Muslims told to insist on equal voice in media *
Posted on 09 June 2008 by Jack
TORONTO — Muslims must “demand that right to participate” in national media, Khurrum Awan, the primary witness in the Maclean’s magazine hate speech hearing, told a weekend conference of the Canadian Arab Federation.
“And we have to tell them, you know what, if you’re not going to allow us to do that, there will be consequences. You will be taken to the human rights commission, you will be taken to the press council, and you know what? If you manage to get rid of the human rights code provisions [on hate speech], we will then take you to the civil courts system. And you know what? Some judge out there might just think that perhaps it’s time to have a tort of group defamation, and you might be liable for a few million dollars,” he said.
On a discussion panel with Barbara Hall, Chief Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, and Haroon Siddiqui, editor emeritus of the Toronto Star, Mr. Awan described his increasingly high-profile struggle “against particular elements in media that are misusing and abusing their responsibility” in writing about Islam.
Under the sponsorship of the Canadian Islamic Congress, and with the help of a small team of fellow recent graduates of Osgoode Hall law school, that struggle has so far involved complaints to the British Columbia, Ontario and federal human rights commissions over an excerpt of Mark Steyn’s book America Alone in Maclean’s magazine in 2006.
The only case to be heard so far, in B. C, concluded last week with a decision pending.
Related: Trial cites U.S. Web sites
Popularity: 42% [?]
June 9th, 2008 at 10:10 am
“Demand that right to participate….”? He, or his supporters have the option to start their own blog, newspaper or magazine to promote their point of view. No one is stopping him from doing so, he’ll just have to conform to the same rules as we do when and if he does so. But to demand publications to present his point of view as his “right” or “… there will be consequenses..”, appears to be a threat to somone else’s right to not publish him, the rights to our property that are so cnveniently omitted from our Charter rights. He will not win his case using threats and intimidation, or is that how he sees things are done in his world?
June 9th, 2008 at 10:24 am
Oh great, just great. First thing Monday morning and normal, mature, rational though process, freedom loving Canadians are subjected to even more crybaby, whiney, ‘oh poor us’ Muslim bullshit. Grow up for cripes sakes and give every other single non-Muslim person (and likely more than enough Muslims as well) on the face of the earth a break. Otherwise go out an buy a box of kleenex and lock yourself in a mosque and wallow in your self-pity.
June 9th, 2008 at 10:26 am
“Mr. Awan said a pending parliamentary motion to scrap 13-1, by Liberal MP Keith Martin, was only brought because Mr. Awan and his fellow complainants are Muslims, and that no one complained about the “90%” of previous complaints filed by aboriginal people, blacks or Jews.
“It is the first time that the Muslim community has filed a complaint, and suddenly this is a big national issue,” he said.”
It is not often that I agree with Mr Awan but on this specific point I think he is spot on. I don’t think that HRCs should be able to regulate speech in any way, we have lots of proper laws on the books if need be, but I am curious why it was ok for other groups to go after people they don’t like but a big issue is being made when it involves muslims.
June 9th, 2008 at 10:59 am
“Islam’s Biggest Enemy is the Muslims Themselves”
Who Is Harming The Prophet?
In an article on the liberal website Aafaq.org, Egyptian writer Ahmad Al-Aswani set out the crimes committed by the Muslim world that he believed have harmed the Prophet Muhammad and discredited the spirit of Islam: “I do not think that cartoons, books, or films can harm a religion or affect the faith of those who adhere to it out of conviction.
“The ones who harm the Prophet are those who butcher and bomb innocents all over the world, from New York to Madrid, London, Bali, Riyadh and Cairo, Kabul and Baghdad - while invoking Allah and the Prophet under the banner of Islamic jihad…
“Among those who harm the Prophet are the likes of Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi, who incites to the murder of Jewish children in their mothers’ wombs (e.g. in a 1996 lecture to the Egyptian journalists association) and to suicide operations, as well as those who cause the death of innocent victims by declaring jihad in Iraq in the name of religion and the Prophet.
