Trump

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Trump

Fwiw, McGuinty once wanting Sharia Law tribunals in Ontario (no doubt for the sake of votes), and Wynn introducing her radical sex-ed agenda, are just two reasons why I find the Ontario Liberals loathsome. Don't get me started on Hydro rates, their failed Green Energy policies and the Liberals' incompetence and corruption in general.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Trump

Sid doesn't want the U.S. allowing in believers in Sharia law, but freedom of religion means existing citizens of the U.S. are fully and legally able to convert to Islam and believe in Sharia law. And if that were to happen, the U.S. Constitution would eventually be discarded.

Sharia Law is exactly that....a body of laws, not a religion. Theoretically America could vote to discard the constitution however that is not the reality nor will it be in the forseeable future. New refugees are expected to swear their first allegiance to the US Constitution. Sharia Law is a body of laws and not a religion so if a potential citizens first allegiance is to this system and not the US constitution they are not eliglble for citizenship. The last step in becoming a US citizen is the swearing in ceremony where this oath is part of the ceremony.

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump

Hi Sid,

That is exactly it! The hubris of not being able to accept there might be things beyond our understanding!

It frequently hits high level minds because they have equally huge egos. But again, if they are not militant, I wont bother creating a fight. I respect that right. Its guys like Ben who are happy to attack (this started with him laughing at Kevin's beliefs - with open mockery of Christianity which I did not find acceptable, but is clearly ok to him), and as you said the Obama 8 years and good friends that have taught me it's better to speak up. But I honestly tire of wasting my breath on Ben and even Paul. Instead I hope that others see it is ok to stand up for what you believe in. No need for their tactics either. Simple bullying, name-calling, and hate have somehow become acceptable norms. I will leave that to them. They never let me down!

Also I have to add that Vlad was utterly correct. It's people like Ben who have helped to galvanize many people who quietly take this type of angry thought process and shrink away from it. Its just terrible. It needs to be stood up to.

Ben's post to Kevin was this: "Fwiw, you're a biblical literalist in 2017, and that's hilarious." That is Ben expressing his opinion of biblical literalism. It is not bullying, name-calling nor hatred.

Then you say that Ben's open mockery of Christianity was something you find not acceptable. Ok... but then you write: "The hubris of not being able to accept there might be things beyond our understanding!"

So Mavros.... please explain something to us all:

How is your statement not open mockery of atheism? How are you not guilty of the sin you rail against?

And as I demonstrated in this post which you didn't respond to probably because it shows you don't even know what "race" means....... this isn't the first time you are guilty of the sin you rail against. I doubt you'll respond to the above questions either. Stand up for what you believe in? HA HA! what a joke. You'd rather hide behind false accusations of hatred.

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Trump

Hi Sid,

That is exactly it! The hubris of not being able to accept there might be things beyond our understanding!

It frequently hits high level minds because they have equally huge egos. But again, if they are not militant, I wont bother creating a fight. I respect that right. Its guys like Ben who are happy to attack (this started with him laughing at Kevin's beliefs - with open mockery of Christianity which I did not find acceptable, but is clearly ok to him), and as you said the Obama 8 years and good friends that have taught me it's better to speak up. But I honestly tire of wasting my breath on Ben and even Paul. Instead I hope that others see it is ok to stand up for what you believe in. No need for their tactics either. Simple bullying, name-calling, and hate have somehow become acceptable norms. I will leave that to them. They never let me down!

Also I have to add that Vlad was utterly correct. It's people like Ben who have helped to galvanize many people who quietly take this type of angry thought process and shrink away from it. Its just terrible. It needs to be stood up to.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Trump

And to Whissel and Drkulec, stay mad over the fact that despite your unsubstantiated rantings, I'm the only one who's linked to real data on intelligence measuring, and the data indicated that conservatives have measurably lower IQs than liberals and theists have measurably lower IQs than atheists. Don't worry. You can still feel smart. You just need to make sure you stay trapped in your delusions. You're both doing a stellar job so far!

Mavros's explanation of why his statements are not racist in content is one i do not need to expand upon. The anti conservatives in the United States are referred to as left wing albeit that may be somewhat of a misnomer. Yes, your rhetoric is unoriginal and sounds no different then what is heard every night on US news stations. Einstein was a theist albeit, not one who believed in mainstream religions or Gods.
When I listen to a true Atheist suggest that it is more likely that the order we see in everything from the Cosmos to subatomic particles to the beautiful symmetric pattern of a salt crystal and say that it is more probable that all of this came together because of random chemical reactions rather then a force that is beyond our comprehension suggest hubris and thoughtless rhetoric.

