaidle at February 11, 2009 5:10 PM


Survey on www.yahoo.ca


Should Omar Khadr be returned to Canada?


:)

Posted by: Holmen at February 11, 2009 5:12 PM

The looney Leftists have aligned themselves with the Islamofacsists thugs for awhile now.

Dr.Sheema Khan and Dr.Elmasry were the 2-stooges that teamed-up to crusade for Shariah law in canada to be applied to females and not males , Dr.Khan was part of CAIR that was also a backer for the 3 Terror cells in canada that are now portrayed as "Victims" of Racial-Profiling , CAIR has now been directly ties to funding Hamas via the bogus Islamic charity claiming to aid orphans and oppressed Muslims.
Here's the Elephant in the room that the MSM fears to reveal to canadians.

CAIR has ties to the Whahhabi Saudis and CAIR is in a Class-Action Lawsuit for aiding and abetting the 9/11 hijackers by coaching Muslims in the USA to not help the Government or FBI when they investigate their fellow Muslims for suspected ties to Jihad or Terrorism.
When William Sampson was in a Saudi jail on trumped up charges for terrorism and alleged slurs towards the Prophet Muhammed while on Islamic soil, Liberal MP Bill Graham is on record telling the MSM that Sampson WAS being tortured but the good new was that the Saudis had not beheaded him yet .
When the UK finally got this Canadian Christian out of jail he came back here and we held an Inquiry where the Foreign Affairs MP had the nerve to sit there and opine that "We can't be all things to all people and be everywhere to help each person in trouble outside of canada" , Mr. Sampson didn't get one cent for the torture and not 1 protest rally was held in Ottawa outside the Saudi Consulate by the leftists or "Peaceful" moderate Muslims in canada .

BUT....Maher Arar had only "Alleged" he suffered harm by the big bad USA and THEN the Liberals snapped in to action to get him out of his Homeland of Syria where he was wanted as a Draft-Dodger to face a Military trial , the MSM wents nuts with the "Torture" lies -which have yet to be proven- and every yahoo in Canada protested the "Islamophobia" and Racism until he was brought back and this included the NDP.
CAIR's team of lawyers launched a $400 million dollar lawsuit to use Financial Jihad and Psychological Terrorism to get an Inquiry for Maher Arar , $30 million dollars later we had NO evidence for Innocence or Guilt but Arar got $10.5 million dollars just for Alleging harm.

CAIR is now crusading for Omar Khadr to get back here on our soil to kill us in a Jihad suicide attack as the Khadr Sons and dad have tried , and Barbara Hall just proves how stupid and naive they are or that they have accepted Islam as a violent faith that produces people prone to murder and riots for Allahs cause.

Why else would Hall treat Honour-Killings as a way of life for Muslims that is protected by the OHRC's definition of religious Freedoms .

I'm still waiting for the big fight over the Pro-Choice Human Rights when Science and Biology is used to do Abortions to babies believed to have a same-gender gene for sexual preferences or Pedophilia for both genedrs.
This should be a nice Cat Fight among the Femi-Nazis and Gay-Stappo during a Power struggle for the fatherland , imaging that....Gender-cides and Homo-Cides via Abortions so these vermons never get to be born and pollute the Utopic leftists version of reality and Justice.


BTW
Maher Arar didn't even show up for the Inquiry that was named after him , but I did find out that he was to get a job at the Bogus Islamic Charity used by CAIR to funnel "Donations" to Palestine and back Hamas and suicde bombers.
Funny how liars never seem to learn about their words coming back to bite them.

Posted by: Roger at February 11, 2009 5:26 PM

One of the few good tidbits of information to come from my exile in a Women's Studies class was a discussion of the connection between literacy and violence. A woman who can read the language of her society is far less likely to take abuse in stride as being just part of her life, or even part of her culture. Women who can read about places to go if they are threatened with violence or death are way more likely to escape domestic violence, but unfortunately, its difficult to provide women's shelters and advocate groups with resources for all the languages that they need owing in part to our fervent clinging to multiculturalism (not saying its bad, just saying knowing the common language is beneficial) and the irritating tendency of certain nameless cultures to keep their women ignorant in order to keep them docile. Maybe if the CRHC is dismantled, the money they recieve could be spent providing shelters and advocate groups with the tools to educate the specific cultures of women who in our country still suffer from abnormally high rates of domestic abuse. Seems like a better use of taxpayer money than paying a commission to look into hurt feelings.

Educated women stand up for themselves, are more likely to recognize and leave an abusive relationship, are less likely to be murdered by an angry spouse, son, brother, father because they get out before it can happen. These women do one thing that many women from islamic backgrounds are not allowed to do: they think a better life is possible and they choose to seek that better life.