“The ones who harm the Prophet are those who call on the world to pass a resolution against disparaging religion, while they themselves denigrate other religions in each prayer in the mosques, as well as in their schools and on their satellite channels - and especially [the religion] of Christians and Jews, whom they curse in every prayer. When Muslim countries submitted a draft of this resolution to the U.N. Human Rights Council, the Saudi Shura Council raised objections, since reviling other religions is one of Islam’s central precepts.
“The ones who harm the Prophet are the likes of those who issued the fatwa sanctioning the breastfeeding of adults, and asserting that [the drinking of] the Prophet’s urine is a source of blessing - or those who allow such fairy tales to be studied in religious schools and colleges… The ones who harm the Prophet are those who teach children in schools, particularly so-called Islamic [schools], to hate Christians on the grounds that it is forbidden to love them…
“The ones who harm the Prophet are those who believe that external attributes such as a beard, a spot on the forehead [attesting to deep genuflections during prayer], a veil, or a cloak are prescribed by Islam, and also those who accuse others of heresy and kill [them] on account [of these external attributes].
“The ones who harm the Prophet are those who believe that woman is [lewd], and that she detracts from [the purity] of prayer just like a dog or a donkey… [2] and those who believe that a woman lacks intelligence and religion, forgetting that [they are talking about] a mother, sister, beloved, daughter, or wife, who is equal to man in every respect.
“The ones who harm the Prophet are people like [Egyptian geologist and Ph.D] Zaghlul Al-Najjar, who claims to have knowledge yet at the same time regards natural disasters such as storms, volcanic eruptions, and floods as divine punishments [for] sinners, and who disparages the New and Old Testaments, believing them to be fabrications - and all this in the name of Islam and the Prophet…
“The ones who harm the Prophet are the rulers of Arab states who have made their countries the last bastions of tyranny and dictatorship in the world, and who demand submission to religious texts to justify their crimes.
“The ones who harm the Prophet do not live in the West - they are among us, the Muslims. [It is the Muslims] who have fashioned an Islamic model that is [inherently] terrorist, hypocritical, life-negating, and sustained by the murder of others in the name of jihad and by attacks on freedom of opinion under the pretext of [defending Islamic] national principles - which are actually nothing but retardation and fossilized prejudice… This is what we - and no one else - have produced.”
‘From the mouths of babes’…..and from fellow Arab Muslims yet. Thin skinned self-oppressing crybabys the likes of this Awan fella need to look inwards for a change instead of blaming everybody but themselves.
http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD195108
June 9th, 2008 at 10:59 am
They are free to particpate already. All they have to do is hire editors, writers, buy paper, ink, presses, sell advertising, establish a distribution network, manage subscriptions, and buy postage.
And I will object, stridently, if they attempt to get government funding for what is a private enterprise.
June 9th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Muslims already have all the rights required:
-They are free to create their own community newspapers
-They are free to write angry letters to the editor about unfavourable columns
-They are free to write counter-columns to unfavourable columns (and Canadian newspapers are quite receptive to the back and forth - it sells papers)
What more is needed?
June 9th, 2008 at 11:31 am
jwl “why it was ok for other groups to go after people they don’t like but a big issue is being made when it involves Muslims.”
Actually, it wasn’t OK . But in the past the HRCs were hitting just the little guys. We didn’t know this was going on, nobody discussed 13.1, I certainly hadn’t even heard about it until a few months ago.
But what is different here is that Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant and MacLean’s aren’t nobodies. The arrogance of the HRCs is taking them down.
It’s probably a critical mass issue. It is now big enough for even the low quality radar of the MSM and its lazy gatekeepers to pick up on their screens.
The Muslims will soon have their own voice in Canada as Al Jezeera hires away the CBC producers of Little Mosque on the Prairie. That’s fine, as long as they don’t “get government funding for what is a private enterprise.” Here’s an opportunity for the CBC to recruit repalcements with Levant and Steyn, to bring some balance. A good reason to get a majority and haul out our hidden agenda to “fix” the CBC.
June 9th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
nomdeblog I am personally happy that this issue has finally made it to the MSM. These HRCs have been bugging me for years and I am glad a spotlight has finally been placed on them. However, I think my point still stands. These HRCs have been going after ‘just the little guys’ for years and no one cared. Lives were ruined but nobody was bothered. And then someone goes after Macleans, a magazine that is more than capable of defending itself, and now we are having a national debate. I am glad this debate is finally happening but it should have started long ago, not only when the muslims got involved.
