Didn’t seem much comfort to people at the time. ‘Destroying the West,’ whatever the hell it means, is the goal of a small minority. You’re the one asserting the other 1 billion-plus Muslims are going along with it.
I didn’t say you were a bigot until you made it so obvious that’s what you are. I don’t think you’re interested in what anybody is saying anyway, since people have contradicted the points you’ve made. Very little of what you’re saying is related to any kind of fact; it’s just speculation. Insofar as you’ve made any points, people have certainly argued against them.
So… when asked for a cite, you provide a website with a group of people doing what you say Muslims don’t do? How is that supposed to prove your point?
Yo Paul, I may have my disagreements with Islam, but this isn’t what I mean and that isn’t what it represents. This though is a danger through immigration of what we could see happening alot more in the future if their population goes up here a step backwards for tolerance, yeah its all fine and dandy saying they are as tolerant as we are. Well, lets put it too the test.
I’ve changed some of my outlook within this thread. That means I am listening, how about reading it before accusing. What isn’t realted to fact in my posts? Another point I want to raise is why everyone seems so offended at my disdain at the prospect of a Muslim Europe, maybe they won’t advocate death, or even change the laws, it still doesn’t mean I want to see them as the majority faith/culture withing Europe. Merely saying to me ‘but Ryan they’ll tolerate you change their ways etc’ doesn’t make it anymore appealing. Call me whatever you want bigot, racist etc.
Seems so, may not actively engage in it, but certainly appease or even condone it. Who wouldn’t under their faith?
Of course, if anyone actually reads the thread rather than the headline, one will note that the story appears to be much more a matter of a corrupt judge than an indictment of Islam.
Your following post regarding the honor killing has counterpoints in so-called Christian nations, as well. They are on the decline, but they still occur.
Had it been the case that people are arguing to allow honor killings in Sweden, or arguing that the father should go free because it’s their culture, and if such arguings had any chance of becoming the new law of the land, then I’d start worrying. But no. It’s exactly the opposite.
The father was arrested and is facing a murder conviction.
Honor killings are universally condemned and people are becoming increasingly concerned about what we should do to stop them. Starting in Sweden.
Overly tolerant liberals (I am referring to the “double standards” in the quote) are starting to question the limits of their tolerance.
Note there is also a more subtle point. The murdered daughter had already rejected the strict mores of her ancestors’ culture, and had already adapted the much more liberal Swedish mores.
Oh and PaulFitzroy, what is there to address about the anti-Semitism of some immigrants? Same difference as the anti-Semitism of white neo-Nazis. And the anti-Semitism of anybody else. I condemn it. We have laws against it.
Regarding honour killings, please let’s display at least a few particles of common sense before we assign blame for this barbaric practice to Islam. Honor killings are a deadly combination of male chauvinism, misogyny, and corrupt civil systems in patriarchal societies. Thus you have hapless women being killed, often by family members, in Moslem countries (e.g. Yemen) as well as Christian countries (e.g. Brazil). In fact, honour killings occur in Western Asia, North Africa, South Asia, and South America, and certainly not only in the Middle East or derivative populations.
One of the worst rates of honour killings is to be found in Kurdish populations originally from the “Genocide Zone”, or Eastern Anatolia, which is also where Kurdish nationalism is strongest; the incidence of honour killings among Kurds not from the Zone (who thus have not experienced extermination, such as those in Iran) is significantly lower, though ethnically, culturally, and religiously the two groups of Kurds remain quite similar.
Honour killings have nothing whatsoever to do with Islam per se, any more than the concept of the blood feud does; the blood feud is roughly the equivalent of an honor killing, but with males as the victims. The practice of the blood feud has historically popped up in the Balkans, the Caucasus, Sicily, Scotland, and even the US, but is now all but eliminated (with the exception of a brief revival in Albania a few years ago, that I know of).
All this tells me that it is convenient for men in certain situations to take their frustrations out on weaker women; it does not tell me Islam is to blame.
In terms of lengthier arguments and proper cites, I and others provided plenty in the following thread, in which a number of people try (and ultimately fail) to argue that honour killings are a Moslem phenomenon:
As for the present discussion, it is difficult to know where to stand on Europe’s future. If well integrated, I see nothing wrong with the present influx of foreigners, the trick is making sure social integration is sufficiently good to offset the residual militant extremism inevitably dragged in by the bad apples. Branding an entire group of people for the faults of a few is certainly not advisable and I cannot imagine it yielding anything but severely counterproductive results for Europe.