Posted by: Irene Swain at February 11, 2009 5:28 PM

For social ostracism, the Left has made racism, (imaginary most of the time) the worst crime in Canada, worse than murder. Honor killings within families and state stoning of raped women? Merely a multicultural bagatelle. Criticizing a brown culture for these acts? Heinous and there must be multimillion dollar expenditures in the form of HRC's to stop it!

Posted by: kivi at February 11, 2009 5:29 PM

Kathy, I agree with you that the Genovese story has been misappropriated.

I think our society has moved too far away from "saying anything about anything". I constantly see people littering, and kids doing stupid things in front of their parents who say or do nothing. If I had more courage in my convictions, I would say "pick that crap up", or "stop acting like an idiot in public".

When I was younger, "societal discipline", if I can use that term, was pretty much accepted (and, I think, good!!)

Now, I think we are a society more at risk for indifference towards each other, because after all, won't the government look after it? Blech.

Posted by: Erik Larsen at February 11, 2009 5:30 PM

The reason lefties excuse honour killing while at the same time buying up yards of white ribbons on Dec 6th is racism.

The left continually engages in the racism of low expectations. Conservatives want to hold everyone to the same high moral standard; true equality. The left wants to have lower standards for different cultures to show how tolerant they are. In reality they're racist because they believe deep down that these people can't help themselves.

This is best viewed on December 6th when we remember 14 dead white women.

When is the national day of mourning and blaming for Picton's more numerous victims?

The left is shocked by middle class white girls' murders, but while disturbed, can't muster the same outrage for poor, mostly brown hookers, as if their deaths are somehow expected.

Same as Muslim daughters, It would seem.

Posted by: chris at February 11, 2009 5:35 PM

Much says "Forgive me for saying "fight domestic abuse" instead of saying "fight muslim domestic abuse only".

Why don't you try and stop all violence instead of violence against women. You can check any stat source you like even the feminist ones and they will tell you that the majority of violence in relationships is started by women. They strike the first blow most of the time. That doesn't bother you though does it. You want to charge the male with defending himself. If you didn't twist statistics you would be forced to put women through sensitivity training as obviously they seem more prone to violence than their male counterparts.

Posted by: gord at February 11, 2009 5:42 PM

Barbara Hall on Power Play now

Posted by: Sammy at February 11, 2009 5:43 PM

I wonder if the Big Media (other than that piece in the Toronto Sun) will catch on to this extraordinarily newsworthy exchange?

Nah. Not a chance. They're part of the problem, after all...

I wonder what Leftists will think about... oh, wait... darn, I forgot... Leftists don't think! Too inconvenient!

Obviously, the "Progressive" movement doesn't care about protecting the human rights of Muslim women. If I was a Muslim woman and I heard what Barbara Hall said, I'd be terrified!

Posted by: The Canadian Sentinel at February 11, 2009 5:59 PM

gord, you cant use the self defense arguement because women are more likely to strike first only using something that is not physically damaging such as a slap across the face.
Men are more likely to cause real physical damage on their first blow, are less likely to stop after one hit, and are more likely to cause severe, lasting damage and/or use a weapon when they attack. I dont say that domestic violence doesnt affect men as well, but overall, the boys who are victims have similar support available to them as many caucasian women, in part because very few minority women are so stupid as to stand up to their husbands, much less attempt to physically assault them.
Muslim women suffer from a disproportionately high level of domestic abuse, much of which goes unreported because they are taught that they deserve it, that their men have the right to beat them, and that they, being inferior, have no right to protest such treatment.

Stopping all violence is an unrealistic goal, lets start with the realistic goals and help the people who really need it right now.

Posted by: Irene Swain at February 11, 2009 6:11 PM

To another leftard, equivocating while undulating:

"Its easy to forget that honor killings take place across all communities, including white ones"

You mean white Muslim ones?

The difference is that Islam promotes and spreads honour killing in their homelands and wherever they immigrate. It is acceptable behaviour in the family, community and Ummah.

The root basis for this horror is the Islamic ideology and Shariah as it applies to women in general.

That Muslim women are "a tilth" to Muslim men. That they are worth half as much as a Muslim man. That in court, they must produce 4 male witnesses in order to charge a Muslim man with rape. That their inheritance is half a males. That a man may have up to 4 wives and sex with as many slaves "as his right hand possesses." That he may marry and have sex with 9 year old girls. That hell is mostly inhabited by women. That women are filthy and unclean.

All of the above is taught from the texts of Islam. The uncreated and unassailable word of Allah.