You have the gall to say how smart you are and that you know all the answers suggests real stupidity to me. I went to chess.ca and looked up both Vlad's and Mavros's ratings, how is it that these ratings are "unsubstantiated" as you claim? Or maybe the evidence is not something that you like to hear so you invent stories about "unsubstantiated" ratings. You know, like the Wikileaks stories were at first called bogus by many Dems until they learned that something called Domain Keys Identified Mail (DKIM) making proof of altered emails "substantiated" except that in Wikileaks history not one email forgery was ever "substantiated".

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump

Listen to Ben's rhetoric. He calls me racist, but I have no such hateful comments as he.

Actually, you do.... read on.....

Militant atheists, by their very nature, exclude humanity and Judeo-Christian thought from their method of thinking. Like Ben here, Heinrich Himmler officially believed in a superior race (in this case Ben is claiming atheists are superior).

Since when is atheism a "race"??? Atheism is a belief system.

So, like the short and homely Heinrich Himmler, who did not make the "handsome standard" of the twisted Aryan ideal he helped to create, Ben's angry posts with little thought or reason exclude him from his own world of the "highly intelligent" master race of atheists.

Let me be clear - I do not equate Ben with Himmler.

But you DID! You just did exactly that! You implied Ben is a racist. Just because you didn't actually type "Ben is a racist" doesn't mean you are not calling Ben a racist. You typed that Ben has 'his own world of the "highly intelligent" master race of atheists.' Even though you are grossly mistaking atheism as a race, it doesn't matter, you still call Ben a racist.

Show me anywhere in this thread that Ben mentioned OR EVEN IMPLIED a "superior race"! Ben is talking about belief systems, not races! Because Ben mentioned intelligence studies comparing people of various belief systems (not of races!), you extrapolated that to Ben believing in a "highly intelligent master race of atheists". You don't even know the meaning of the word "race"!

Its just the world has seen where the line of militant atheist thought leads. The pinnacle of this path. Ben may not even be aware of this or care, but the world has a history with this method of thinking. It is recorded in both World Wars.

Wait.... now you're saying Ben is not just an atheist, but a "militant atheist"??? You, the one who says you aren't making any insults?

Do you believe all atheists are militant atheists?

And by the way, the world has a history with the militant Judeo-Christian method of thinking. Ever hear of The Crusades? Ever hear of the Spanish Inquisition? You don't get to cherry pick your history!

So Like Mr. Belzberg said, worship a stone, just don't throw it at me. Believing in nothing is still believing! Also try not to trash this wonderful country and its foundation.

Mavros, you worship the Bible, and you threw a Bible at Ben! Here's exactly what you wrote:

"..you seem to be a immigrant (2nd, 3rd, etc. generation - probably born in Canada) who is happy to come to/or be part of a Judeo-Christian society and then take a dump on it, while enjoying the verbal freedom your home country would most likely never allow."

You threw your concept of "a Judeo-Christian society" at Ben, and said to Ben that he should conform to that society and not take a dump on it. Canada is NOT a Judeo-Christian society, you really need to realize that. Canada has freedom of religion. Do you even know what that means?

It means it is possible that tomorrow morning, something like 35 million Canadians could wake up and convert to Islam, and believe Canada needs Sharia law. Neither you nor Sid Belzberg fully grasps this. Sid doesn't want the U.S. allowing in believers in Sharia law, but freedom of religion means existing citizens of the U.S. are fully and legally able to convert to Islam and believe in Sharia law. And if that were to happen, the U.S. Constitution would eventually be discarded.

Just today, your wonderful Mr. Trump railed against the U.S. Constitution!

He blamed the constitutional checks and balances built in to US governance. “It’s a very rough system,” he said. “It’s an archaic system … It’s really a bad thing for the country.”

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Trump

Hi Peter, I can discuss this later or on personal chats if you want. You have presented logical and thoughtful arguments and I am compelled to a discussion with you at some point. Responding carefully to Ben just took too much time today.

[Mavros Whissell]

Re: Trump

To add to what Mr. Belzberg has said:

To Peter: there is no difference with militant atheists in their approach to attempting to change the laws of a country. They come into a society with the aide of clumsy political indifference or a veil of lies.

