NationStates Jolt Archive

No, considering how Canada and the US became the supreme uber duo of ass kickage thanks to immigrants.

Silly European.

No, thx. I really really dont want Norway/Europe to be like USA. Canada is much better but no thx too...

Immigarants are people too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:upyours:

I said this before, not the first time I've said something like this. And why not? In order to help poor people and be sincere, you gotta let them in your home?
Just because I'm anti-immigrant doesnt mean I dont feel sorry for all those starving people in africa...


No, it's because you judge on the basis of ethnic differences that it is hard to believe you feel sorry for those "uncilivised" african/arab/mexican people.
But I'll try to believe you

Immigration is un-American.

Yeah, look at what it did to our honest-to-god REAL Americans that were already here. Some whiny-ass religious psychos and business men immigrated, killed almost every American and put the majority of the rest into special camps, and ate all their buffalo.

'Who else is anti-immigrant?'

Idiots, that's who.

Exactly.

'Who else is anti-immigrant?'
Wasn't there a gameshow called "Who wants to be an immigrant?"

...

Oh, that was one of the Issues, wasn't it? It's so easy to mix NS with real life policies... :p

Im not against legal immigration as long as we have it kept in limits. So many each year. AND YOU HAVE TO LEARN ENGLISH.. AND SOME OF OUR CUSTOMS... too many say no speak english (b een here 10 years...no speak english accomodate me kiss my stupid ass) no have drivers l icense...feel sorry for me... ugh!! Come in the US legally and work hard and fit in Im ok with you...but come in sign up for wic, food stamps..and Im like take your ass out.. If your an illegal alien you deserve to be deported..I hope there is no amnesty... RESPECT our laws. My town is already getting over burdened with them..everything has to be in Spanish....why??? Let them learn english..the churches will teach it. I see the families driving 40000 dollar trucks..and line up with wic vouchers. grrr.. NOt naturalized you shouldnt get free benefits!! YOu want the goodies ...work for them become a citizen. wait your turn to get here legally. dont take the lazy scummy way out.

After ethnicity, geography does matter because you are affected by the culture of where you are born and raised...

Come on. This is bullshit and you know it.

People who grow up in ethnic 'enclaves' in other geographies, often get a 'purer' version of the 'ethnic' upbringing than those who are raised in the 'ethnic homeland'... because the 'enclave' is trying to hold on to an 'ideal' of a culture that may no longer even exist, 'back home'.

For instance, if you viewed immigration as a problem to be solved, why not attack the source to find the solution.


But, why SHOULD we accept that immigration is 'a problem to be solved'?

There are NO cultures that are free of immigration, current or historical... so why assume immigration is a 'problem'?

Why not just accept it as a fact... something that DOES happen to cultures, will-they-or-nil-they...?

You'll be a lot more psychologically contented, if you accept the inevitable.

Also - you look at big 'racial' opposition movements, and they always seem to centre around some kind of 'cult-of-personality', or some kind of 'political' or 'religious' agenda. Why do you even WANT to be someone else's puppet?

Why not just accept it as a fact... something that DOES happen to cultures

Things only happen when people let them happen.

You'll be a lot more psychologically contented, if you accept the inevitable.

Yeah, the French should have just accepted it as the Germans were marching through Paris.

Hypothetically, what if your against immigration because you wish your soceity to be that of a homogenous one?

Then would my solution apply?

It's a false paradigm.

First, you get all the 'foreigners' out.

Then you have to get rid of 'those' pesky religions... or 'that' political agenda, then people with glasses, maybe.... then those who are the wrong KIND of blonde and blue-eyed...

It's self-defeating. If you embrace the concept of a nationally homogenous population, you can ALWAYS find characteristics on which to divide.

Im not against legal immigration as long as we have it kept in limits. So many each year. AND YOU HAVE TO LEARN ENGLISH.. AND SOME OF OUR CUSTOMS... too many say no speak english (b een here 10 years...no speak english accomodate me kiss my stupid ass) no have drivers l icense...feel sorry for me... ugh!! Come in the US legally and work hard and fit in Im ok with you...but come in sign up for wic, food stamps..and Im like take your ass out.. If your an illegal alien you deserve to be deported..I hope there is no amnesty... RESPECT our laws. My town is already getting over burdened with them..everything has to be in Spanish....why??? Let them learn english..the churches will teach it. I see the families driving 40000 dollar trucks..and line up with wic vouchers. grrr.. NOt naturalized you shouldnt get free benefits!! YOu want the goodies ...work for them become a citizen. wait your turn to get here legally. dont take the lazy scummy way out.

Is this English?

Things only happen when people let them happen.


Like Knut den mektige?


Yeah, the French should have just accepted it as the Germans were marching through Paris.

Is there a connection here? I think you might have missed the 'psychological' part...

Yeah, the French should have just accepted it as the Germans were marching through Paris.

Really, does it strike you as a good idea to compare the peaceful cohabitation of diverse cultures to nazism? Or at least, does it strike you as an unironic idea? Because, really, if so...

Really, does it strike you as a good idea to compare the peaceful cohabitation of diverse cultures to nazism? Or at least, does it strike you as an unironic idea? Because, really, if so...

Given the remaining body of posts... yes, that poster probably DOES think it a perfectly acceptable comparison...

Is there a connection here? I think you might have missed the 'psychological' part...

People shouldn't have to take it when they're getting their asses kicked, be it physically or culturally. Why should we have to prepare for immigrants to overrun us? We know that they're just gonna bring their wars, poverty and warped politics over here with them.

Really, does it strike you as a good idea to compare the peaceful cohabitation of diverse cultures to nazism? Or at least, does it strike you as an unironic idea? Because, really, if so...

Peaceful my ass. Gang rapes and gang warfare and shit. Stuff we didn't have before "the others" arrived.

Peaceful my ass. Gang rapes and gang warfare and shit. Stuff we didn't have before "the others" arrived.

I see you live in Australia. If you're an Aborigine (is that an acceptable term? I've always heard it used by my fellow Americans, but I don't know if it's the same over there), you may actually have a point.

I see you live in Australia. If you're an Aborigine (is that an acceptable term? I've always heard it used by my fellow Americans, but I don't know if it's the same over there), you may actually have a point.

If I was an Aborigine, I'd either be dancing around a fire in my underwear or I'd be 99 onehundredths white, while claming to be Aborigine to take other people's land and get free cash from the government.

If I was an Aborigine, I'd either be dancing around a fire in my underwear or I'd be 99 onehundredths white, while claming to be Aborigine to take other people's land and get free cash from the government.

I'm going to take that as a "no" then.

Though judging by your posts, maybe you ought to consider the fire-dancing. There's no pesky internet there to annoy you, in the flames.

Really, I'm saying this for your benefit.

Really.

People shouldn't have to take it when they're getting their asses kicked, be it physically or culturally. Why should we have to prepare for immigrants to overrun us? We know that they're just gonna bring their wars, poverty and warped politics over here with them.

You are intent on extending the strawman argument? I guess you have to, you can't touch the actual subject of debate.

There is a difference between acts of war and everyday life... in most places. You seem to claim that peaceful immigration is an act of war. There is nothing I can do to change your mind... but it is clealy ridiculous... unless your immigrants are arriving in columns of tanks, I suppose.

Why should you prepare for "immigrants to overrun us"? You don't think much of your culture, if you believe it is THAT easily threatened. One wonders why you think a culture that falls to pieces if challenged is even WORTH preserving.

Wars, poverty and warped politics? Surely - if you look at the NATIVE peoples of your nation - YOURS are the wars and warped politics? Surely, if you look at the NATIVE peoples of your nation... 'poverty' was a non-entity until capitalism-obsessed Westerners turned up and ruined everything.