Islam must be put on trial. It is the ideology of Islam that incites world horror, historically and now.

So, Kyla, go for it. I'll support you.

In fact, it's about time the vast majority got organised against the ideology of Islam. It is more than a clear and present danger. Future generations depend on the actions we take right now.

Posted by: irwin daisy at February 11, 2009 6:23 PM

Barbara Hall on "Power Play" with Tom Clarke this evening was purposely obtuse, but she isn't fooling anyone.

Posted by: Liz J at February 11, 2009 6:37 PM

They could care less about Women. Its all about status for their little elite of SPECIAL Ladies. No others need apply. Not being a Lady I’m told its like a high school clique in the feminist biz.

Being devotes of the Socialist death cult, with its extensive worship of both multiculturalism with Politically correct platitudes. Add in the Gentry of the Nation with its support of the Human Rights racket of Injustice. Designed to destroy real Liberties. Its easy to see how they can be deluded with double think.

It should come as no surprise they value the Islamic death dealers with such admiration. While holding a implacable hatred of Christianity.

They just never stop to consider that after the Country is taken over they will be the first stoned. No one likes traitors in any culture.

Laughingly with all its absurdity, the modern feminists think their untouchable or immune from misogynist Islam.
To me that’s a real definition of insane. To really take a risk for Muslim Women is unthinkable to these p-pampered poodles. After all they never had to face hordes of death dealing Christians bent on oppressing Women ( Which is crazy when the bible itself say‘s in Christ all Women & Men are the same). They actually may get hurt. I highly doubt the real suffragettes, & such felt the same way. These are posers for penny’s from Washington & Ottawa for their highly debatable idea of what or who they represent. Frankly it themselves as a lobby with no vision except a blame game towards men.

This herd of cows will be the first to grovel than convert to Islam. Bet on it. Cowards are the least stable.

Posted by: Revnant Dream at February 11, 2009 6:43 PM

Irene says: "Muslim women suffer from a disproportionately high level of domestic abuse, much of which goes unreported because they are taught that they deserve it, that their men have the right to beat them, and that they, being inferior, have no right to protest such treatment."

Great point. Something we men have been saying all along. What the problem is here is that the "left" is trying to make it look like Muslim men and your average Canadian male are the same. If we point out that Muslims are prone to this behavior we are racists. But we are forced to take the blame when Muslim men act the way they have been brought up to act.

Irene said: "Stopping all violence is an unrealistic goal, lets start with the realistic goals and help the people who really need it right now."

You are correct. Again. But, if we continue the blanket statements that infer all men are thugs, all white men are racist, all women are saints, and all blacks are poor victims of racism etc. nothing gets solved. Because all people are different. Individuals if you like. The point I was making was that violence is bad. Teach that in schools. Don't teach men are violent. Whites are racist etc.

Posted by: gord at February 11, 2009 7:04 PM

Yes the victim industry B-U-R-E-A-U-C-R-A-T-S... do not want to take any action against their designated victim groups.

The question remains, why our so called justice system, from the enforcement side to the judicial continues to shy away from vigorously pursuing the prosecution of such offenses under the actual and existing laws?

What good has come from this mindset and it's intrusion on our society?

If you can't find the will to defend your society then you don't have the right to claim it as yours.

Observe the Barbara Halls of this world and understand that they are your enemy.


Posted by: OMMAG at February 11, 2009 7:08 PM

So true kate. Sad that so few remark the obvious.

Posted by: RW at February 11, 2009 7:15 PM

Re: Much Ado..

The irony is that Ms. Ado's flawed logic which jumps out like a third hump on a camel is the both the proof and the justification our muslim friends use to show women are indeed intellectually inferior to men. Ms. Ado's infantile logic confirms the hadiths that teach true believers that the testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man. Ms. Ado, the lives and lifestyles of western women will be be determined by rational thought versus political correctness and cultural relativism. Give it some thought.

Posted by: EyesWideShut at February 11, 2009 7:28 PM

In my perspective the Libby type sows are some type of human sub species. If they were real women they would care about real women.

Posted by: Western Canadian at February 11, 2009 8:18 PM

Erik,

Agreed. She is just a pansy and no one knows what shes doing, but that was not what I was addressing. I was referring to the oft-repeated attacks on other cultures, which are the norm here. I am not suggesting cultural relativism, but at some point, you have to start distinguishing between cultural flaws and general human flaws. In this case, domestic abuse, sometimes taken to an extreme (death), is, I contend, a general human flaw, not a cultural flaw.