Listen to Ben's rhetoric. He calls me racist, but I have no such hateful comments as he. Most who saw the name "Mavros" would assume my country of origin is outside of Canada (as Peter did! - and he was right). In the same way I assumed "Daswani" was of origin from outside of Canada somewhere along the recent line. This is not racist. Its logic. Its not a French, English or Native name. I didn't say I hate Daswani, or Daswani is inferior, or any of the nonsense he is pushing about me. I was assuming a foreign sounding name is probably foreign, simply that. But Daswani is perhaps angry at society, or simply exercising his freedom and heritage, so that he can safely call others racist.

Militant atheists, by their very nature, exclude humanity and Judeo-Christian thought from their method of thinking. Like Ben here, Heinrich Himmler officially believed in a superior race (in this case Ben is claiming atheists are superior). Ben claims to be highly intelligent - constantly - despite really lacking proof of that fact. The big racist that I am, I know there are 100s of thousands of chess players of higher rating then me, all of different creeds and religions. Its just a fact. Mr.Belzberg pointed out Ben's rating is lower than mine, so by Ben's own standards, I should be calling him a moron. But I will not. Maybe he is very smart - seriously. I just think he is incredibly angry and that fact is proven by his repeated posts. So, like the short and homely Heinrich Himmler, who did not make the "handsome standard" of the twisted Aryan ideal he helped to create, Ben's angry posts with little thought or reason exclude him from his own world of the "highly intelligent" master race of atheists.

Let me be clear - I do not equate Ben with Himmler. Its just the world has seen where the line of militant atheist thought leads. The pinnacle of this path. Ben may not even be aware of this or care, but the world has a history with this method of thinking. It is recorded in both World Wars.

So Like Mr. Belzberg said, worship a stone, just don't throw it at me. Believing in nothing is still believing! Also try not to trash this wonderful country and its foundation.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Trump

I'm the only one who's linked to real data on intelligence measuring, and the data indicated that conservatives have measurably lower IQs than liberals and theists have measurably lower IQs than atheists.

Can you cite your source?

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Trump

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/01/politi...inkId=37070118

The latest from the idiotic piece of garbage that Drkulec, your CFC President, thinks is a good leader.

[Ben Daswani]

Re: Trump

The connection is that conservatives are mainly branded racists on the basis that they are prejudice against a particular religion. Everyone know's that the particular religion we are talking about is Islam. My issue is that Islam is more of a theocracy then a religion and conservatives happen to disagree with the political construct that falls out of Islam that includes Sharia Law and do not believe that proponents of this political ideology should be somehow exempted from swearing their first allegiance to the US constitution as a way of being eligible to be a US Citizen.
The rhetoric coming from Ben is no different then the left wing rhetoric I have been hearing for the last 8 years The left conveniently tries to characterize disagreeing with a political system disguised as a religion as racist.

What the hell?

I didn't brand Whissel a racist for anything he had to say relating to Islam. No one spoke of Islam until you came in here and started ranting about it.

I branded Whissel a racist because he implied that I seem to be an "immigrant" and to have a "home country" other than Canada, presumably because of my last name. He was implying that people of my ancestry cannot be truly native to Canada. Are you so blinded by your disdain for progressives that you can't acknowledge when something is so obviously racist?

Also, to characterize anything I say as "left wing rhetoric" is laughable. Nothing I have endorsed in my entire life could be accurately characterized as "left wing."

----------

And to Whissel and Drkulec, stay mad over the fact that despite your unsubstantiated rantings, I'm the only one who's linked to real data on intelligence measuring, and the data indicated that conservatives have measurably lower IQs than liberals and theists have measurably lower IQs than atheists. Don't worry. You can still feel smart. You just need to make sure you stay trapped in your delusions. You're both doing a stellar job so far!

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Trump

Sid, I don't follow your line of thought here. Ben indicated that he didn't like biblical literalism. How do you get from there to suggesting that he do a little research project on sharia? What's the connection?

The connection is that conservatives are mainly branded racists on the basis that they are prejudice against a particular religion. Everyone know's that the particular religion we are talking about is Islam. My issue is that Islam is more of a theocracy then a religion and conservatives happen to disagree with the political construct that falls out of Islam that includes Sharia Law and do not believe that proponents of this political ideology should be somehow exempted from swearing their first allegiance to the US constitution as a way of being eligible to be a US Citizen.
The rhetoric coming from Ben is no different then the left wing rhetoric I have been hearing for the last 8 years The left conveniently tries to characterize disagreeing with a political system disguised as a religion as racist.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Trump

I am not surprised. His lonely boy crusade against the CFC is clearly rooted in the rejection of his company during working hours when they needed to do some work. He is a male version of Glen Close in Fatal Attraction or perhaps more accurately Jim Carrey's Cable Guy. He clearly has a hard time with boundaries and is offended when people try to establish even reasonable ones. I never met the guy but I can only go by the stories that I have heard about him and his reactions on Chesstalk.

