Pages

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Charge 'Em

...and, if convicted, lock 'em up. But there are no grounds in this for a ban on hijabs or traditional garb if and when they are worn as the result of an act of Free Will. Certainly no grounds for a change of opinion on the Tory's ridiculous veiled voter legislation.

16 comments:

  1. Whooee! It's a sad thing, BCL. O' course, he needs to be charged. This has the smell of "honour killing." That cannot be permitted to go unpunished. An example should be made of this asshole as a deterrent.

    JB

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous2:43 PM

    A girl gets murdered and you take that as an opportunity to take a swipe at the Conservatives. How "LIBERAL" of you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A girl gets murdered and you take that as an opportunity to take a swipe at the Conservatives. How "LIBERAL" of you.

    Man, they're getting more sanctimonious than the caricatures of the bleeding-heart liberals they themselves invented.

    Frank, do you remember Ezra's Islamo-babushka brouhaha? Multiply that by a billion and you get Conservative discourse on Muslims (and Sikhs, if the wingnuts are being particularly lazy).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous4:03 PM

    Hey, I hear Ezra just jumped off a cliff!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous5:55 PM

    Well, let me gongratulate you for being the first liberal on liblogs to even bring this up, we can forget about the the NDP dippers wanting to even touch this thing with a meter stick (funny and sad considering how feminists tend to vote for them)

    I must abhore you for turning it into politics. A 16 year old kid was killed by a man named Mohammed, who was her father, and defended by a brother also named Mohammed, who was her brother.

    WHY THE H#LL CAN'T YOU LEAVE YOUR PARTISAN POLICITCS AT THE DOOR!!! IT WAS PEOPLE LIKE YOU THAT WEAKENED THE WEST AT ITS KNEES WHEN ISLAM WAS RAVAGING ALL CIVILIZATIONS.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous6:02 PM

    As long as muslims keep voting 90% liberal, I say keep letting them in!

    We must be nice to them now so that when they are the majority they'll be nice to us.

    ReplyDelete
  7. baby,

    I only wrote the post after the first five blogging tories started mouthing off about multi-cuturalism and etc. You want to me to avoid politics on a politics blog?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous12:09 AM

    If you disagree with Muslim honour killings,

    are you a "racist"?

    I understand that around here Islam isn't considered a set of values and beliefs, which one can agree or disagree with, but rather is a "race", and therefore out of bounds for discussion. (disclaimer: this does not apparantly apply to christianity).

    BCL, how very culturally insensitive (racist??) of you not to respect a man's right to practice Sharia law to its fullest extent.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous2:56 AM

    Oddly, "I understand that" is often followed by an anonycon's demonstration of a total lack of comprehension, along with a healthy dose of dishonesty.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well, I have argued that the problems Conservatives have with Muslims are less religous than racial, simply because they are not intellectually sophisticated enough to tell one dark skinned woman in headgear from another.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The only thing Conservatives contribute to a discussion on Islam is their need to project their end-times hysteria on to every other belief system.

    They even do it with Global Warming. They think the rest of us are delighting at the thought of an End-of-the-World scenario. If only the consequences of Global Warming were expected to be that dramatic and cinematic. What's far more likely is a long, dreary decline, the resolution of which no one alive now will be lucky enough to witness.

    ReplyDelete
  12. A couple of points.

    First, biff's need to criticize the use of the term "racist" (even when, as here, it has nothing to do with anything), comes from his/her complete inability to defend the bigotry (which many of us describe through the use of the term "racism"). S/he gets bogged down in semantics because s/he cannot address the substance.

    Second, and this one is far more important, I think we should not rush to judgment here. While it may be true this girl was killed because she refused to conform to religious practices, it is also very possible this was about something else altogether.

    A year ago in Edmonton there was a huge outcry about teen violence when four boys were charged with killing a man on a city bus. The media spoke with an ETS emplyee who reported there was blood everywhere and that the boys engaged in a prolonged beating, including kicking the man in the head. It turned out that the man attacked the boys, and they only hit him a couple of times while he had one of the boys in a choke hold. He died because of a fluke punch, and all charges against the boys, who were clearly acting in self defence, were dropped.

    So let us not rush to judgment until the facts are in.

    ReplyDelete
  13. So let us not rush to judgment until the facts are in.

    Hope springs eternal, eh Gayle?

    Being "conservative" nowadays requires that one's knowledge be completely unencumbered by such petty distractions as "factuality." It interferes with moral clarity.

    I can't think of anything that is more at odds with true conservatism than that.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous6:10 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous6:15 PM

    A book that should be in Harper's library, if not already:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsius_7/7

    Expect the new book by Ezra to be coming soon. It will be titled "While Mississauga Slept"

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous12:28 PM

    What's the big deal? Honour killings were commonplace where I grew up. It's the right thing to do. Just because your culture is so permissive and craven, doesn't mean I have to follow your lifestyle rules. You must learn to be more tolerant of other cultures, you racist white bastard!

    ReplyDelete