I have Australian friends... and they inform me that your kind of 'nationalist' sentiment is a 'problem'... but not a BIG one, because it is unpopular.

So - one might say, you (especially BEING an immigrant, yourself) are in a weak position to be talking about 'warped politics'.

I have Australian friends... and they inform me that your kind of 'nationalist' sentiment is a 'problem'... but not a BIG one, because it is unpopular.

Oh really? Lots of people agree with me down here.

Listen, the world was perfect 10 years ago. We don't need any changes. All these muslim and African immigrants should just fuck off. We don't need them.

I am, somewhat unsurprisingly, vehemently anti-immigrant. My nationalism compels me to be so.

Peaceful my ass. Gang rapes and gang warfare and shit. Stuff we didn't have before "the others" arrived.

You mean - before the Westerners arrived?

Oh really? Lots of people agree with me down here.

Listen, the world was perfect 10 years ago. We don't need any changes. All these muslim and African immigrants should just fuck off. We don't need them.

The world was never perfect, because the world doesn't deal in absolutes. That's part of what makes it the world. It's a big, complicated, paradoxical mish-mash of possibility.

You were 10 years younger 10 years ago. You've also had 10 years to forget all the badness, and to let your brain "pan for gold" so to speak, letting the detritus and unpleasant memories sift to the bottom while the gold stays on top.

Methinks that's a much, much bigger factor than any immigrants.

Oh really? Lots of people agree with me down here.

Listen, the world was perfect 10 years ago. We don't need any changes. All these muslim and African immigrants should just fuck off. We don't need them.

Also, you don't immigrate from Muslimania or any place like that. It's a religion, not a place.

You mean - before the Westerners arrived?

No, after the others arrived.

Also, you don't immigrate from Muslimania or any place like that. It's a religion, not a place.

And we don't want it here, pushing their crap on us.

Oh really? Lots of people agree with me down here.

Listen, the world was perfect 10 years ago. We don't need any changes. All these muslim and African immigrants should just fuck off. We don't need them.

Irrespective of whether the latter comment is ironic or not, I like it. Ultimately, Britain has never, nor can ever be, perfect, however I do consider most immigrants of :

-indian
-African
-East-European
-Carribbean
- Oriental

provenance to be utterly unnecessary and unwanted.

Oh really? Lots of people agree with me down here.

Listen, the world was perfect 10 years ago. We don't need any changes. All these muslim and African immigrants should just fuck off. We don't need them.

The world was perfect ten years ago?

How old were you?

You realise, the Aborigines have been saying they 'don't need' Westerners for quite some time, now?

In fact, since us Westerners have largely destroyed their way of life - they'd probably be quite happy for ALL these 'western immigrants' to go 'back home'.

As an RECENT immigrant yourself, surely you should be among the first to leave?

Or are you a 'special exception'?

Or.... do you just lack the courage of your convictions?

And we don't want it here, pushing their crap on us.

Yeah, what with their not eating pork and their Sabbath on Fridays and... uh... Veils?

Really, what's wrong with Islam? Do you have a photographic memory and fear that if you see Allah you'd be sinning? If so, well, that's quite an odd way to look at things.

No, after the others arrived.

So - if I present evidence that shows rapes and gang-warfare existed in Australia MORE THAN 10 years ago, it makes your argument a lie, yes?

Oh really? Lots of people agree with me down here.

Listen, the world was perfect 10 years ago. We don't need any changes. All these muslim and African immigrants should just fuck off. We don't need them.


There we have it "we don't need any changes". Which means: we are well protected in our wealthy countries so let all those jealous people die in starvation. Conservative ideas like that only serve the rich people, because if you weren't rich you would be begging for some change. No, your selfish and bourgeois. Conservative ideas will never make the world a better place, because it wants to keep the unequality, the suffering, the slavery. You're very honest Kievan-Prussia, but you're also a reactionary, in my opinion immoral, piece of western arrogance.

Irrespective of whether the latter comment is ironic or not, I like it. Ultimately, Britain has never, nor can ever be, perfect, however I do consider most immigrants of :

-indian
-African
-East-European
-Carribbean
- Oriental

provenance to be utterly unnecessary and unwanted.

I really can't tell if you're being serious or not because I'm new here and your posts seem a bit over the top. Seriously bro, you forriz? ;)

Irrespective of whether the latter comment is ironic or not, I like it. Ultimately, Britain has never, nor can ever be, perfect, however I do consider most immigrants of :

-indian
-African
-East-European
-Carribbean
- Oriental

provenance to be utterly unnecessary and unwanted.

Which, I'm sure, makes you feel WILDLY happy.

I'd be willing to bet you don't consider yourself to belong to any of those groups...

There we have it "we don't need any changes". Which means: we are well protected in our wealthy countries so let all those jealous people die in starvation. Conservative ideas like that only serve the rich people, because if you weren't rich you would be begging for some change. No, your selfish and bourgeois. Conservative ideas will never make the world a better place, because it wants to keep the unequality, the suffering, the slavery. You're very honest Kievan-Prussia, but you're also a reactionary, in my opinion immoral, piece of western arrogance.

That is an utter fallacy. Ultimately, western dominance and hegemony requires no justification, it is the product of a succession of unrivalled periods of exertion, progression and development, and we are not compelled to dissipate our welath amongst those who have no claim to it. Immigration into an established state will always fail abysmally due to the inherent conservatism of the "silent majority", and the insular sentiment of the general populace, and their sense of greivance at funding an unreciprocated distribution of their wealth to aliens.

Which, I'm sure, makes you feel WILDLY happy.

I'd be willing to bet you don't consider yourself to belong to any of those groups...

Of course not. Bloody hell no man! I'm an established white caucasian.

As someone who is part Native American (Smokey Mountain Cherokee) and Mexican Indian (Turascan Indian), I can say that this place was much much better, cleaner and safer about 600 years ago before the invasion by those gods-denying, earth-raping, violence-bringing christians came.

Sounds stupid? Not quite as stupid as some of the above crap. People are going to move whether you like it or not. Don't like immigrants coming to your clean neighbourhood? How about ending the imperialistic connections your country no doubtmaintains with their "native lands" which create the economic conditions (to say nothing of the exported wars) which make their countries unlivable? You want a real solution? You're going to have to give up a lot in the way of creature comforts, pal.

Western countries pretty much invaded, divied up and have maintained some kind of control in the Middle East for over a century now. We've also managed to exploit the labour and resources of the South American countries in much the same way since we got here. We helped to mke the hell from which they seek escape.

Blessed Chris :sniper: is a racist and an ignorant redneck.

I support immigration.

Blessed Chris :sniper: is a racist and an ignorant redneck.

I support immigration.

Come on. Do enlighten me as to why.

Beyond immigration and nationalism I am a nice, cuddly person.

Come on. Do enlighten me as to why.

Beyond immigration and nationalism I am a nice, cuddly person.

Because you're a white caucasian.

[QUOTE=The blessed Chris]That is an utter fallacy. Ultimately, western dominance and hegemony requires no justification, it is the product of a succession of unrivalled periods of exertion, progression and development, and we are not compelled to dissipate our welath amongst those who have no claim to it. [QUOTE]

uh... ever heard of the words colonialism, exploitation, the World Bank, slavery, bloody wars etc etc ?
'cause that's how we gained are wealth really. That's how we still do it today. It may sound pathetic, but the world belongs to every one.

Because you're a white caucasian.

So by extension you assert that all white caucasians are "racist and ignorant redknecks". Oh well done.

So by extension you assert that all white caucasians are "racist and ignorant redknecks". Oh well done.

I think it was a joke, chrissie

So by extension you assert that all white caucasians are "racist and ignorant redknecks". Oh well done.

It's always funny when you mock people and they don't realize it.