Fwiw, I've never given up on Neil entirely, if only because I hate to see a lost possible Canadian chess organizer. He's creative, but like all of us needs to work on permanently holding down the darker side. Neil might never again be aboard the CFC 'bus', but it would be nice if somehow he could help decorate it. I'm afraid he's a command & control or bust kind of guy, though, and if he goes his own way like Larry did, well that's the way it'll be.

Also fwiw, I get the general idea of how Canadian chess could have been better off with a different FIDE Prez, if only in terms of future $ to Canada, but in the past at least, the CFC has invariably let financial & other resources slip away all the same, at varying rates of speed. Anyway I likely would have had to have made quite a campaign of it to change a single Governor's vote re: the FIDE election, after I left CFC governance that is.

On a seperate topic (the main one of this thread), I couldn't quite believe my ears when I heard on CNN today that Trump would be "honoured" to meet with the North Korean leader. While the latter might not have been tried anywhere for murder, he's put out propaganda videos of nuking the US in various ways. While I expected gross stupidity and insanity in what might be the latter days, such always seems to come sooner than I expect.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump

I think Mr. Belzberg is entirely correct.

Different cultures, well they are everything that makes this country great. Look at our chess community, and they are generally a great bunch of guys and girls! Different religions, different cultures, all love chess! All here enjoying freedom. But allowing in a law form such as Sharia that promotes: lying to unbelievers as acceptable, open prayers against Jews, beating women, throwing homosexuals off buildings, or that type of lunacy is terrible. In our legal code these translate to fraud, uttering threats, abuse, assault and murder. All illegal. Thank you, liberal government, for motion 103. Protecting one religion over all others? Here comes the creep. Islam is still not the most persecuted religion either, its still Judaism. The most interesting discussions are listening to Iranian or Saudi nationals who have come to Canada to escape Sharia, they understand the value of their new found freedom and actively fight this kind of change. Mr. Belzberg understood exactly what I was trying to address. I would go so far as to say militant atheism is also a deadly cause that threatens to change Western law.

Yes Vlad (and Kevin), I thought of the mute button many times. And I think Nikolay thinks its no good to just ignore, but you have a point. When some of these guys just go to base insults and try and call you every name in the book, its not worth listening. If it were a solid argument, its a different storey. I think somewhere way back when this might have been an argument based on facts. However, I am fairly certain once the base insults come out, the opposition just doesn't really have anymore basis in reason, and they've simply lost their argument and have no validity. Probably your solution is better for my blood pressure though!

Mavros, I get the impression that you may not he familiar with the full text of Private Member's Motion 103. If I'm wrong, I'll apologize now, in advance. But if I'm right, you can find the full text here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parliamentaria...mentId=8661986. Once you've read the full text of the motion, and keeping in mind that the motion was put forward in the immediate aftermath of the Quebec mosque shootings (context!), I hope you'll agree that the motion is NOT trying to "(protect) one religion over all others." In fact, Irwin Cotler, former Canadian Minister of Justice & Attorney General and respected international human rights lawyer, had this to say about the motion:

The author of the anti-Semitism motion, former Liberal MP and justice minister Irwin Cotler, told*The CJN*he would suggest changes to M-103. “I would support it in principle, but I believe support for the motion would be enhanced if it used the term ‘anti-Muslim hate and bigotry’ rather than Islamophobia, because Islamophobia [has come] to be seen in unclear or divisive ways.”Cotler said he would have moved amendments to the motion to change the wording, but “if the amendment was voted down, I would have supported the motion.” [source: http://www.cjnews.com/news/canada/wh...ided-on-m-103]

Apparently Mr. Cotler, a noted authority, doesn't think the motion represents "creep". I hope you'll consider modifying your opinion on this.

Did Ben say something that prompted you to bring forward your concerns about sharia law? What was it that he said?

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump

...
Why don't you try googling what percent of Islams believe Sharia law should be the law of the land? Tell us all what your findings are.
.

Sid, I don't follow your line of thought here. Ben indicated that he didn't like biblical literalism. How do you get from there to suggesting that he do a little research project on sharia? What's the connection?