A side note nomdeblog, you are obviously in a pollyannaish mood this morning if you think CBC will be hiring Levant and/or Steyn. I would be shocked if they even hired a journalist who supports the same wing of Liberal party that Martin and Turner belonged to, never mind a proper conservative.
June 9th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Once Muslims step from the 11th Century to the 21st Century,
come back and we can chat and debate this topic.
Until Muslims are in the 21st Century it is pointless ?
June 9th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Jwl , if Jack puts up Chantal’s column , you won’t think I’m “Pollyannaish today” … :>)
I see your point about the little guy. Maybe we should treat this like a tainted blood scandal. Aren’t Conservatives more likely than Liberals to correct past wrongs? Compare these positions:
“We’ve done the best we can under very difficult circumstances.” The speaker — federal Health Minister Allan Rock. The date — Feb. 27, 1998.
“”Regardless of legal liability, all governments have a moral responsibility to Canadians who placed their faith in the blood system, and, through no fault of their own, became infected,” Ontario Premier Mike Harris wrote in a letter to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien.
Maybe the government should set up a similar fund, just replace
Hep C with HRC.
Better still, we need a fund for those infected by Liberals. ( am I still too Pollyannaish?)
June 9th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Just read Hebert’s column and I don’t agree with it. Why are Conservatives always labeled ‘partisan’ but Liberals/NDP represent ‘Canadian values’. People who accuse someone else of being partisan are only saying stop thinking the way you do and agree with me. You will be able to knock me over with a feather if CBC hires anyone remotely non-socialist.
I would be over the moon if Conservatives did something about Sec 13 but I am not sure they will. Maybe they are waiting for this issue to percolate into mainstream Canada before they make a move but I am not sure. They are probably concerned about being labeled anti- ___ fill in the blank by people like Cynapse and MSM journalists and they don’t want that discussion to be happening around election time.
June 9th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Look ma, I’m famous
(you should actually feel lucky that your safety does not depend on such legislation. As such I’ll let that swipe be. Good luck selling ANY minority group on mob rule over invasive legislation)
June 9th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
You are right jwl , not much hope of the CBC hiring “anyone remotely non-socialist”. And its French network is even worse. In fact, Chantal Hebert’s career got launched with “Radio-Canada appointed Hébert to cover federal politics on Parliament Hill”
So she is well schooled in Conservative bashing.
June 9th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Cynapse I feel lucky that I am protected by laws, just like everyone else. But even those laws don’t protect me if someone actually wants to hurt me.
Here are just a few minority groups/people who don’t support HRC’s and I did not need luck to find them: Eagle Canada, Muslim Canadian Congress, Nina Grewal (born in Japan, raised in India) and Keith Martin (calls himself ‘a brown guy’). You should stop thinking of people as stereotypes and focus more on individuality.
It’s people like you who are spreading fear in Canada. Canada has been one of the most peaceful countries in the world for decades but according to you, the only thing protecting minorities from the ‘mob’ are HRCs. When have immigrants ever faced ‘mob rule’ in the past 100 years? I must have missed the Canadian history lessons where we randomly murdered and assaulted minorities, and the authorities looked on and did nothing about it, but it all stopped once PET introduced HRC.
June 9th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
(the following is not an indictment of Canada as a state so much as the culture of the locals - especially outside the larger centers. Fewer laws are generally better, agreed.)
Burning crosses and mob lynchings are the rare event that somehow became “the norm” via the excesses of historians. Such things rarely happened in the US (relatively speaking) much less Canada. Explosive as those events are, that’s not the kind of “mob” justice I had in mind.
The more likely form of mob justice is two fold
1) Some unsavoury incident involving the “politically incorrect” locals (graffiti, threats of physical harm, denial of loans or public services, denial of jobs, refusal of entry into public places, spitting and other forms of assault)
2) The refusal of local law enforcement or the school system to do anything about the problem, since the perpetrators are likely drinking buddies or their children.
Ask any minority that’s lived outside a major center and you will hear about the old boy network. It is real - not liberal hyperbole, and I’ll challenge anyone on this board about its existence. The same network can produce excessive classism in non-moderated societies, and in fact that problem can be even worse than racism in the smaller centers.