The problem is that too many immigrants, particularly among the poorer arrivals, are badly integrated or not at all integrated, and you end up with problems such as Italy currently faces, of “ghettos” forming in the city centres and driving up violent crime, drug use, gang behaviour, etc. Spend more time worrying about the essential issue of integration, Ryan, it will be far more productive than fretting about foreigners of dfferent ethnicity or religion coming to your continent.
Ryan - it would be easier to follow this thread if you actually bothered to attribute the quotes you’re using, instead of mixing what one poster is saying with that of another poster.
You’re increasingly coming off as racist, the more you’re arguments are falling apart. Maybe racist is too strong a word, but xenophobe isn’t. You’re using the same style of debate as the National Democrats are over here and it doesn’t seem like you’re interested in serious debate, just an insubstatial rant. It won’t surprise me if you get pitted over this, but I really don’t have the energy.
I see that ETA and IRA have already been mentioned, as examples of religious/nationalistic terrorists who’ve ‘killed thousands’. One can argue that the fierce opposition by police and military in both N. Ireland and Basque country is state controlled (and therefore politically condoned) terrorism against a minority, much in the same vein as the Turkish goverment are trying to suppress PPK. Since it’s politically condoned, it’s a rule by a goverment who have the public support, i.e. you support the killing of catholics in your own country.
Now please, don’t even think about saying that they’re terrorists and deserve it, because that would invalidate your whole argument so far.
Oh, and then we have the Baader-Meinhof, Brigate Rosso and a few more. Modern terrorism is a European invention.
We’re not defending Muslims. We’re saying that the irrational fear that they “will take over”, is just that. Irrational. And then we’re showing examples of why this is so. In the process, we’re trying to tell you that Muslims are people too, something which clearly is lost on you and a few others.
Whoever brought up the ‘honor killing’ in Sweden, needs to do the homework better. It was done in a Kurdish family (that same group that gets surpressed by Muslims, donchaknow…) and widely condemned by the Kurdish community here.
This is the problem with the ignorant. They start off with a fixed world view, look for arguments that fit their emotionally (not factually) based stance, and ignore the rest.
Right, so is it “my” country too? I was born here, I’ve lived here all my life, but my parents are immigrants. Guess I should go back to where I came from eh?
Nope. Try again. Within Islam there are so many different nuances and sects that you wouldn’t even know where to begin to research them all.
You mean like those filthy Muslim Arabs that invaded Spain, and gave Spain and a lot of the Iberian Peninsula a rich weath of culture and history? Those same filthy Muslim Arabs who were way ahead of Copernicus et al when it came to astronomy, optics and mathematics?
You know, that phrase screams “bigot” at me. I doubt if your Muslim “friends” saw half of your posts here, they probably wouldn’t be your friends anymore.
bangs head against brick wall
How many times, as a liberal, westernised Muslim, do I have to say this. Extremeists is Islam are treated more or less the same way as Christian Fundamentalists are in Christianity – the majority think they’re nutjobs.
Whereas Muslims must give 8% :rolleyes:
I would like to say that I’m amazed that an 18 year old living in Manchester appears so bigoted, but I can’t. Ryan_Liam, please go away and learn about Islam first. Find Tamerlane’s reading list, and actually read some of the books he reccomends. Please. And try to read them without the “They’re all going to take over my country” attitude.
Likely never, but any rate a good long time if it ever does happen. The demographics has already been partially addressed - Muslims still remain a small percentage of Europe’s population and while the proportion will probably continue to grow in the forseeable future, it doesn’t seem likely that it will top 50% any time soon. Immigration rates into Europe have actually been in decline relative to the U.S. and the U.S. census bureau predicts net immigration into Europe of maybe 21 million people over the next 50 years ( probably an unreliable estimate like all long-term predictions, but it is a starting point ). Even if the European ( white, ostensibly “westernized” Europeans ) population drops to 250 million by 2050 ( rather low estimate ) and if current and future Muslim immigrants retain completely both their higher fertility AND their religion ( a very dubious if ), the number still shouldn’t top 20% in 50 years.