I am referring to the Kitty Genovese story, which I see as a pretty standard example of the human propensity to stand around and do nothing in issues that are considered 'private'. This is a misguided approach that is endemic to humanity in general - it is based on sheer greed. Why bother about someone else's well being if my well being is guaranteed?

"It's a religious or cultural practice, not ignorance practiced by a immature bully to the point of murder."

It is not a religious or cultural practice. It is not legal anywhere in the world (it would be if it were an acceptable religious or cultural practice). No matter where you go in the world, it is punishable. Legal practices do, after all, reflect local cultural and religious practices. In this case, it is a case of a bully wanting to stamp his dominance. When a white/black/yellow/brown guy beats his wife on suspicion of adultery, anyone can argue it is about the man's honor, but at the end of the day, it is, and always will be, domestic abuse. In some cases they take it too far and kill. Far from muddying the water, I am just making it clearer.

Kathy,

Do you believe every book thats ever written or do you selectively choose what suits you. I checked the link - its buy a bunch of bloggers who, surprise surprise, claim to know more than the rest of us. There are plenty of conspiracy theories out there - and you are free to believe all of them.

For the sake of argument, lets assume your source is the most accurate one ( a very long shot indeed). Can you honestly tell me that every person you know would rush into his neighbors house if he heard a man and/or woman yelling/ yelling at each other? I assume you will claim that you would intervene (we will never know), but what about all the people you know? I would give that long hard thought before answering. Theres a difference between the way things are and the way one wants them to be.


Erik,

"Now, I think we are a society more at risk for indifference towards each other, because after all, won't the government look after it? Blech."

Au contraire, nobody expects the government to look after it. Nobody cares as long as its NIMBY (not in my backyard). Its the ultimate expression of selfishness and greed -why should I care if it doesn't affect me directly? Government intervention does affect you - why do you think some people get so riled up paying taxes for a healthcare system that benefits groups that dont take care of themselves (smokers).

"You can check any stat source you like even the feminist ones and they will tell you that the majority of violence in relationships is started by women"

I am not blaming men for being violent, nor am I absolving women. Domestic abuse is not just about women. Yes I play to that particularly stereotype because it resonates - we all know it exists - but I am not denying that both sides are perpetrators. What I am pointing out is that it is endemic to human behaviour in general, and focusing on one community as opposed to all communities, is pointless at best.

"Stopping all violence is an unrealistic goal, lets start with the realistic goals and help the people who really need it right now."

The question you need to ask is why women/men of any community would turn to the 'outsider' for help, when the most vocal outsiders express nothing but contempt for their community. Think about it. Why would a muslim woman go to a guy like Roger or Irwin Daisy to help change her culture? She wants to fix it. He wants to destroy it. See the problem? The problem is that the well-meaning and sympathetic discourses on the topic are drowned out by the hostile and antagonistic voices. Yes they need help getting out of there, but why would they turn to you. They want to remedy the situation, not toss their "good" beliefs into oblivion.

Daisy, perhaps you will provide us with other religions attitudes towards women - Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Judaism etc. Or are you a one-trick pony? I find it amusing that all ultrareligious folk are a bit wierd with their women, albeit to different degrees, with Islam being the most heinous. Some Jewish men, for instance, believe that their women are "dirty" during a certain natural biological process. Not relativism - I am not saying they treat their women nearly as badly as Muslims do, but at the same time, this condescending attitude towards women transcends cultures. Remember when women couldn't vote? Now then, Irwin, lets see how many tricks you have up your sleeve.

Eyeswideshut,

Mr. Ado does not lead the life or lifestyle of a western woman. If he did, he would need to see a psychiatrist. He just thinks critically and is willing to be a contrarian (using critical analysis and a willingness to assess the 'other' side of the story). Cave. Outside cave. Two different visions of the world. You get my jist.

Posted by: Much Ado About Nothing at February 11, 2009 8:21 PM

much ado - the difference between domestic violence in the west (almost anywhere, actually) and honor killings is that the former is considered odious and vile in their respective society while honor killings are condoned, even respected, in theirs. Reason doesn't seem to be your strong point but try to think real hard about this profound difference.

Posted by: rian at February 11, 2009 8:39 PM

Barbara "as long as it's not against brown" Hall was just on CTV's Powerplay...8:45 pm... now trying to defend "professor" Moon in his belief that a form of "censorship" be applied to the MSN media. That didn't sit well with Tom.

Posted by: bverwey at February 11, 2009 8:57 PM

72% of the women in wyoming are battered and ive been eating mine plain

Posted by: ROBERT BRICKER at February 11, 2009 9:02 PM

Above, Edward Teach and others commented on Barbara Hall's "cultual Marxism". There's much truth in that as explained in this excellent essay which links the concept to political correctness and to Marxist theorists like Antonio Gramsci.