Now I can say I’ve endured at least a 1/3 of the list on #1 and my family who arrived in the 1930’s obviously endured much more. There was no HRC then and little access to me in the 1980’s so we got a pretty accurate sampling of how self-described “real Canadians” behave without a knife to their backs. And this is coming from someone whose income is ahead of the curve - poor minorities face even greater odds.
Despite these incidents (most recently I was refused service at a federal voting booth by an older British man who was probably just “preserving his culture”) I probably wouldn’t directly use these human rights services. HRC cases are about more than just the crime. The recipients of these attempts to preserve culture” have to be of the mind to sit in a court and raise a huge stink to win a paltry sum of money (or at least it will be paltry after lawyers fees, living expenses and lost wages are deducted) at the expense of being completely unemployable in the forseeable future. In my recent case, a woman quickly intervened and shuffled me off to another booth for service before things could get ugly, so I can’t say definitely that any rights were violated (= “let it go”). These incidents are frequent, though and don’t make the paper.
So while I find the HRC and the assault on freedom of speech a slippery slope towards totalitarianism, you’re quite right to believe I won’t be leading the brigade to abolish it. The “mob” would have to present a far better track record for such a move to be feasible and if they had then incidents like this “nipper tipping” in Georgina wouldn’t have required the Toronto “red” Star to get involved before anyone started doing anything about the attacks.
HRC certainly needs reform … but Canada has not quite matured beyond the need for an HRC.
June 9th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Thats quite the statement Cynapse, no assuptions here no siree. You forgot to throw the bigoted whitey angle in there though.
2) The refusal of local law enforcement or the school system to do anything about the problem, since the perpetrators are likely drinking buddies or their children.
Another good one here:
There was no HRC then and little access to me in the 1980’s so we got a pretty accurate sampling of how self-described “real Canadians” behave without a knife to their backs.
Rather an excellent assessment of how HRC’s operate. See it our way or else. Funny how such a tolerant fellow as yourself sees this as necessary and ok.
June 9th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
The thought remains that Canada signed onto the UN legislation regarding human rights because it was a good idea at the time.
Nobody knew it would turn into a monster.
I side with Cynapse on this one and I ask “Is it really necessary to throw the baby out with the bathwater?” I don’t know the answer to that and I doubt many people do. If I have it right even Levant is not asking for same. What he wants is a fix.
I agree because for far to long now Canadians have been victimized by minorities as a result and it’s getting worse as the years move on.
The idea wasn’t bad — the method employed to forward the “dream” in the present day is but we can change it.
“Does that make any sense?”
June 9th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Ward:
As I thought I implied, HRC’s are a necessary evil. Note the word “evil” - it’s the pit bull that could quickly turn against its owner (and the Mark Steyn case is an example of such). The HRC is like war - a last resort but sometimes the only resort. I’m actually glad that you don’t understand this, Ward - it means you have experienced the best side of this nation.
The mob is defined largely by its homogeneity and its volume relative to the targets. The HRC would be equally appropriate for, say, a European who is being shut out of a Chinese-run business or neighborhood on the basis of ethnicity alone. That particular example will eventually come to fruition in Toronto, where the proportions and economic power are shifting rapidly.
As for the law enforcement angle … you’d have to live in a small town to understand. Things work a little differently where there’s no big city anonymity.
June 9th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
“Muslims must “demand that right to participate” in national media”
Participate? Translation…..dominate, total control, they want it all their way.
Islam = hypocrisy. Islam = double standards. Islam = never compromise. Islam = the end justifies the means.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.290/pub_detail.asp
June 9th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
The problem is with liberalism in general and not just the liberals running our HRCs. There are already countless cases of reverse discrimination in hiring practice in Canada, with no mechanism for those of a heterosexual European persuasion to seek any redress at all. Nipper tipping would never have come about had our laws been applied fairly and equally to everyone from the beginning. It all boils down to the simple minded liberal worldview that European Christians are always wrong while every minority is always right. However the real world is just not a one way street, and the idea that only Europeans can behave in a racist manner is ridiculous, so there will always be a backlash in the end and liberal types are only stoking the fires with their unidirectional multicult lunacy.