I think it was a joke, chrissie

Oh god :eek:

That sounds wrong on NS general.:p

I am anti immigrant infact my nations motto is ''No immigrants allowed''

Come on. Do enlighten me as to why.

Beyond immigration and nationalism I am a nice, cuddly person.

You realize I could say "other than the unadultered joy I take from exfoliating with the puréed intestines of damned pagan babies I'm a nice, cuddly person", right? Only having one or two imperfections doesn't make you a good person if they're major enough.

You realize I could say "other than the unadultered joy I take from exfoliating with the puréed intestines of damned pagan babies I'm a nice, cuddly person", right? Only having one or two imperfections doesn't make you a good person if they're major enough.


I think it was a joke, groovy.

I think it was a joke, groovy.

Stop misleading yourself, it wasn't a joke.

Edit: I guess it was a joke - a cruel one aimed at making fun of his ignorance. I don't think he got the joke, but that's not saying much for his intelligence, nor yours.

Stop misleading yourself, it wasn't a joke.

mm... I must admit it wasn't funny.

mm... I must admit it wasn't funny.

But "Groovy" is one of the best nicknames ever, if that helps.

I think it's hilarious when Americans and Brits complain about immigration and get all xenophobic.

Don't you people realise that your nations are as mongrel as they come?! America is made up of European immigrants and Britain is made up of invaders and immigrants also. What's one of the most English tradtions? Take the fine tailoring of Saville Row, founded by Dutch immigrants. How about the Sunday roast dinner? Roman!

The 7-11 corner shop? Asian immigrants. Ska? West Indian immigrants. Each new influx of immigration brings with it new traditions, opens up our culture, enriches it. We need to embrace immigration, control it, yes, forbid it? Certainly not.

And in order to appeal to the lowest of the low out there: If we stop immigration who will clean your office and drive your taxi home after a big night out? Immigrants - especially the illegal ones - do the jobs rich white folk don't want to lower themselves to doing.

That is an utter fallacy. Ultimately, western dominance and hegemony requires no justification, it is the product of a succession of unrivalled periods of exertion, progression and development, and we are not compelled to dissipate our welath amongst those who have no claim to it. Immigration into an established state will always fail abysmally due to the inherent conservatism of the "silent majority", and the insular sentiment of the general populace, and their sense of greivance at funding an unreciprocated distribution of their wealth to aliens.

Which is an odd thing to say, since immigration is not new, and was the basis (often violently) of most of the 'great' cultures of today.

England without immigration would have been... what?

Of course not. Bloody hell no man! I'm an established white caucasian.

What colour hair, one wonders?

And in order to appeal to the lowest of the low out there: If we stop immigration who will clean your office and drive your taxi home after a big night out? Immigrants - especially the illegal ones - do the jobs rich white folk don't want to lower themselves to doing.

This last part isn't accurate. These xenophobes are low class bums who don't want competition from immigrants. They can't afford taxis or immigrant cleaners. Oh the irony.

'Who else is anti-immigrant?'

Idiots, that's who.


How very smart of you! I am on both sides of the argument. Immigrants help build our houses and places of work but they also DO NOT pay taxes and are crowding public schools which should belong to rightful citizens of the US. Immigrants take away jobs from citizens but are very hard working people who just want a better life. The student walkouts are bogus because half the students walking out have no knowledge of what they are protesting and just want to get out of class. And waving the mexican flag around? Your in AMERICA why would you wave the flag of the country YOU FLED FROM to have a better life? Isnt that kinda of oxymoron-ish? I am still in a huff on which side I am on.

it's "oxymoronic", and no, it's not. Maybe a little hypocrytical and unintelligent, but not oxymoronic in the proper sense of the word.

Oxy means sharp, moron means dull, in Latin I think. It's used to describe the contradictory use of words.

A proper example of an oxymoron would be "a heavy feather".

How very smart of you! I am on both sides of the argument. Immigrants help build our houses and places of work but they also DO NOT pay taxes and are crowding public schools which should belong to rightful citizens of the US. Immigrants take away jobs from citizens but are very hard working people who just want a better life. The student walkouts are bogus because half the students walking out have no knowledge of what they are protesting and just want to get out of class. And waving the mexican flag around? Your in AMERICA why would you wave the flag of the country YOU FLED FROM to have a better life? Isnt that kinda of oxymoron-ish? I am still in a huff on which side I am on.

FYI, these statements refer to illegal immigrants, not just immigrants in general.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there also a clause in the bill in question that states that in order to apply for a student visa you have to wave your right to due process, meaning that you can be permenantly deported and branded a felon at any time without having to go through a proper trial. Also, I recall it being worded vaguely enough that if an illegal immigrant showed up bleeding to death on your doorstep, calling 911 could likewise get you deported and felonized.

And once again, correct me if I'm wrong. That was just my interpretation from reading it.

How very smart of you! I am on both sides of the argument. Immigrants help build our houses and places of work but they also DO NOT pay taxes and are crowding public schools which should belong to rightful citizens of the US. Immigrants take away jobs from citizens but are very hard working people who just want a better life. The student walkouts are bogus because half the students walking out have no knowledge of what they are protesting and just want to get out of class. And waving the mexican flag around? Your in AMERICA why would you wave the flag of the country YOU FLED FROM to have a better life? Isnt that kinda of oxymoron-ish? I am still in a huff on which side I am on.

You are confusing 'immigrant' with 'ILLEGAL immigrant'.

By the way... if YOU were in another country, would you stop having sympathies for YOUR 'mother-country'?

Many immigrants (and NON-immigrants, too) see the current wave of immigrant-phobia as an attempt to divert attention away from IMPORTANT issues by appealling to 'lowest-common-denominator' politics.

And many see it is an attack on the other Americas... since we seem happy to put 'our people' anywhere on the globe... with guns if necessary... yet, we have constructed an 'inaccessible' state for ourselves.

if an illegal immigrant showed up bleeding to death on your doorstep, calling 911 could get you deported and felonized.

Who the hell wrote these laws?

Aren't you supposed to help blind Bartimaeus begging on the road to Jericho? So much for saying "God bless America". That's using the lord's name in vain, especially when you don't believe in God's messages.

And I'm not even Christian - shame on the lawmakers of this country.

Who the hell wrote these laws?

White people. :(

Bartimaeus wasn't white. It all makes sense now.

besides me...just curious
Me!

I hate illegal immigration. Legal immigration doesn't bother me.
Anyone who says illegal immigrants don't steal our jobs is just not thinking clearly.
I've seen some silly example about a judge and a lawyer. What idiot would hire an illegal immigrant (no matter how qualified) to do a high profile job like that? That analogy just doesn't work. You need to be looking at construction, house cleaning, factories, chicken houses and other farm work. They must fill those jobs and if the illegals weren't here doing them they would have to pay more untill some legal citizen were willing to do it. I certainly wouldn't be willing to do my job for less than I make but if they could get away with paying someone else 3 dollars an hour to do it I guarantee they would.
You can try to blame the corporations, farmers and whomever as much as you like but it is our governments job to protect our borders and enforce our laws.

I want the wall/fence. I think our military should be patrolling our border. I think they should shoot people to keep them out if nececarry. That may sound extreme but every person who is trying to get in ilegally should be treated as a potential threat to our nations safety. We don't know who they are or what their plans may be when they get here. Assumptions that they are simply looking for a better life are not going to keep us safe.

Depends on if they are 100,000 swedish christians (which would be hard to find), or 100,000 kenyan christians...

No. They would be 100,000 Christian American families...exactly like the family I was proposing I had that would move to Norway, except Christian instead of Jewish.

No, thx. I really really dont want Norway/Europe to be like USA. Canada is much better but no thx too...

In what ways is Canada much better than America?

I'm very surprised. Most jewish people are very pro-immigration...