Fire. Them. All.

Posted by: JR at February 11, 2009 9:28 PM

Much Ado etc.: Sigh. "Why would a muslim woman go to a guy like Roger or Irwin Daisy to help her change her culture...?" - after you've been blathering on about how honour killings have nothing to do with "religion and culture".(shorten that to R+C in the future, 'kay?)
You don't even believe a word of this yourself. So why say it?

Posted by: Black Mamba at February 11, 2009 9:35 PM

And I love how with "domestic abuse" some people "take it too far and kill". What's taking it just far enough?
Then: You admit that "some" Jewish men don't "treat their women nearly as badly as Muslims do". Gosh, why not? Couldn't be Religion and Culture, could it? Genetic predisposition, maybe? Wanna argue that?

Posted by: Black Mamba at February 11, 2009 9:44 PM

Quoted: I attended a mandatory Human Resources training course on harassment. We were supposed to print our name on a card. Pretty standard except I didn't. The trainer remarked, I remarked she didn't need to know. She proceeded to harass me for 5 minutes. The other trainer and the attendees caught on way before she did. Point made."

That's a thing of beauty, that is. Good job!

Posted by: Sean at February 11, 2009 9:46 PM

ado


domestic violence is usually a violent "control" mechanism, ment to intimidate through violence, and is usually not ment to kill (please note the usually)


honour KILLINGS, are for one reason, and one reason only, to kill. And they are supported and condoned by the familly and the community


and in many islamic counrties, tho illegal, the punishment for it does not fit the crime


in most islamic countries women , tho only considered 1/2 the value of a male, they are treated as posessions,not humans


try and grasp the difference in cultural and individual minds sets between islamic (not all islamic) and western

Posted by: GYM at February 11, 2009 9:49 PM

Much ado - as always, rational and tempered arguments are interesting, I bet nobody comes here to have their mind changed though, including me.

Some of the issues you raise relate to culture and religion.

Not to prolong things, and to try to hone in on specifics, one important difference between certain Christian religions and Islam, are the "rules".

For example with Catholicism, it's easy to know what the "rules" are - just go ask the pope.

I don't know what all the "rules" are in Islam.

Interpretations of the Koran are done differently by different Imams. If you want to see a variety of - "interesting" - responses to questions - go to "askimam.org".

I have seen western Muslims write back to those some of imams' comments and call them barbaric and primitive.

So, who wins, and who is right? The Imam who made the proclamation? The westernized Muslim who says that the imam's proclamations are barbaric?

That is one of the important that I see with Islam - there is not one arbiter of "truth" in interpretation of the Koran.

And then, on other issues, there are things like the niqab, which are traditional, rather than religious, but get "lumped together" with Islam.

Lots of problems, and no solutions

Posted by: Erik Larsen at February 11, 2009 10:05 PM

"These honour killings bother me about as much as someone forgetting to signal when he turns right. They bother me about as much as hearing about one gangster shooting another in a distant city. They bother me slightly less than hearing about a cockfighting ring in Texas. Let them live in their own hell. When they feel like joining the rest of the human race, maybe I'll put some value on their lives.
Posted by: dp at February 11, 2009 2:56 PM"

That's a pretty piss-poor attitude, dp. Especially when you consider that, at least here in North America, the victims of honour killings tend to be those young girls that are fully aware of much freedom they are denied by islam, and who are trying to integrate themselves into society at large. Girls like Aqsa Parvez, for example, who was murdered (allegedly, heh) by her islamist father, presumably for not wearing the head-rag. A girl who was, by all accounts, TRYING TO become a part of the human race, while also trying to not cut all ties with her family.

Honour killing is a tool used by the islamists to keep their womenfolk subjugated, and to keep their tribe from integrating into Western society as a whole. That is why we should fight it vigorously, and why it is so much worse than ordinary domestic abuse. Honour killing is planned, directed violence, with a specific goal in mind. It is a war tactic, if you will.

Posted by: gordinkneehill at February 11, 2009 10:21 PM

I just fail to see the point of demonizing one community for its rather pathetic antics, when similar actions take place in every community.
- Much Ado -

Pathetic Antics? Antics? UBC Engineering students hanging a VW off the Lions Gate bridge would constitute an 'antic'. Honour killing, not so much. Check out religionofpeace.com to see the 'antics' thoughout the world for 2009 alone.
Then scroll down for page after page for 2008. Some 'antics'.

Where pray tell might I find similar stats for the Sikh, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, or Christian communities?