Since we are using anecdotal evidence, I am from Toronto and attended a largely black high school, and if you think getting pushed into the water is bad you should see how mercilessly many black youth can treat those they perceive as weaker than themselves, like Asians, Muslims, and especially other blacks who dare to show their contemporaries any sign that they are at all intelligent. For many years I worked for a large multinational corporation that designed, installed, and provided service and support to the largest computer networks in Canada, with many PC terminals located in small towns throughout Ontario and used to provide such services as drivers and vehicle license renewals, Human Resource and Development job searches, and land transfers. Our workforce was very ethnically diverse and centered in Toronto and we had Field Engineers of every stripe including Pakistanis, Somalians, Koreans, Chinese, Filipinos, Lebanese, Indians, and Jamaicans. Some of this diverse assortment of FEs were stationed and living full time up north, and the rest were sent around the country to perform installations or deal with problems as they came up. Our customers up north in small town Canada only ever treated the Field Engineers that we sent to up deal with their problems with respect, and by far the most trouble we had along the line of cultural clashes occurred in Toronto, where Chinese, Vietnamese and Japanese dislike Filipinos, and Jamaicans hate Africans and Asians, and Pakistanis hate Indians, and Indians hate each other….
June 9th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
It all boils down to the simple minded liberal worldview that European Christians are always wrong while every minority is always right. However the real world is just not a one way street, and the idea that only Europeans can behave in a racist manner is ridiculous, so there will always be a backlash in the end and liberal types are only stoking the fires with their unidirectional multicult lunacy.
===============
Pure straw man. No one here claimed that. This is typically used by Euro conservatives to deflect from the fact that, since they have the largest numbers and most of the power, they are therefore the primary aggressors. The circumstances can change, and anyone who’s spend any time around different people understand full well that things won’t get better just because X group or Y group takes over. That’s why an agency is needed to keep people straight.
The issue is simple: everyone wants to rule like a king and be championed like an underdog. But it never happens since everyone knows who’s the king and when an underdog ceases to be an underdog.
June 9th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
I simply don’t believe that Canadians are all about getting one over on the other guy. I do believe that for the most part we are tolerant and are fair minded, and the liberal one sided manipulation of our institutions just goes against our sense of fair play. The liberal HRCs just disregard complaints made by whites, or complaints made by one ethnic group against another because they do not care about fair play and like our real courts and every other liberal institution, are all about social engineering. If the right wing carried its agenda too far then I would expect to see a backlash as well, it is just that the left has been pushing the pendulum too far in one direction for forty years.
June 9th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
“everyone wants to rule like a king and be championed like an underdog”
???
I’m not clear on this. Call me “dumb’.
June 9th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Interesting that most atrocities happen because of the State.
Watch the movie Sophie Scholl - The Final Days and watch the court scene near the end. It is very similar to what we see taking place today….the State telling you how you must think.
June 9th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Cynapse , obviously something happened in x-urbia north of Toronto. You may very well have a case of racism and discrimination going on there. What to do?
Nothing can justify the caving in to 13.1 of the HRCs on our value system of liberty and freedom of speech that allows us to say what we think.
There is ignorance all over the world about race, it will never completely disappear but just as the Irish fought it and ended up with John F Kennedy as President and now we may get Obama ( who I can’t stand but it has nothing to do with race) thereby proving that it takes decades but assimilation will take place for all to enjoy eventually. The law works, slowly.
Meanwhile, we mustn’t hand our basic freedoms over to a bunch of un-elected third tier para legals who know zero about the law.
As to the Brit, “preserving a culture” , that is not the same as preserving equality before the law that his ancestors died for. He needs to be reminded about that .. by who ? How? Maybe go up to the electoral officer in charge for starters, you’ll say he’s just as bad. Then to the MP, is that Peter Van Loan? Send him an email. Let us know , we’ll all pound away at it.
June 9th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
John, I hope this isn’t so…I tried to find the clip you refer too and I found this instead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1c_PT2b6iM0
It may be better. I’ll try to get my hands on the movie. I had never heard of Sophie until today.
Thank you for that.