Oh come on...dont listen to neo-Nazi lies about how..."the Jews are behind third world immigration to drown White European society." You say that most Jews are very pro immigration, but I'm willing to bet that you dont know most Jews, in fact you probably dont know many Jews at all. ;)

Yeah, I am. The big secret is that I got some finnish blood, so ethnically I'm not 100% ethnic norwegian/scandinavian.

Type something in Norwegian, its a very cool language.

I want the wall/fence. I think our military should be patrolling our border. I think they should shoot people to keep them out if nececarry. That may sound extreme but every person who is trying to get in ilegally should be treated as a potential threat to our nations safety. We don't know who they are or what their plans may be when they get here. Assumptions that they are simply looking for a better life are not going to keep us safe.

Yes, because there's so much damage a single poverty-stricken wayward Mexican can do.

For Christ's sake, don't shoot them. At the very least detain them and THEN find out if they're secretly made of plutonium or some ridiculous notion like that.

Oh really? Lots of people agree with me down here.

Listen, the world was perfect 10 years ago. We don't need any changes. All these muslim and African immigrants should just fuck off. We don't need them.

Ha. Good thing that white people have never been responsible for the problems in the world. Stupid dark skinned people. I know I've never been able to find any evidence of any of the problems of the world involving white people either individually or en masse. The majority of the mass murderers and serial killers, all black, of course. On must go back millenia to find an aggressive white person. *nods*

Can a person be pro-immigration but anti-"flood the border?"

In what ways is Canada much better than America?

National Health Care, lower rates of violence, drug use and obesity, less likely to flip out and kill a few ten K of Iraqis, fewer wiretaps, legalization of same-sex marriage, cheaper secondary education, and a nice, cool northern climate.

Edit: Not to mention Kids in the Hall, Dan Akroyd, Elisha Cuthbert's breasts, William Shatner, and the ever-charming (and twitchy) Michael J. Fox.

I think you should take William Shatner out that list

I think you should take William Shatner out that list

It's the internet, statistically, folks are bound to like the Shat.

I am not an immigrant. I was born here. My mom was. My dad was. My grandma was. My other grandma was. My grandda was. My other grannda was irish. There! in yo face!:mad:

They decended from the same people? All ukranians are descendant of scy.'s now?

Can't say all. Can you say all Norwegians are descended from Vikings? No. I don't speak in absolutes. Only you do. The point is that if one were to look at the ethnic origin of the Ukraine it would go back to the Sarmatians which were Iranian.

Please back your claims with quotes. I never said differences between ethnicities equal the difference between humans and apes...

No, but you compared them as if they were equal. If you admit the difference in degree is HUGE then your point that you made back then is shot to hell. And of course the difference is huge. Unless the degree is equal your point made no sense.

Let's see if I can find the quote.

Gene differences amongst humans are so tiny that a gene that can be considered to be "unique" to, say, Chinese, will also catch out just about everyone else. There will also be some genes that a Briton and a Chinese share that the Chinese person does not share with another Chinese. The differences in Genes are really that tiny.
gene differences between humans and monkey are soo tiny too. But we are very different.

I don't believe that you are not intelligent enough to notice that these things you are comparing AS IF THEY ARE EQUAL. I know you know they are not equal but for several pages you treat them as if they are. Shall I quote more?

I believe you know there is a difference in the degree of these things and that you were being intentionally deceptive. Are you arguing that you don't know that there is a significant difference in the degree of difference between us and something that has a different number of chromosomes and between the various races?

Hmm...I would also like to know if he is really Norwegian.

Nordland, are you really Norwegian?

No, I don't believe he is. Read his posts. It's not hard to figure out.

He has all the marks of the classic troll. Exaggerated position. Inability to be consistent because he keeps forgetting what he 'believes'. Claiming the things you implied are not things you actually said. Trying to ignore the context of statements. Unwillingness to back up any of the claims about himself personally.

Hell, when Fass started talking to him, he had to ask him to speak English. Then he questions Fass was actually Swedish. He may not be a troll. I could be wrong. But if it walks like a duck...

:headbang: hahaha ..another useless thread in make believe open forum exchange of ideas between teenagers and those older but still stuck in an intellectual timewarp. Occasionally someone comes along with some wise words, only to be usurped by a prepubescent mind capable only of grossly generalising poster slogans. :rolleyes:

Lets (the wiser ones) leave this thread for the mindless to exchange their ignorance to and fro.

Anti- immigration hahaha...good one. If we had always thought like that, we'd still be in caves.

*sigh*

National Health Care, lower rates of violence, drug use and obesity, less likely to flip out and kill a few ten K of Iraqis, fewer wiretaps, legalization of same-sex marriage, cheaper secondary education, and a nice, cool northern climate.

National Health Care = Higher Taxes
Lower rates of violence = Canada has less people and less minorities...minorities are, statisticly the ones who commit more of the crimes
Drug use and obesity = I dont know about drug use but isnt Mary J decriminalized up there? For obesity, well...that is a problem America faces and I will be the first to admit it.
lees liely to kill Iraqis = ....yeah...thats the reason we're there...just to off some Iraqis...:rolleyes:
Fewer wiretaps = We only wiretap terrorists...I have no problem with that
same sex marriages = Is that a good thing?
Cheaper secondary education = higher taxes
Northern Climate = I would live the South Florida climate over a Canadian climate ANY day.


Edit: Not to mention Kids in the Hall, Dan Akroyd, Elisha Cuthbert's breasts, William Shatner, and the ever-charming (and twitchy) Michael J. Fox.

Cant argue with that...:D

Lower rates of violence = Canada has less people and less minorities...minorities are, statisticly the ones who commit more of the crimes

Did you really mean to imply the existence of minorities causes crime?

Remember correlation is not causation. And the vast majority of crimes are committed by the majority population.

Fewer wiretaps = We only wiretap terrorists...I have no problem with that

LOL. Really? And how do you know that we only wiretap terrorists? What about the many examples of non-terrorists that have been subject to wiretaps.

same sex marriages = Is that a good thing?

Only if you believe in fundamental rights and/or equal protection under law.

In what ways is Canada much better than America?
Universal healthcare, more rights (gay marriage, unrestricted freedom of choice) lower crime rate, hockey and lacrosse as national sports instead of baseball, canadian football is better than american football, our government's not tryint to take over the world, we don't have a huge defecit et c.

No, I don't believe he is. Read his posts. It's not hard to figure out.

He has all the marks of the classic troll. Exaggerated position. Inability to be consistent because he keeps forgetting what he 'believes'. Claiming the things you implied are not things you actually said. Trying to ignore the context of statements. Unwillingness to back up any of the claims about himself personally.

Hell, when Fass started talking to him, he had to ask him to speak English. Then he questions Fass was actually Swedish. He may not be a troll. I could be wrong. But if it walks like a duck...

I dunno...maybe he doest know Swedish....I dont know how close Norwegian and Swedish are...in fact, I have no idea.

But anyway, he claims to be Norwegian....theres no reason to beleive that hed be lying..unless hes some 11 year old fag lying to be "cool" over the internet....:rolleyes:

National Health Care = Higher Taxes
Our government spends less per capita on healthcare than yours does and everyone here is covered.

Lower rates of violence = Canada has less people and less minorities...minorities are, statisticly the ones who commit more of the crimes
We have less crime per capita. Also, there are a lot of ethnic minorities in Canada.

Drug use and obesity = I dont know about drug use but isnt Mary J decriminalized up there?
No, thanks to pressure from the american government, pot is still illegal here.

Fewer wiretaps = We only wiretap terrorists...I have no problem with that
lol. Right, you keep telling yourself that.

same sex marriages = Is that a good thing?
Yes.

Cheaper secondary education = higher taxes
And a more educated population, which is a bit more important than lower taxes in the long run.

Did you really mean to imply the existence of minorities causes crime?