If honor killings are a far stretch from domestic abuse, please explain how. - Much Ado

One word: Acceptance. Not universal to be sure, but broad nonethelss.

Forgive me for saying "fight domestic abuse" instead of saying "fight muslim domestic abuse only". - Much Ado

Not a matter of foregiveness, but a recognition of the malady of the holier than thou: 'moral equivalence'.


Posted by: No Guff at February 11, 2009 10:36 PM

who cares about broads. lets bring back the poster boy for the first family of terrorists in Canada.


http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/02/11/khadr-appeal.html


CBCKhadr All Khadr All the Time.

Posted by: cal2 at February 11, 2009 10:40 PM

gordinkneehill- I'm not sure if my attitude has anything to do with it. My feelings are the result of half a lifetime of bombardment from a bunch of people who plan to tear down my home.

I don't put a high priority on integrating damaged goods into our society. Maybe it's not their fault they were born into a culture of insanity, but it's not my fault either.

Posted by: dp at February 11, 2009 11:21 PM

[quote]
Fur = BAD
Renewable = GOOD
FUR = RENEWABLE
BAD = GOOD
[/quote]

and if GOD didn't intend us to eat animals he wouldn't have made them outta MEAT.

What that has to do with Babwa Hall is unknown but it sounded as profound as anything else in here.

Just remember ... IF YOU HAVE TIME TO BITCH ABOUT THE CHRC IN HERE YOU HAVE THE TIME TO DROP YOUR MP AN EMAIL TOO. LET THEM KNOW WHAT YOU THINK. MOST OF OUR "LEADERS" ARE SO OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY THEY ACTUALLY BELIEVE THEIR EVEN MORE RETARDED HANDLERS AND "ADVISORS."

Posted by: DAVE-Y at February 11, 2009 11:33 PM

"Course as a white male christian I'm sure they care about me. If only to fine companies for hiring too many white males.

How much money is wasted with racist CHRC audits?

Posted by: dinosaur at February 11, 2009 1:24 PM"

According to a spokesperson at a BC Human Rights Council office, a few years ago, white males are not discriminated against, therefore there's no reason for a white male to lodge a claim.

(As told to me by the white male in question.)

Posted by: chutzpahticular at February 12, 2009 12:50 AM

"[W]e have to make choices because we can't respond to everything" translates to "we will make arbitrary decisions and go after our ideological enemies".

Posted by: nv53 at February 12, 2009 2:11 AM

Hall exemplifies the entire security of the oppressors in contemporary, "liberal" nations.

Posted by: Kralizec at February 12, 2009 2:24 AM

I wonder if Commissar Hall would respond, as she did to the request for comment on Islamic mens' "honor" killings of women, to a request for comment on the criticism, inconvenient-truth-telling about, bashing and killing of Muslims and GLBTs? Oh, wait... I'm sure she already made her position clear on the latter stuff... so the reasonable impression of doublethink/double standard on her part remains. Until she unequivocally clearly sets the record straight without clouding it up with the standard Left-wing-elitist verbal diarrhea.

Someone like Tom Clark ought to put her on the spot with a question of that context. That I'd like to see. Would it ever happen? Not bloody likely...

Also she should be asked to comment on whether it's a hate crime for Muslims to go around inciting hatred and violence against Jews and against GLBTs. Wonder who'd have the balls to ask her to comment on that stuff?

These people need to be put on the spot and held to account for their doublethink, double- and multiple-standards application, prejudices and intolerances. Like hell we can afford to have these arrogant, elitist, entitlist, mentally-disordered fascists unilaterally deeming that which shall and shall not be. We know what happens when a People permit their state apparatchiks to make such decisions as whose rights trump whose, or who has rights and who doesn't, and so on and so forth. This kind of situation historically has been observed as leading to the mass murder of innocents based on arbitrarily-determined criteria such as religion, skin color, gender, political point of view, etc...

Could Canada, vis-a-vis the HRCs, be on such a slippery slope? How can we be certain it isn't? Dogma and denial aren't sufficient!

Posted by: The Canadian Sentinel at February 12, 2009 4:37 AM

It is not a religious or cultural practice. It is not legal anywhere in the world (it would be if it were an acceptable religious or cultural practice). No matter where you go in the world, it is punishable. .... I am just making it clearer.

Heh, I think that you're just deluded or making this up.
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Yemen, India, South America...etc. All of these countries have the barbaric laws regarding the man's so called honor over the woman's virtue.
Look you can continue to lie to yourself and others, but I know differently.

