>>>The source of the word does not matter. There is most certainly a move by Islam to capture and dominate the planet. I choose to be free and therefore have no interest in being a part of it. For many muslims, my choice of freedom requires that I be killed. A positively foolish stance on their part.
>
>Where are you getting this from? Consider that at one stage there were branches of the IRA whose stated aim was to terrorize and kill until the Brits and their Protestant dependents were driven from Northern Ireland. By your logic, Catholicism itself was a terrorist religion determined to eliminate freedom and kill unbelievers. Some bigots may have liked that description but a more accurate portrayal is that violent groups find it easy to hide and recruit if they can hoist a banner that appeals to a disaffected population. Consider what happened in Ireland: after decades of strife, affluence spread across the community and the extremists were marginalized to the point where IRA leaders now even can meet the Queen for tea. If you want a lesson, the lesson is that "affluence" and "hope" are powerful disinfectants against extremism because once disaffected populations see that they have a chance, why would they be drawn into the rhetoric of hate, or cr*p in their own nests? Unless you have a disaffected Muslim population in Canada, consider why or how such a conspiracy can gain ground unless it's paying people, in which case your problem is a rogue state hiring traitors in Canada, not Islam. Also seems to me that if civil wars do break out, race will be a regional curiosity because the war will in fact be between these same disaffected populations and their more affluent "betters" who were too stupid to foresee the results of entrenched structural inequality.

I disagree with you, John, and so does the evidence.