No, but judging by American statistics minorities cause a way higher ammount of crime in relation to their population.

Remember correlation is not causation. And the vast majority of crimes are committed by the majority population.

I'm not sure about that, some of the statstics on murder and jail time dealing with blacks are pretty impressive. Impressive of course in a bad way.

LOL. Really? And how do you know that we only wiretap terrorists? What about the many examples of non-terrorists that have been subject to wiretaps.

Because I have no reason to beleive that the government could care about listening to me having phone sex with a girl named Jenna, when they could be trying to locate the terrorist connections within my country.

Only if you believe in fundamental rights and/or equal protection under law.

Or if your simply traditional. Or if your simply religious. Or if you simply dont think its natural. Theres 100 reason for and against.

No, but judging by American statistics minorities cause a way higher ammount of crime in relation to their population.
I'm not sure about that, some of the statstics on murder and jail time dealing with blacks are pretty impressive. Impressive of course in a bad way.
Oh, it's those damn blackies again, nevermind the system that's biased against them that has so many of them in jail. And really, there isn't a single black person in Canada either, is there. :rolleyes:

Because I have no reason to beleive that the government could care about listening to me having phone sex with a girl named Jenna, when they could be trying to locate the terrorist connections within my country.
They're not necessarily tapping your phone, just the phones of people they don't like...

Or if your simply traditional. Or if your simply religious. Or if you simply dont think its natural.
And of course these are all valid reasons to deny rights to a specific group of people. :rolleyes: Prejudice is great, isn't it? Especially when it targets groups of people that aren't you.

Our government spends less per capita on healthcare than yours does and everyone here is covered.

I dont think our government should spend anything on healthcare. I dont think its the governments job.

We have less crime per capita. Also, there are a lot of ethnic minorities in Canada.

You have less minorites than us.

No, thanks to pressure from the american government, pot is still illegal here.

Oh it has to be our fault....couldnt be your Conservative party..:rolleyes:

lol. Right, you keep telling yourself that.

You really think the government wants to hear average people like me having phone sex?

Yes Thats your opinion...


And a more educated population, which is a bit more important than lower taxes in the long run.

We still have enough educated peope to go around, and until we dont, I wont worry about it. I dont want to have to pay for some other guys education.

You have less minorites than us.
What's with you blaming the minorities for everything? White people can commit crimes too.

Oh it has to be our fault....couldnt be your Conservative party..:rolleyes:
Actually, the liberals were all for decriminalization and then Bush and company threatened to tighten the border, slowing down business between our two countries so they relented.

You really think the government wants to hear average people like me having phone sex?

Thats your opinion...
If you've done something that they don't like and you're married, having phone sex with someone who isn't your wife they might be interested in that.

We still have enough educated peope to go around, and until we dont, I wont worry about it. I dont want to have to pay for some other guys education.
You haven't been paying much attention to the trends in academia, have you? There are some major concerns about the future of america with regards to the number of well educated people available to fill certain roles when the baby boomers retire. It is also in a country's best interests to make sure that there are enough highly educated people in it.

National Health Care = Higher Taxes

And as has already been stated, this is false. Further, individual Canadians pay less on health care than individual Americans, so regardless of whether you think the Government should be involved or not, it actually manages to save just about everyone more money in the long run, and everyone benefits to boot. Why on earth is this a bad thing?


Lower rates of violence = Canada has less people and less minorities...minorities are, statisticly the ones who commit more of the crimes

Rates work percentage-wise, boyo. The size of the population doesn't matter. And crimes aren't caused by minorities, they're more likely to be caused by poverty. Unfortunately, due to folk such as yourself (by which I mean white supremecists, neo-nazis, generic douchebags (which really, aren't as cleanly as the brand-name douchebag), etcetera...) minorities tend to be poorer than White folk.

Drug use and obesity = I dont know about drug use but isnt Mary J decriminalized up there? For obesity, well...that is a problem America faces and I will be the first to admit it.
It's not decriminalized, but alcohol (which is a much more damaging drug) is. The situation is the same down here. Funny thing about the obesity, too, since as has already been mentioned, Canada has a cooler climate which you would think would result in a less active, calorie-burning prone people. I guess the average Canadian is just that much better than we are.

lees liely to kill Iraqis = ....yeah...thats the reason we're there...just to off some Iraqis...:rolleyes:
Well, to say we're there for Oil is clichéd. I suppose you could argue that the whole thing is actually a wide-scale Satanic sacrifice, and that keeping the blood flow up is what keeps George powerful. It would explain his sudden upswing in popularity right before the election, at any rate. I personally don't subscribe to such a belief, but mostly because I don't believe in Magic, and I don't believe Bush would be that competent.


Fewer wiretaps = We only wiretap terrorists...I have no problem with that
Well of course, we couldn't also wiretap various high-profile Democrats, listening in on their strategies, etc. No president (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon) would ever do that.

same sex marriages = Is that a good thing?
Depends. Like the nazi comparisons?


Cheaper secondary education = higher taxes
=Lower tuition=more educated populus=everyone is allowed to thrive, meaning those who have power and money are a more accurate representation of those who have ability.


Northern Climate = I would live the South Florida climate over a Canadian climate ANY day.

Cant argue with that...:D

Well, of course not. You'd need a lot of sun to get your neck so red.

I hate illegal immigration. Legal immigration doesn't bother me.
Anyone who says illegal immigrants don't steal our jobs is just not thinking clearly.
I've seen some silly example about a judge and a lawyer. What idiot would hire an illegal immigrant (no matter how qualified) to do a high profile job like that? That analogy just doesn't work. You need to be looking at construction, house cleaning, factories, chicken houses and other farm work. They must fill those jobs and if the illegals weren't here doing them they would have to pay more untill some legal citizen were willing to do it. I certainly wouldn't be willing to do my job for less than I make but if they could get away with paying someone else 3 dollars an hour to do it I guarantee they would.
You can try to blame the corporations, farmers and whomever as much as you like but it is our governments job to protect our borders and enforce our laws.

I want the wall/fence. I think our military should be patrolling our border. I think they should shoot people to keep them out if nececarry. That may sound extreme but every person who is trying to get in ilegally should be treated as a potential threat to our nations safety. We don't know who they are or what their plans may be when they get here. Assumptions that they are simply looking for a better life are not going to keep us safe.

On the subject of 'not thinking clearly'....

Some people don't appreciate quite how important the 'bottom-line' might be to big business.

Sure - if there were no cheap immigrants, big business would do something about their payscale-versus-employable-staff.... but you somehow overlook the 'bottom-line'.

By which I mean... if X-Brand chicken-packers pay $3 an hour now, and the standard wage is $10... X-Brand chickens is simply going to move their packing-plant across the border, and pay lower wages elsewhere.

We still have enough educated peope to go around, and until we dont, I wont worry about it. I dont want to have to pay for some other guys education.

Why? We paid for yours.

National Health Care = Higher Taxes


I'd say 'prove it'... but I already know you are way off base on this one.

Lower rates of violence = Canada has less people and less minorities...minorities are, statisticly the ones who commit more of the crimes


RATES of violence means in comparison. So - if Canada has a tenth the population of the US, and LESS than 10% of the violence - your argument is false.

lees liely to kill Iraqis = ....yeah...thats the reason we're there...just to off some Iraqis...:rolleyes:


As likely as any of the other reasons, surely? At least 'wanton killing' hasn't YET shown to be a Bush-regime fiction.

Fewer wiretaps = We only wiretap terrorists...I have no problem with that


You don't pay much attention to the news, do you? Calls between US citizens (not terrorist) and possible-terrorist-overseas was what the fuss was about. It doesn't even have to be proved to BE a terrorist.

In other words, that call you made to the computer helpline, that actually got redirected to a Pakistan callcentre...

same sex marriages = Is that a good thing?