Net immigration into the EU is a few hundred thousand a year, NOT a few million and not all of those are Muslim. The annual immigration rate peaked above 1 million in the early 1990’s and has declined thereafter to about half that by 2002. The UK, where rates have risen the past few years, bucks the trend a bit but we’re still talking about a net of 150,000 in 2002, of which less than a third might be Muslim ( just from looking at the distribution patterns - ~20,000 were specifically from the Middle East in 2002 ). These numbers from a quite anti-immigrant UK group which is presumably a source you will trust ( their figures also roughly jibe with others I’ve seen ):
a) fertility rates drop as prosperity increases - this effects immigrant communities as well.
b) The assumption that Muslim immigrants overwhelmingly retain conservative religiosity in secular societies into multiple generations is unwarranted. To quote ( emphasis added ):
Not exactly unselfishly, the French political class then directed most policies towardsthese young beurs, which they saw as making radical Islam the rallying point for their political mobilization, testing severely the limits of the new tolerance in France (Hargreaves 1995, 125;Ireland 1996, 39). While it is correct that Islamic institutions made particular inroads in schools, factories, sports clubs, welfare offices, and mosques, it is by no means the case that the young beurs rejected the French political system or republican values (Van Zanten 1997, 351, 357) - the enforcement of the model still produces the desired manifestations. Only about one third consider themselves believing Muslims, the rest consider themselves “Muslim atheists,” thereby transforming their religious affiliation into the indication of an ethnic belonging (Hargreaves 1995, 121; Silverman 1992, 14-5), mythologizing the Arab world. Islam has become for these youngsters mainly a battle cry, a bargaining tool in their painful process of integration through protest (Basson 1996, 5; Schnapper 1991; Van Zanten 1997, 368).
c) The assumption that Islam or even indeed conservative Islam = radical Islamist jihadism and hatred of the “West” is also unwarranted.
The problem ( as the avove article indicates ) has been a failure of societal adaptation in some circumstances. As Abe noted, this needs to be addressed. However the situation is hardly apocalyptic. Indeed, I could make an argument for increased Muslim immigration to the West being the best thing for the world overall, as it will speed diffusion of modern, secular values in the Muslim world.
Well, on the bright side you are never likely to get the chance to fulfill your patriotic fantasy, insomuch as you should be long dead if even if your dire scenario was to ever come about.
On the unfortunate side, I’m afraid your sentiments puts you in the exact same xenophobic camp as Osama bin Laden. Not company I’d be proud of, if I were you.
Well that was a very good post Tamerlane, except for the last paragraph, which was completely idiotic. I say Godwin or perhaps you’d like to clarify how you figure taking up arms (for unspecified purposes and presumable in own country) makes for the exact same as one willing to kill hundred of thousands in anther country for religious purposes? This takes a fair bit of speculation on what he was planning to do with those arms. Likewise in my book it takes a bit more to be labelled xenophobic than merely wanting to oppose cultural aspects one consider distasteful. I suppose you wouldn’t particular like to idea of your neighbourhood being flooded by racist clansmen. Are you too xenophobic?
I’ve heard it argued by those who seem to know what they’re talking about that Bin L’s motivation for “taking up arms” was his belief that the West, and particularly America, is actively attacking the Muslim world and trying to impose western values there. That sounds a pretty good parallel to Ryan_Liam’s paranoia about Muslim values being imposed in the West
It’s argued that Christian Europe is vanishing, and extraplotating from there has dire circumstances. Yet somehow Islam isn’t also party to these changes. It’s special.
It’s Christianity or Islam. There is no other choice and only one of them is right.
Christian Britain has some moral first claim since time began. I say perhaps it’s about time the Druid ran the lot of these Johnny-come-latelies out of town.
-Ryan_Liam wants to protect ‘his’ culture from this invasion. Unfortunately ‘his’ culture has already assimilated part of Islamic culture. ‘His’ culture has being doing this for centuries, it’s what ‘his’ culture is. You don’t like your culture changing? Tough.
Apparently it’s a worry that Europe will become some uniform, great evil empire of Islam. All countries’ national identities will merge. I find this remarkable, as it’s something that the last invading Middle-Eastern religion never managed in centuries of trying. And boy, did they fight enough battles over the years trying.
The OP is tripe, and the quoted article is an exercise in fear-mongering and pandering to prejudices, calculated to encourage the USA’s current ‘last Christian nation standing’ bunker-mentality.
Because his views are so paranoid and prejudiced that we (or at least I) don’t answer his comments as seriously as we would do for a post more grounded in reality. No, they don’t deserve to be taken seriously.
Like there’s nobody posting about antisemitism in Europe, on this board. Besides, I was precisely thinking about you when I mentionned that some people on this board would foam at the mouth if only 1/10th of the prejudiced comments ** Ryan_Liam ** is making about muslims were made about Jews. I would tell you to try to picture yourself reading the same stuff about Jews, in order to understand why we think he’s a bigot, but from your own comments, I doubt you’d be able to recognize a prejudice if it bit you in the ass, as long as it’s a prejudice against muslim people.