Agreed. Only problem is, Islamic solution to a Christian conversion is death.

-S

Book of revelation clearly states that this will actually come to pass, and they will fail against the Jews who are gods choosen people. No harm will come to Isreal in the end of time because they will become impregnatable. The chariots of fire still have to come about though. I assume this is a tank with a laser weapon. Could be just a modern day tank however. Regardless anyone who tried anything against Isreal will be killed with no hope of suceeding. The wall they talk about (imagine that - it is already under construction, yet how did they know about it 2000 years ago?) will be completed. The birds that will be destroyed (gutted from the inside out) in the end of time are probably unmanned aerial fighting vehicles.

So quite frankly, I don't have any fear of what will come of one of our allies in the East - it is already written. Islam will already fail and this was already written before Islam even had a foothold. This is one way to prove that Islamic religion is false or lacking in that it does not have such a detailed account of the end of time. It is very vague, but anyone can be very vague.

Now the bad news - The US of A will eventually fail. Even though it was listed as the seventh head of the beast, and has risen up to near world dominance without crossing a single border, and it has also satisfied its mark for being the richest country the world will ever known since ancient empires don't even come close, it is doomed due to the 8th (not a head, but representing self indulgence) - the gluttoney of itself - ie. money grubbing Our Enrons and Worldcoms, and Tyco will kill it. The merchants on the sea will cry for they have no where left to sell their wares and no way to make a living (Chineese I assume). Problem is, when is this supposed to happen? It is not too far off. 20 years? 50 years? Even 100? I assume between 20 to 50 years.

Anyway, I'll quit babbeling now.

-S

PS. Little did we know that the Unions in the end of time that cause the most trouble would turn out to be corporate unions like the RIAA and MPAA.

Exactly....Christians say turn the cheek...Muslims appear to say kill em all if they are not with us and Jews hold true to strict law....all 3 are opposite an Can Not Ever see eye to eye...the Christian awaits the return of Jesus to put it right...The Muslim attemtps to kill everyone into submission and really I am not sure what the Jew is doing.. :) According to Christian scripture the Jews have a veil over there eyes at the moment hiding the truth from them until a time appointed...

Christian belief has an answer....those who choose life will go with God those who choose death will go to a wormy exsistence...either way what can be learned is that there will never never never be peace until all beliefs go there seperate ways...which this is not the movie 2010 where some new worlds will be made so each belief can go there way...it has to end before it can begin again. :)

A storm is coming...
http://www.jsu.edu/news/july_dec2004...3%20-0015A.jpg

Cool pic! Anyway, yeah - Islam must use scare tactics to scare people into following a set path. I think I would choose death instead of worshipping and serving a tyrant god. That is the difference. A god who cares about my existance is the only way, not a do or else god. I feel very sorry for Islamists. They follow a false path of your damned if you do, and your damned if you don't, and in the end you are damned anyway. That is why it is easy for jhadiists to recruit suicide bombers by pointing out that a lifetime of doing rights to correct the list of wrongs is nearly impossible to achieve, and the only way to rectify that is to blow up the infidels which wipes the slate clean (And gives you 72 virgins in heaven! yeah right!). Why die for a tyrant? All this over one man who was not allowed to be a diciple, and he created a violent religion because of it. Was this in spite?

Saw this on Discovery again. Mohammed went his own path when he was not allowed to be a diciple of Jesus. Maybe he saw himself as a prophet in time because that is what he wanted to be. I wish I could remeber the name of this one. It was very interesting as they analyzed Mohammed's life.

-S

It is not "a semi-independent" immigration policy at all, and it is in fact very similar to the Provincial Nomination systems that other provinces also have. In both cases the province is involved only in the selection process, but the actual application for citizenship is made to the federal level where the power to grant or deny the application solely rests.

From the Government of Canada Immigration website on Provincial Nominations:


http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/skilled/provnom/index.html

Now compare it to the policy with the Canada-Quebec partnership:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/skilled/quebec/index.html

Notice the similarities?

It is not a matter of oversight or rubber stamping; as I pointed out, the application must ultimately be made to the federal government and there lies the sole power and responsibility for granting or approving it.

All a Provincial Nomination does, and the Canada-Quebec program as well, is grant the applicant a waiver on certain criteria that other applicants must meet. The process is identical otherwise.

To again quote JW:

Again, this is simply misleading and factually wrong. Quebec has an arrangement with the federal government that is almost identical to that of many other provinces, and in either of these cases the responsibility and power to approve or deny citizenship lies solely with the Government of Canada.

Finally, I like how they name Alberta and BC as "victims" of Quebec's "unique immigration policy" when in fact both Alberta and BC are partners in the similar Provincial Nomination program, and thus enjoy the same rights as Quebec.

Yes. This time out they make a seriou factual mistake right from the outset, while in other articles people have posted by them I've noticed a tendency (and I've pointed these out before) to distort facts and present things out of context; given this pattern, the significant factual mistake presented here that serves to both distort and to inflame, and that nothing in the article is cited with outside sources I am supposed to accept the rest of it anyway? No, I don't think so.

The policy is intended to allow the provinces a voice in our immigration policy, it is not to "shift the workload onto others". And as to the rubberstamping, again under either program mentioned the only difference between them and the regular immigration program is that certain criteria are waived; the rest of the process is identical.

With lethal precision missing the point.

Bingo.

Genocide seems to come to mind, but so does Hitler in the same sentence. Not quite an easy pill to swallow.