Yes.

Cheaper secondary education = higher taxes


False assumption. Maybe their education just COSTS less?

You are big on talk, and short on proof.

This thread simply will not keel over.

National Health Care = Higher Taxes

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the US government currently spends more per head on health care than the UK government, and yet is does not have a national health service, while the UK does. Seems to suggest that a tax increase would not be inevitable, no?

besides me...just curious

Yes, thank you, we know that you have a personal vendetta against Muslims in your country. We know because of the fact you seem to create a new topic with the hopes of gaining supporters of your crusade, when your old topic falls and gets old. We know that you think they are such bad people. We know that you can offer no proof of your so-called 'facts'. Get off your fucking high horse and grab a book on Tolerance.

Yes, thank you, we know that you have a personal vendetta against Muslims in your country. We know because of the fact you seem to create a new topic with the hopes of gaining supporters of your crusade, when your old topic falls and gets old. We know that you think they are such bad people. We know that you can offer no proof of your so-called 'facts'. Get off your fucking high horse and grab a book on Tolerance.

We know that we know that we know that you know that we know that you know that we know that we know that we know *Takes breath* that.....

(Being infantile leaves a sour taste in my mouth)

No, but judging by American statistics minorities cause a way higher ammount of crime in relation to their population.

Do Asians in the US cause a higher amount of crime in relation to their population than the majority? If not then the simple relation between minority status and crime rates seems spurious.

We know that we know that we know that you know that we know that you know that we know that we know that we know *Takes breath* that.....

(Being infantile leaves a sour taste in my mouth)

Return to your playpen then.

Do Asians in the US cause a higher amount of crime in relation to their population than the majority? If not then the simple relation between minority status and crime rates seems spurious.

No. Asians that come here tend to have a better train of thought than other minorities. They place a higher emphasis on education, family values and progress.

No. Asians that come here tend to have a better train of thought than other minorities. They place a higher emphasis on education, family values and progress.

Ah the myth of the model minority. So where exactly are you getting the facts about them placing this higher emphasis on these things?

Ah the myth of the model minority. So where exactly are you getting the facts about them placing this higher emphasis on these things?

Admittingly, nowhere.

But it is common knowlledge that the East Asian culture does place a higher emphasis on these things. High than White Americans, Black Americans, Spanish Americans....all of us.

Admittingly, nowhere.

But it is common knowlledge that the East Asian culture does place a higher emphasis on these things. High than White Americans, Black Americans, Spanish Americans....all of us.

Cultural stereotypes got to love them. Asians are better at math, blacks sports, yada yada yada. Seriously thats just tired stuff thats trotted out over and over again. You'll have to do better then that for your arguement.

No. Asians that come here tend to have a better train of thought than other minorities. They place a higher emphasis on education, family values and progress.

So, being part of a minority doesn't cause you to indulge in more crime than a member of the majority then?

So, being part of a minority doesn't cause you to indulge in more crime than a member of the majority then?

Depends on the minority...It would be silly to say that all minorities have the same culture.

Depends on the minority...It would be silly to say that all minorities have the same culture.

So, what you are talking about is not actually the minority status, but rather the culture of those minorities. This seems to suggest that if certain immigrant minorities in the USA commit more crime than the majority per head, then in their home countries we will also find a correspondingly high crime rate. Does this hold?

No. They would be 100,000 Christian American families...exactly like the family I was proposing I had that would move to Norway, except Christian instead of Jewish.

No, I wont be ok with that too...considering 100,000 is a big number relative to 4.5 million.

In what ways is Canada much better than America?



Oh come on...dont listen to neo-Nazi lies about how..."the Jews are behind third world immigration to drown White European society." You say that most Jews are very pro immigration, but I'm willing to bet that you dont know most Jews, in fact you probably dont know many Jews at all. ;)



Type something in Norwegian, its a very cool language.

Yeah I dont know any jew in real life although I talked a few online. I always thought jews are much more pro-immigrant since, given their history, perhaps rightfully, they'd be scared of anything in the anti-immigration direction.
I dont know if it's true but I read somewhere that the biggest supporter parlimenter of this USA immigration law which would legalize millions of illegal immigration is jew. I'm also thinking Jocabia is a jew too since Jacob is close to Jocab.

Jeg snakker bare litt norsk. ;)

No, but you compared them as if they were equal. If you admit the difference in degree is HUGE then your point that you made back then is shot to hell. And of course the difference is huge. Unless the degree is equal your point made no sense.

Let's see if I can find the quote.



I don't believe that you are not intelligent enough to notice that these things you are comparing AS IF THEY ARE EQUAL. I know you know they are not equal but for several pages you treat them as if they are. Shall I quote more?

I believe you know there is a difference in the degree of these things and that you were being intentionally deceptive. Are you arguing that you don't know that there is a significant difference in the degree of difference between us and something that has a different number of chromosomes and between the various races?

No, I didnt equate the difference between ethnicities/races to difference between apes and humans. They were saying me all differences between ethnicities and races were tiny. I said just because it's tiny doesnt mean they are all same. I said even a tiny difference can make a big deal. So I gave ape human example. Apes are very close to us (genetically 99%) yet we are very different. Again, I didnt equate the difference between apes and humans to difference between different ethnicities. Again, I just meant that even a tiny difference may be a big deal.
Then they told me these differences are only skin colour. Aside from skin colour, eye colour, skull shape, and other physical differences, I disproved that point too, by giving a link to a scientific study that says "avarage iq differences between races are genetic"
Now, do you assume you werent intelligent enough to get my point? Maybe you didnt want to get it subconsciously or maybe on purpose. You are so desperate to prove me wrong, you are taking what I said hugely out of context. You are also claiming that I said things which in fact I didnt. You also claimed you anhiliated my 'points' which in fact still stands. You are getting more desperate that you continue to accuse me of being troll and even question if I'm norwegian.

No, I don't believe he is. Read his posts. It's not hard to figure out.

He has all the marks of the classic troll. Exaggerated position. Inability to be consistent because he keeps forgetting what he 'believes'. Claiming the things you implied are not things you actually said. Trying to ignore the context of statements. Unwillingness to back up any of the claims about himself personally.

Hell, when Fass started talking to him, he had to ask him to speak English. Then he questions Fass was actually Swedish. He may not be a troll. I could be wrong. But if it walks like a duck...

I asked him to speak english so others can understand us. You are becomming increasingly desperate and non-objective. I really dont take you as a party to discuss my 'norwegianness', you may believe as you wish.
I dont believe I'm inconsistent. I make some exceptions in my points but there are exceptions in almost all things in life. Besides as I said, this is only a NS forum, not a political party declaration.
How old are you btw?

:headbang: hahaha ..another useless thread in make believe open forum exchange of ideas between teenagers and those older but still stuck in an intellectual timewarp. Occasionally someone comes along with some wise words, only to be usurped by a prepubescent mind capable only of grossly generalising poster slogans. :rolleyes:

Lets (the wiser ones) leave this thread for the mindless to exchange their ignorance to and fro.

Anti- immigration hahaha...good one. If we had always thought like that, we'd still be in caves.

*sigh*

If you really believed that, you wouldnt post here. You'd just ignore the thread. Perhaps this was a subconscious attempt to cover your inferiority complex.

No, it's because you judge on the basis of ethnic differences that it is hard to believe you feel sorry for those "uncilivised" african/arab/mexican people.
But I'll try to believe you

From the tone of your posts, I assume that you think you are very openminded. But as you can see you have your exceptions too. You are very prejudiced against me and people like me. Maybe you feel this is justified, I dont know.

No, but judging by American statistics minorities cause a way higher ammount of crime in relation to their population.

