Wednesday, February 1, 2017

More lies from the dishonest media picking on Trump using alternative facts

From Gwynne Dyer:
Canadians felt good when Trudeau responded to Trump's ban on Syrian refugees by tweeting: "To those fleeing persecution, terror and war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength. Welcome to Canada." Feeling morally superior to Americans is one of Canadians' favourite pastimes, and in this case it is self-evidently true.
The United States took in 12,587 Syrian refugees last year; Canada, with one-ninth of America's population, accepted almost 40,000. Yet there have been only two lone wolf Islamist attacks in Canada in this century, each killing one person and neither carried out by an immigrant. A non-Muslim crazy has just murdered six Canadian Muslims in Quebec City, but Muslim immigrants pose no appreciable danger to their fellow Canadians.
If Trump's domestic opponents use the Canadian example to discredit Trump's story about the mortal danger posed by Muslim immigrants, the man might claim that lax Canadian immigration policy is a threat to the United States and apply "extreme vetting" measures to Muslim Canadians who want to cross the border.
In reality, there is no significant danger from Muslim immigrants to America either. Most of the 28 major massacres in the United States since 9/11 were carried out by white right-wing extremists, and those that did involve Muslims were almost all committed by native-born Americans.


Adolf Fiinkensein said...

No doubt that's why the 'white right wing extremists' who did the shooting shouted 'allahu akbar.'

Nick, anything pinko Amerika hater Gwynne Dyer says needs to be taken with a bloody great slab of salt.

paul scott said...

Sweden, France, Belgium, Europe soon Canada, the Islam colonisation.
Trudeau is a complete disaster. Welcome refugee Islam colonisers.
Beige is beautiful. White is horid. Christianity is evil. Islam is beautiful.
One generation up and Western civilisation will be in the gutter In Canada.

Later this year in New Zealand some rigorous and clearly defined Immigration laws.
At the moment I am busy doing an online Visa entry for a foreigner, and for all Immigration NZ know it could be Jihad John.
Just fill inn the form, sponsor and pay the money.

Anonymous said...

Two more guys on minimum wage......shelf stacking has more merit and job satisfaction than what you do.

Lord Egbut

David said...

Adolf, you are totally unable to prove white right wing extremists' who did the shooting shouted 'allahu akbar.'

There are two possible reasons, neither of which involve the murder being a Muslim, let alone an Islamist fanatic, but never, ever let it be said that you follow the facts.

Why on Earth would you think it unusual that the words allahu akbar be uttered in a mosque, during prayers?

Psycho Milt said...

No doubt that's why the 'white right wing extremists' who did the shooting shouted 'allahu akbar.'

They didn't. It says "most of" the shootings were carried out by white right-wing extremists - any evidence that the people referred to with that "most of" shouted "Allahu akbar?" Hint: there is none.

The Veteran said...

Isn't the right and responsibility for any sovereign country to police it's own boarders and determine who gets entry? Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to a country that doesn't.

Trump went about implementing his election promise to suspend immigration from certain countries for a limited period of time pending the introduction of more comprehensive vetting procedures in a particularly ham-fisted way that gave his many opponents ammunition to criticise him with. You make your bed, you lie upon it. While the liberal effete in America will tut tut I suspect main street America will quietly applaud.

Canadians feeling morally superior to Americans is a national sport. Shades of how many New Zealanders view Australians (ooops, delete that, sorry Adolf and David).

Anonymous said...

Borders Veteran Borders...... His election promise was to ban ALL Muslims not those where he has no business interests or, interestingly, those who were not a part of the old Commonwealth....he desperately wants to do a Reagan and meet the Queen to legitimise his position as a senior statesman.

It is the responsibility of a country to control it's borders but within the parameters of international acceptability. Nth Korea has every right to control it's borders.

The only poll so far has been Rasmussen the totally OTT right wing polling mob that has as much clout as a Winston Peters press release. This is not like you Veteran, defending the indefensible.

Lord Egbut the confused.

Nick K said...

Vet, what you write is all very true and correct but completely off-topic as far as the point I was making in this post!

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... not defending the indefensible. Sovereign countries make their own rules about who can enter and who cannot. Try entering the US with a criminal conviction recorded against you and welcome to the transit terminal holding cell. Everytime I go to your place of abode I enter as an alien and subject to additional scrutiny.

Trump's call for a temporary halt to Muslim immigration was first made back in December 2015. Since then he has modified his position and limited the temporary ban to seven countries. It applies not just to Muslims but to all citizens of those countries. I do struggle to understand the rationale focusing on those seven countries (or perhaps I don't ... these countries are of limited importance to the United States). But whatever, and while clearly the announcement was mishandled and created confusion, equally clearly it was aimed primarily at Middle America ... keeping a promise ... and Middle America is Trump's constituency. The so called ban won't achieve much at all ... it's all about domestic politics 101.

For Nick ... thought I was right on topic.

Psycho Milt said...

Of course the US government can legally do things like ban entry by citizens of Iraq because Iraq is a Jihadi war zone, despite the fact that it's a Jihadi war zone entirely due to deliberate actions of the US government. But the rest of us are fully entitled to draw conclusions about how much respect is due the US government that does that - "none" being the amount that springs to mind.

The Veteran said...

PM ... for many on the 'left' side of the political divide respect for the US has never featured prominently in their agenda ... certainly every administration post WW2 has attracted it's fair share of critics. For some, to oppose the US no matter the issue is part and parcel of their political mantra.

Noel said...

Borders Veteran Borders.
Ok so now they are repelling the boarders at the border.
I wonder if they are entitled to the cost of the ESTA back if they are held over for extra profiling?

David said...

PM ... for many on the 'left' side of the political divide respect for the US has never featured prominently in their agenda

Maybe that's because w ehave memories, we recal American interventionism such as Sự kiện Vịnh Bắc Bộ, Bay of Pigs, the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadegh, Jacobo Árbenz, the Syrian Government in 1949, Salvador Allende, and many more. We remember the Iran-contra affair, the non-existent WMDs in Iraq, the continued drone attacks and so much more.

There is much to admire about the US, but they also do much harm, even today we have the spectre of President Pussy Grabber threatening to invade Mexico.

Anonymous said...

So much for his and Mays's "non-interventionist" press conference. The man lies even when his lips don't move......

Lord Egbut