Like the pious Muslims - their claim, that order woman to be raped as a form of punishment? Or when the rape is NOT Imam sanctioned, the girl is then stoned to death. How about granting a child bride to an older male, closely related for favour or dept? That's their culture are you going to deny this as well?


Posted by: ldd at February 12, 2009 4:37 AM

Honor killings do not take place across all cultural groups. That is an ignorant statement. There are two kinds of societies, guilt societies and shame societies. Islam is a product of a shame society.

Here are some situations

I do something morally wrong, nobody knows. In a guilt society, I feel bad, in a shame society, no problem.

I do something wrong, everybody knows. Problem for both guilt and shame, but guilt feels a little better getting it off you chest, shame feels horrible because it is public.

I do nothing wrong but am falsely accused. Guilt society, I am angry and fight back. Shame society, I feel the same shame as if I had done the wrong thing.

This is why a daughter can bring shame on the father, and why he feels he must kill her to reclaim his honor, even though it has nothing to do with him, from a Western "guilt society" perspective.

Liberals think everybody is like us, and that everybody thinks like us, that is why they say stupid things like Much Ado up thread.

Posted by: Tim in VT at February 12, 2009 6:22 AM

One more argument for Much Ado, although I am sure they will not respond to it.

Honor killings are like lynchings in the old south. I am sure (NOT!) that Much Ado would say that 3 lynchings in Alabama in 1952 are a less serious problem than four traffic accidents.

Both types of killings have the effect of repressing and terrorizing whole classes of people who may never be subject to the actuality, but who know that it is not impossible.

Domestic violence is randomly distributed, and while reprehensible, does not threaten the freedom of women not directly involved in a systematic way.

I guess that Much Ado though sees lynchings, honor killings, stoning of gays and rape victims, etc, as cultural peculiarities to be savored as adding color to this vast world.

Posted by: Tim in VT at February 12, 2009 9:58 AM

"female" trumps "male", but only when there isn't "brown". It's works the same way as "sex" trumps "religion", but only when there isn't "muslim"

An HRC version of paper-rock-scissors.

Posted by: glasnost at February 12, 2009 11:00 AM

The question you need to ask is why women/men of any community would turn to the 'outsider' for help, when the most vocal outsiders express nothing but contempt for their community. Think about it. Why would a muslim woman go to a guy like Roger or Irwin Daisy to help change her culture? She wants to fix it. He wants to destroy it. See the problem? The problem is that the well-meaning and sympathetic discourses on the topic are drowned out by the hostile and antagonistic voices. Yes they need help getting out of there, but why would they turn to you. They want to remedy the situation, not toss their "good" beliefs into oblivion.

Ado, apparently you've never been in an abusive relationship, escaped an abusive relationship, or know anyone in any form of abusive relationship. Muslim women who are in abusive situations have unique problems, they suffer from the same problems as other cultures in the exact same circumstances , but they have fewer options when it comes to leaving. Do I expect them to go to a man and ask for help? Of course not! I would not ask ANY woman who has escaped domestic abuse to go to a man for help. For anyone to expect that is insanity (see the idea of dealing with one man who is abusive, then expecting that dealing with a different man will yield different results, people are not programmed to do the same thing over and over and expect different results, thats why women's shelters rarely have male staff). I expect them to be able to go to a shelter though and speak with someone and get help, and unfortunately, if they cant speak the languages available in the shelter, how do they ask for help? If there was a single muslim woman on staff, she could more effectively communicate with other women of similar cultural backgrounds, allowing the shelter to help even more people.
What I meant when I posted was that we need to teach these women who often cannot fluently speak the language of their country of residence that they dont need to fear being beaten if they make dinner wrong, or fear death if they take off their hijab. It has nothing to do with tearing down their religion, it has everything to do with protecting a vulnerable group in our society that is unfortunately largely ignored by the groups that are supposed to be looking out for them.

Posted by: Irene Swain at February 12, 2009 11:56 AM

Irene, I usually quite agree with you. However, I think your assumption that no abused woman would go to a man for help is an unhelpful generalization because it caricatures men, who are individuals. There are many men who would be stalwart supports for abused women, especially as the VAST majority of men are not abusers.

Re going to a shelter: they're so full of men hating feminists and lesbians, going to a shelter could sometimes be likened to jumping out of the frying pan into the fire: the apparent saviour women at many shelters are often the perpetrators of another dangerous ideology.

Yes, many Muslim women need help. However, erasing men, as a group, and holding up feminist shelters as viable possibilities is a problem for me. Of the two, I think the men would be a better solution. Until shelters stop being nests of man hating vipers, I think they’re of little practical use to these women, who certainly need help.