Or they are prosecuted and convicted more often. Again, correllation does not equal causation. If you normalize for poverty you will see much closer to equal crime convictions. If you normalize again for the fact that justice costs money, then you'll find there is no specific group more likely to be involved in crime.

I'm not sure about that, some of the statstics on murder and jail time dealing with blacks are pretty impressive. Impressive of course in a bad way.

Yes, and that must mean it's because they're black. There are no other possible factors other than the color of their skin. *nods*

Because I have no reason to beleive that the government could care about listening to me having phone sex with a girl named Jenna, when they could be trying to locate the terrorist connections within my country.

Which implies they are 100% accurate in their choice of taps. What if they decide that taking a chance that they may only be listening to you have phone sex with Jenna is worth violating your rights because it will make them more likely to locate the terrorist connections?

Or if your simply traditional. Or if your simply religious. Or if you simply dont think its natural. Theres 100 reason for and against.
Yes, except the reasons for legalizing don't affect you unless you choose to let it affect you. Your reasoning violates the civil rights of individuals and violates equal protection under the law.

Yeah I dont know any jew in real life although I talked a few online.

Have you ever met a Jew?

No, I wont be ok with that too...considering 100,000 is a big number relative to 4.5 million.

Yet you treat Samis as if they don't matter even though their population numbers are comparable.

Yeah I dont know any jew in real life although I talked a few online. I always thought jews are much more pro-immigrant since, given their history, perhaps rightfully, they'd be scared of anything in the anti-immigration direction.
I dont know if it's true but I read somewhere that the biggest supporter parlimenter of this USA immigration law which would legalize millions of illegal immigration is jew. I'm also thinking Jocabia is a jew too since Jacob is close to Jocab.

Jeg snakker bare litt norsk. ;)
You're thinking Jocabia is a Jew? Ha. Good thing you're not racist or anything. Actually, my name is Eric as most people here can confirm for you. Eric is a family name and we have a couple in every generation. My family name is Kjelstrom (although that is not my last name now, it's my mother's maiden name). Yep, I'm Scandinavian. Or maybe Kjelstrom is East African. By the way, my first nation name was The Kjelstroms, but it has long since passed away.

Meanwhile, my current nation name is a conglomeration of letters that I just hit alternating from consonent to vowel and happened to end up with the current name. This is also something I've explained several times.

I did enjoy you're pet theory though. It amounts to more evidence of your racism.

And your Norwegian is a phrase that everyone who has ever been to Norway knows. For those who can't read it, it's "I speak only a little Norwegian."

I asked him to speak english so others can understand us. You are becomming increasingly desperate and non-objective. I really dont take you as a party to discuss my 'norwegianness', you may believe as you wish.
I dont believe I'm inconsistent. I make some exceptions in my points but there are exceptions in almost all things in life. Besides as I said, this is only a NS forum, not a political party declaration.
How old are you btw?

31. You asked to speak English because you don't actually know how to speak any Scandinavian language.

And this is an educated forum where you post hyperbolous claims and call it an 'exception' when you get proven wrong. No, there are not exceptions to a good hypothesis. A good hypothesis that is shown to have something that contradicts it is WRONG. Plain and simple. You don't have a few exceptions, you have primarily exceptions.

From the tone of your posts, I assume that you think you are very openminded. But as you can see you have your exceptions too. You are very prejudiced against me and people like me. Maybe you feel this is justified, I dont know.

His 'prejudice' against you is not generalized. It's specific because of your personal actions. That's called reacting to the situation, it's not 'prejudice'. PREjudice means he decided before knowing any particular evidence. Here, he decided after gathering evidence.

Keep grasping at straws.

Admittingly, nowhere.


I believe you mean, 'admittedly'...

I'd have left it alone, if it were not part of your argument about the relative 'education' of immigrants...

If you really believed that, you wouldnt post here. You'd just ignore the thread. Perhaps this was a subconscious attempt to cover your inferiority complex.

***Ad hominem.***

And your Norwegian is a phrase that everyone who has ever been to Norway knows. For those who can't read it, it's "I speak only a little Norwegian."

Indeed - even I knew that one, and I've never been to Norway...

Indeed - even I knew that one, and I've never been to Norway...

Come on. Do we need any more evidence that he has nothing but ad hominems to make his point? He's trolling.

First, he chastised Fass for not speaking English. Then he chastises everyone he can for not be European or not being European enough. Then he calls people names throughout the thread (a practice he hasn't completely abandoned). He's clearly admitted that he thinks looks are the most important thing for deciding WHO someone is and how much they have in common with another person.

Now he decided I'm a Jew because my NATION's name looks a little like Jacob, which of course doesn't appear anywhere in Christian dogma :rolleyes: and amusingly I got by randomly alternating consonants and vowels.

And, finally, the only Norwegian he knows is "I know only a bit of Norwegian".

Raise your hand if you're actually buying this, because I know I stopped believing this wasn't a joke like forty pages ago.

You're thinking Jocabia is a Jew?

Clearly, if you're pro-immigration, you're either a sheep or a jew. Or you're ignorant and stupid. You're out to get Ny Nordland and destroy his ethnic purity, it's all a conspiracy against him! THIS PROVES IT!

Now that my family has been naturalized into our home country, I oppose immigration.

:P

If you really believed that, you wouldnt post here. You'd just ignore the thread. Perhaps this was a subconscious attempt to cover your inferiority complex.

Wasn't it suggested that you stop with the ad hominems?

"He's inferior"
"He's stupid"
"He's ignorant"
"He's a Jew" (I laughed at that one by the way)
"He's retarded"
"He's delusional"
"He's not European"
"He's a minority"

Let's sum it up. You didn't come here to discuss your points or support them as you've said many times. You came here to spout your xenophobic and racist views (you can claim they are neither but the evidence is against you) and you're upset because people didn't swallow this stuff, hook, line and sinker.

You're arguments have ceased to contain anything new for a long time and the thread has come down to bickering where you basically squirm and try to find any reason that doesn't involve, you know, logic to continue to claim that immigrants are dangerous to your society (while of course pretending you're not claiming superiority).

Come on. Do we need any more evidence that he has nothing but ad hominems to make his point? He's trolling.

First, he chastised Fass for not speaking English. Then he chastises everyone he can for not be European or not being European enough. Then he calls people names throughout the thread (a practice he hasn't completely abandoned). He's clearly admitted that he thinks looks are the most important thing for deciding WHO someone is and how much they have in common with another person.

Now he decided I'm a Jew because my NATION's name looks a little like Jacob, which of course doesn't appear anywhere in Christian dogma :rolleyes: and amusingly I got by randomly alternating consonants and vowels.

And, finally, the only Norwegian he knows is "I know only a bit of Norwegian".

Raise your hand if you're actually buying this, because I know I stopped believing this wasn't a joke like forty pages ago.

My in-laws aren't Jewish.... not to ANY discerable level (though who can say who might have bedded who, a hundred years ago...?) - indeed, that side of the family is largely 'ethnically' Cherokee - and yet, of six 'cousins', four of them have 'Hebrew' names...

My in-laws aren't Jewish.... not to ANY discerable level (though who can say who might have bedded who, a hundred years ago...?) - indeed, that side of the family is largely 'ethnically' Cherokee - and yet, of six 'cousins', four of them have 'Hebrew' names...

Amusingly, though, while they are all practicing Christians, my mother's mother's mother's mother's mother was Jewish and it's passed down maternally. In other words, I'm among the lost sheep. However, my family prior to coming to America living in Scandanavia for about a millenia.

However, I am a Christian as is every generation of my family in last two hundred years.

Now that my family has been naturalized into our home country, I oppose immigration.