June 9th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
My guess is he’s saying Caucasians (why dance with labels like European this or that?) are still the dominant economic and political force (kings) and therefore are not “underdogs” whose cause needs to be championed. Basically, this supports what Brian S. asserted. The forces of social justice like HRCs are not meant for Caucasians, they’re meant to protect others from Caucasians.
June 9th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Mac:
No, I meant Europeans. Most Middle Easterners + some Indians are Caucasian and they certainly aren’t the kings. The English and French have run dueling kingdoms in Canada. Soon, other Northern Europeans joined the kings and proved their worth by dumping all over the Italians, Eastern Europeans and Portuguese. The aforementioned groups are somewhat joining the kings and in turn venting their rage at other groups beyond what people lazily attribute to the McNallys and O’Haras of the nation.
Of course, all of this is only valid for Canada. The same pattern occurs in other nations for other groups. The pattern is more ethnic than racial, so “Caucasian” really isn’t a good term at all.
HRC’s are meant to protect the weak from the tyranny of the strong (kings). If you’re a king that’s great for you, but depending on your level of malice it might be hell for someone else.
The real issue here seems to be that many people on this thread think Canada is more peaceful than, say, Afghanistan or Northern China due to the people that inhabit this land. I have the unfortunate position of having to say “bullsh!t”. The Canadian “tribe” is no more gracious than the Pashtun or the Han. However, the Canadian has a far superior government that mitigates malicious actions on the part of the ruling tribe, which in turn mitigates the dog-eat-dog environment and economic disparities that make a nation “third world”.
Want to see what happens without such a government? Go to Latin America. There you’ll find an elite group of kings that live a lavish existence … yet so many of them try to emigrate here. Why? The underclass virtually has no rights or recourse for mistreatment and in turn have no respect for rule of law. Thus, in Brazil, you can expect your entire hand to be cut off when the robber wants the watch on your wrist. Police retribution? Not an issue when there is no even application of the law to begin with - it’s kill or be killed.
I don’t think any of us want to live that way.
June 9th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
Brian S:
Can’t say I disagree. The persecution of Steyn and Levant passed a critical point that made many people chafe … at least in private (many I know don’t want to to be on record as backing those individuals, given their political slant).
Warman’s use of an innocent woman’s net connection to dupe the far right is what troubles me the most - this is a blatantly illegal tactic that could land people in trouble for things they didn’t do. False accusations of computer piracy and child pornography have resulted from connection theft and one would expect that a government agency dedicated to protecting the rights of citizens would not engage in such activity.
June 9th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
“Warman’s use of an innocent woman’s net connection”…
The interesting thing for me is how did he get by the encryption key she is alledged to have used (I have one too)? I’m asking because I have a wireless internet connection for my family when they appear every so often. Also, I now have an A&W sitting about 50 meters away.
Should I ditch it and do a straight hookup without it?
Call me “cluelesss”.
June 9th, 2008 at 9:15 pm
It is true that we Canadians should cherish the set of common laws that took 800 years for Europeans to develop. But isn’t that the point? The notions of freedom of speech, and justice being blind, both played a big part in the rule of law that has set us apart, and are exactly what liberals now wish to disregard in order to further their agenda. Not to mention the fact that they have been more than willing to break our laws in order to achieve their goals.
June 9th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Jack, the strength of the encryption in earlier WiFi kits is weak enough that you can find a Live CD, boot it on a laptop with a wireless card, and crack it in 30 minutes or so if there is enough traffic. 128 bit key lengths is the minimum that will discourage a casual wardriver (wireless thief).
Base your key on a random set of digits and alphas.
You cannot keep out those determined to get in, but you have the casuals spend their time on lower hanging fruit.
Forcing authentication to an authority is another valuable step. WPA or RADIUS offers this kind of protection.
Lastly, if your WiFi access point supports it, map the MAC address of each WiFi client that you wish to permit onto your network. It’s less open for visitors, more of a pain to administer, but this last step locks things down fairly tightly.
June 9th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Even 128-bit WEP encryption can be breached
WPA 2 still relatively crack-proof.
LG’s tip re: the MAC addresses is pretty much the only way to really lock down your network.
June 9th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Cynapse: I grew up in small towns most of my life.