Posted by: lookout at February 12, 2009 12:28 PM

lookout, maybe my city is different, but in my city, the men take a back seat in the women's shelter in part because it's a little easier to ask another woman for help because trust hasnt been destroyed. As for the man-haters in the shelters, many of those women can sympathize with every girl that comes through the door because they've been there.
I dont mean to paint men with a single brush because I know there's really great guys out there and they VASTLY outnumber the jerks, and I apologize if that's how it sounds. Please dont make the same generalizations about the women who work in the shelters, cause I know a few of them and they're really wonderful individuals (and the ones I know are all in stable heterosexual relationships at the moment) and frankly, we could use more girls like them, if only to even out the ratio of positive feminists to man-hating feminists.

Posted by: Irene Swain at February 12, 2009 12:55 PM

Irene, I appreciate your feedback: it's good to hear that there are some feminists doing good work on the public dime. Where I'm from, that would often, even usually, be an oxymoron.

I appreciate that you're not painting all men with the same black--as in bad--brush. The abuse industry uses such false generalizations as a deliberate policy. Thus, abused Muslim women in this country, unfortunately, find themselves between a rock and a hard place.

Posted by: lookout at February 12, 2009 3:43 PM

I believe (as I have met and dined with moslem women whose company was an absolute joy, who were gracious hostessess, worthy friends and secure, happy and self-confident people you couldn't help but love) that the real problem isn't Islam at all (although that faith has in many ways morphed into a more tragically political ideology than a faith).

The real problem is Arab pan-Nationalist racial and gender chauvinism crashing headlong into the wildly permissive, frivolous and hedonistic society of the modern West. And that is why the leftoids can't fathom what to do. Arab (and to be fair, other middle-Eastern and far-Eastern) chauvinism wears the false colours of religious edicts to entrench the priveleges of its ruling male caste, at the expense of women and young girls.

These beliefs actually are not all that old in the West, perhaps 60-100 years ago. (let's not be too smug shall we, we only gave women the vote after WWI) and a great many women suffered rampant gender discrimination in the West as recently as the 1970's.

The "Arabist" culture is really not that far behind us, but what concerns me is the rate at which it is regressing. This presumably as it beholds the rapid degeneration of the Western moral fibre into the joke that is the modern International Left. I mean one cannot blame these people for being utterly rejectionist about just about everything modern and Western! Name one aspect of modern Western life that you'd want to emulate if you were a recent arrival from a genuinely conservative middle-Eastern society.

Now add in a tremendous sense of forboding about the future, coupled with a current tendency to wish to preserve the position of men as the saviours and protectors of your society, and why wouldn't you think of sanctioning the unchaste, "liberated" woman?

Look what a sight the West is to behold to someone who still thinks like Archie Bunker: overtly and overly-sexualised 11-year old girls, enfeebled and disinterested male students in classrooms, a financial system that was really the world's largest and longest-running Ponzi scheme (I mean in China they'd be shooting the entire banking class if they did what Wall St. did!) a pathetic excuse for war-waging and war-winning (as bin-Laden said, people naturally favour the strong horse over the weak) and a vast scheme to import seditious and destructive minorities into the majority population, followed by a craven pandering by the political elites to their every demand.

I mean, I'd hate us too. And then your daughter comes home dressed like a hooker, and you catch her texting "pornographic" messages to some boy across town, and rather than smile sweetly and accede to Papa's will, because Papa is always right, she tells her father, in front of her brothers and mother, to "F*** O**".

That's it in a nutshell. It really is about control, about a sense of permanence and cultural survival, and ultimately about the culture of permissivity and permissibility against one in which there is no real sense of personal privacy.

In other words, the total debunking of the "multi-culturalism" myth...

Posted by: bcf at February 12, 2009 6:16 PM

bcf- I see a family counselor in your immediate future.

Posted by: dp at February 12, 2009 7:41 PM

bcf - Yep

I'm not with you 100% on each statement, but I essentially agree with pretty much everything you say

Posted by: Erik Larsen at February 12, 2009 9:51 PM

Exactly Erik, as this is a blog post, and I've pointed out the limitations of blogging in a previous post here at SDA, I've had to magnify, and compress to make a long-winded argument readable in a reasonable amount of scroll-time ;o)

Hope you got the gist of where this is headed...

Posted by: bcf at February 13, 2009 11:19 AM

if it becomes taboo to criticize Islam and Arabs and those who get 'offended', we are truly doomed

same as in Afghanistan where you know you get killed if you dare speak up against medieval times

all our civilization rests on this realization

Posted by: canadian at February 14, 2009 9:50 PM
Site
Meter