The problem i think islam for the most part hasnt cought up with the rest of the world, and are at odds with it. For example, christianty stayed with the current times and abanonded such obsurdity as Trial by ordeal, burning at the stake, or the like. Islam however, has not. Its a religion that, from all outward apperances is stuck in the past. They still call westerners "crusaders" and "infidels", leftover rhetoric from the crusades. That speaks volumes.

Islam must adapt itself to the modern world, or be pushed aside. Plain and simple.

Edit:
I see negative pressure on islam, and lots of it, a good thing. It will force moderates (if any exist) to seperate themselves from the not so moderates. If it doesnt coherse Islam to adapt to modern times, then it will polarize the world against it to take action - either way the problem will be solved.

No matter if they favor francophone people who are islamic or not, Quebec doesn't have the final say, so it'd be actually the Canadian government at fault.

However, I'd like to see some figures, like how much of the immigrants to Quebec/Canada actually have been muslims? There are no numbers, not even a link to support the myth, of a rapid influx of muslims into Canada... (I know the writer didn't say that, but he's implying just that)

If that article wasn't fearmongering and creating hysteria (it probably wouldn't if it would cite those numbers I've asked for) I don't know whatelse it is.

Use Google, like I did this afternoon. Figures I found (from Canadian government, so for some they may be trustworthy, for others not) since 2000 show that Ontario has the largest and Quebec the second largest Muslim communities in Canada. Figures also showed that during the last couple of years the total number of Muslims in Canada has doubled. what needs to be known is that the spreading pattern is not euqal everyhwere, and that Muslim colonies tend to build huge accumulation in major towns. So even a smaller group can gain more power in a location than a greater group that is scattered around.

But all that is not contradictory to what is said in that article. Peoiple just need to read it more precisely and at the samr time stop wanting to split hairs. Scnadium seem sto be unaware that most of ehat he has given in argument against that description in that article - is not in contradiction, partially even is supporting it.

Stop looking at single fields, Scandium. Watch the whole board.

This thread becomes worn out. So this thread i leave - exactly here.

I did some digging around on Statistics Canada's website, and according to the most recent published census (2001), the population of Muslims in Quebec is 108,620, which is 01.5% of Quebec's population.

Now with that in mind, let's look at another quote from that JihadWatch article:

Large-scale presence indeed. :roll:

And here is the link to see for yourself by the way, since I don't want you to take my word for it anymore than I'd expect rational, thinking people to take JihadWatch's word (since citing published facts, studies, and statistics would tend to undercut their agenda):

http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo30b.htm

Just to clarify how immigration in Canada works - Althought I'm not a lawyer in any sense of the world.

Immigrants apply to the government of Canada, via an embassy or consulate, for visas or citizenship, stuff like that. The government of Canada decides wether they get in or not.

Where the provincial government gets involved is in selection. Suppose Québec needs pharmacists, or nurses. A guy in Ouganda feels like moving to Quebec - Rouyn-Noranda in particular. He can apply to the government of Quebec for selection. Since he's a pharmacist, and his wife is a nurse, and Rouyn can alway use some cultural diversity and immigration, Quebec selects them.

They phone Ottawa, and after twenty minutes of transferring and language problems, they tell each others that So-and-so would be welcome in Quebec. Immigration Canada will waive such thing as checking for profession, abillity to work, I don't know what. Then, they, and they alone, will handle the security checks and related stuff.

I don't see how the JW accound can be said to be factual. But then, I've been told long ago that that site was an unbiased news source, and I don't question what I'm told. Ever.

I'm asking for absolute numbers, when there was only 1 muslim in Canada it would now be 2, ok it's not like that but an increase by hundred percent, or doubling as you put it just sounds so much more dramatic, doesn't it?

Stop putting a spin to facts here.

You guys are queer, so before I got to bed, again: read that article again. There is the talk of a PARTY PROGRAM of a Canadian party. And there is the talk of what COULD happen because of that - if that program is made real, eventually. It is not about what already is. Scandium has successfully distracted all attention away from half a dozen other articles, and this article in it's true meaning as well, and has locked it all by pinpointing one single, but not really important sentence, and then clinging to it. He has admitted himself that there are differences between the practices between provinces, and between provinces and the central government. He has written it himself black on white, in an endless stream of words, it seems. The article just sums it up more economically: "that province has a policy of it's own". And by consequence, that is true. Period. What is your problem when most other readers seem to have understood during the first reading what it meant? You are stumbling over your own feed.

Stop staring at one and the same single field hours long. Watch the whole board. A movie is more than just one picture. In fact, in a movie you even cannot perceive the single picture.

And now - really, run this thread without me.

To Scandium.

No I don't believe the population of Canada will ever be 80% Muslim, unless Canadian Muslims hide in a cave, nuke Canada and return once radiation is gone.

That was sarcasm, just in case.

I don't think you are alone when you think the Supreme Court and taking over the Parliament to be too ambitious. Any devouted Islamist thinks just the same. It shouldn't be hard to discover any lesser plans though, there aren't that many Imams and Muslim organizations to keep track of in Canada.

I added secular and neighbor in the end because whatever Islamists do, they can be stopped, countered, or favoured. The Premier in question didn't favoured Islam. What happens the next time a decision has to be made or a policy discussed or implemented, will depend as much on Canadian Muslims as on non-Muslims.

I have to say that the article does a fairly good job of hiding that under the carpet...

So what now, is this policy already in use or not, because the article clearly suggests it is.