I now live in Vancouver, and have been the recipient of “reverse” discrimination at the hands of “visible minorities” to great detriment to my business.
The rule, not the exception, (at least in my trade) is to award the business to individuals or businesses (often Johnny come latelys) with the same ethnic background as the customer.
The impression I get with your posts and with the HRC’s is that because I am white, I am disqualified from discrimination and that minorities do not engage in discrimination.
I also get a sense of underlying bigotry in many of your arguements.
Going back to the small town angle, I was raised in small town Sask and Alberta. I can tell you that where I came from people really embraced you no matter where you were from or your background.
Perhaps its different in Lib Ontario, but that would be very ironic indeed.
June 9th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
The impression I get with your posts and with the HRC’s is that because I am white, I am disqualified from discrimination and that minorities do not engage in discrimination.
I also get a sense of underlying bigotry in many of your arguements.
That’s a basic consequence of not reading posts in full. You must have missed this part.
“The mob is defined largely by its homogeneity and its volume relative to the targets. The HRC would be equally appropriate for, say, a European who is being shut out of a Chinese-run business or neighborhood on the basis of ethnicity alone. That particular example will eventually come to fruition in Toronto, where the proportions and economic power are shifting rapidly.”
Not sure where the bigotry in that is. The principle is not foreign to you, since you are one of many who insist that a spade be called a spade where Islamic terrorism is concerned. Similiary, if not the yokels in the towns who actually perpetuated the major transgressions of the past and the lesser ones today, whom should be blamed?
BTW, you have no idea about Ontario - it ceases to be substantially liberal once the 416-905 barrier is crossed.
Again, I expect to win no converts with this argument. There is a great chasm between how “old Canada” sees itself and how those under old Canada see them. It probably isn’t going away any time soon - I can understand your mythology but never embrace it. You can comprehend my stories but never understand their impact. Maybe we should just be Canadian and obscure it with pleasantries.
June 10th, 2008 at 12:53 am
Thanks for the clarification, Cynapse.
The problem with the HRCs and government regulations being a one-way street instead of acting without bias is this represent basic injustice. Your “kings” represent a tiny portion of the European population. The rest of us are just regular folks who can be oppressed with equal ease to any minority group… hell, here in Vancouver, I am a minority… so who should we look to for justice?
Evidently, there is none to be had.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:39 am
I guess that I qualify as a yokel because I grew up on a place 40 miles from the nearest town in SW Sask. I don’t really like to be called a yokel or a hillbilly because I don’t think I am either one, Cynapse.
I do believe in Liberty. I do not like to be told what to do so you probably know that I refuse to be told what or how to think!
In the Cypress Hills, of my day, people were judged pretty much by how well they could ride a horse! I am not making this up…yellow, green, purple, red, white, black…there was great respect in my circles for the Bedouins and the fine Arabs they rode…you can imagine the trauma my brothers and I put up with because our Dad used his old car and our Collie dog to round up his cattle AND he wore a Fedora not a Stetson! The dog rode in the car, in the passenger seat when they drove out to milk the cow (the cow was not driven into the barn to be milked at our place) us kids rode beside the dog or in the back.
We were different but we were only cogs in the wheel of a diverse group of people. One of our neighbours decorated his dresser with hooves from his dead horses and dogs and he ate ham swarming with maggots, one of the most respected horsemen of the area was half Creole, part Mohawk, part Scot (I think). He was about 6′6” and his Mom was a 4′2” Creole lady from the deep south, there was a family from the Ozarks who papered their house with the Eaton’s catalogue and drove around with their dead baby in the trunk of their car all one winter - they showed it to anyone who wanted to see their sleeping angel. We all went to the same dances and everyone helped everyone else brand their cattle, almost everyone smoked tobacco and everyone owned at least one gun and knew how to shoot it. I cannot remember anyone getting robbed or shot (We never locked the doors or the gas tanks and the keys were always in every vehicle). How did this happen, you ask? We minded our own business. The HRC does the exact opposite and they are causing, not resolving problems, IMO.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:04 am
“I’ve put together a video of what Mr. Awan said and my thoughts about the dramatic harm this young man is doing both to Canada in general and the Muslim community in particular.”
http://pelalusa.blogspot.com/