:PK-P already beat you to saying that ;)

You're thinking Jocabia is a Jew? Ha. Good thing you're not racist or anything. Actually, my name is Eric as most people here can confirm for you. Eric is a family name and we have a couple in every generation. My family name is Kjelstrom (although that is not my last name now, it's my mother's maiden name). Yep, I'm Scandinavian. Or maybe Kjelstrom is East African. By the way, my first nation name was The Kjelstroms, but it has long since passed away.

Meanwhile, my current nation name is a conglomeration of letters that I just hit alternating from consonent to vowel and happened to end up with the current name. This is also something I've explained several times.

I did enjoy you're pet theory though. It amounts to more evidence of your racism.

And your Norwegian is a phrase that everyone who has ever been to Norway knows. For those who can't read it, it's "I speak only a little Norwegian."


Tydelig, jeg spøkte, forstod du det??? :rolleyes:

Wasn't it suggested that you stop with the ad hominems?

"He's inferior"
"He's stupid"
"He's ignorant"
"He's a Jew" (I laughed at that one by the way)
"He's retarded"
"He's delusional"
"He's not European"
"He's a minority"

Let's sum it up. You didn't come here to discuss your points or support them as you've said many times. You came here to spout your xenophobic and racist views (you can claim they are neither but the evidence is against you) and you're upset because people didn't swallow this stuff, hook, line and sinker.

You're arguments have ceased to contain anything new for a long time and the thread has come down to bickering where you basically squirm and try to find any reason that doesn't involve, you know, logic to continue to claim that immigrants are dangerous to your society (while of course pretending you're not claiming superiority).

I've never said they were dangerous. I just love my country and want to preserve it. I see this immigration as a change I dont want. Some pople like brunoi are ok with it, some dont care, some like me dont want it. This is a subjective opinion.
You continue your baseless claims...

I've never said they were dangerous. I just love my country and want to preserve it. I see this immigration as a change I dont want. Some pople like brunoi are ok with it, some dont care, some like me dont want it. This is a subjective opinion.
You continue your baseless claims...

Perhaps you don't know what dangerous means. Please look it up and reply again. If you need to preserve your society by excluding them, then you find them to be a danger to the preservation of your society, i.e. dangerous.

It is a subjective opinion, one that will oppress the rights of others. Because you can avoid immigrants and reproduce with only Norges if you like and no one will stop you. However, you wish to make it so those that would like to see a multicultural Norway will not be able to do so.

As far as your other claims let's not pretend like you haven't bashed Muslim society by making sweeping generalizations about them. You can quit feigning this seperate but equal crap, because we saw through it like 100 pages ago.

Tydelig, jeg spøkte, forstod du det??? :rolleyes:

Another phrase, I'm sure GnI can understand. Very impressive. Also, coincidentally a phrase you could pick up simply by visiting Norway or knowing someone from Norway.

Yeah, you spoke. We all got that you can say piddly phrases in Norwegian. Phrases anyone who's ever heard the remotest bit of Germanic languages could likely pick up and as I've shown understand.

Much like your other evidence this evidence does not necessarily support your claims.

Yes, because there's so much damage a single poverty-stricken wayward Mexican can do.

For Christ's sake, don't shoot them. At the very least detain them and THEN find out if they're secretly made of plutonium or some ridiculous notion like that.


Well if we were talking about a single illegal maybe, but we are most certainly not.
Beyond that how do you know they are even mexicans? Just because they come in from Mexico does not mean they are mexican. Anybody could come in that way. Furthermore I am not just talking about hispanics running into Texas but boats from god knows where in Florida and any other way in that is not a legal entry. There are people out there risking innocent lives (not just their own) to get into our country illegaly and that's just not cool.

Another phrase, I'm sure GnI can understand.

I'd guess at something like "Obviously, I spoke, you understood?"

But then - although I'm good at languages - I have no real experience of Norway or Norwegian. Bjork is about as close as I get.:D

I'd guess at something like "Obviously, I spoke, you understood?"

But then - although I'm good at languages - I have no real experience of Norway or Norwegian. Bjork is about as close as I get.:D

Yes, that's it, more or less. And that's the point. He's choosing simple phrases that almost anyone could and would put in if they were pretending to be Norwegian. Could be coincidence, but given everything else we know about him, I'm guessing... NO.

I am anti-immigration.

People shouldnt leave their homelands, they should gather up the courage to stay and improve the conditions of their countries. Also immigration is especially damaging for the survival of the European people, ultimately though this problem will only be properly solved when Europe and America go into another and more serious economic depression. The economic troubles will severely weaken the strength of our current corrupt governments and this will be the time for Nationalist parties to make their move. Their opposition will be weak(consisting of people who strongly support multi-cultralism but can ultimately only complain in online forums and make pointless demonstrations) and this opposition will be easily silenced.

Oh and go ahead flame me if you want.

I am anti-immigration.

People shouldnt leave their homelands, they should gather up the courage to stay and improve the conditions of their countries. Also immigration is especially damaging for the survival of the European people, ultimately though this problem will only be properly solved when Europe and America go into another and more serious economic depression. The economic troubles will severely weaken the strength of our current corrupt governments and this will be the time for Nationalist parties to make their move. Their opposition will be weak(consisting of people who strongly support multi-cultralism but can ultimately only complain in online forums and make pointless demonstrations) and this opposition will be easily silenced.

Oh and go ahead flame me if you want.

I'm sorry but this sounds like its right out of a history book on WWII.

The way I view it is that it's all about the ability to chose. And so long as it is being done legally we shouldn't restrict the ability to chose where you want to live just because someone else don't like you comming to where they live.

Well if we were talking about a single illegal maybe, but we are most certainly not.
Beyond that how do you know they are even mexicans? Just because they come in from Mexico does not mean they are mexican. Anybody could come in that way. Furthermore I am not just talking about hispanics running into Texas but boats from god knows where in Florida and any other way in that is not a legal entry. There are people out there risking innocent lives (not just their own) to get into our country illegaly and that's just not cool.

Still, "shoot first and ask questions later" is a completely over-the-top reaction to immigrants, especially in a country that has due process written right in the fucking constitution.

Further, whose lives are they risking? It's not like every illegal that enters the country causes some giant Russian Roulette game in the sky to give 'er another spin.

I am anti-immigration.

Also immigration is especially damaging for the survival of the European people

Que? "The European People"? What does this mean exactly? Our culture? Our genes?

If it's European culture, that's silly, because if the culture is worth having people will either adopt it, or continue to uphold it. Otherwise it's a failed idea, and will move on. No one will make anyone become a Buddhist or start eating tamales unless they want to become a tamale-eating Buddhist. And if that's the case, who are you to stop them?

And if its our genes, well, what's the big deal? All it means is that white skin becomes less wide-spread. And that would be bad, because... er... getting sunburned more easily builds character? Because we're hoping to move up North, and with our newly acquired layers of blubber we may be kept warm and thus enabled to use our white hides to their full potential by blending in with the blinding white snow of the North Pole???

I'm for immigration...it built this country the problem in the states right now is ILLEGAL immigrants...they're messing up the process for true immigrants from around the world to come to America and they're costing us mad dough.

I'm for immigration...it built this country the problem in the states right now is ILLEGAL immigrants...they're messing up the process for true immigrants from around the world to come to America and they're costing us mad dough.
How are you weighing the costs? I have a feeling that you ignore the mad amount of revinue they are dumping in, in the form of cheep labor.

While I think that they should come in the legal way dont get me wrong they are a boost to the economy just at times a drain on the government. What we have to do is make sure that they and or the economy covers the cost to the government

I am anti-immigration.

People shouldnt leave their homelands, they should gather up the courage to stay and improve the conditions of their countries. Also immigration is especially damaging for the survival of the European people, ultimately though this problem will only be properly solved when Europe and America go into another and more serious economic depression. The economic troubles will severely weaken the strength of our current corrupt governments and this will be the time for Nationalist parties to make their move. Their opposition will be weak(consisting of people who strongly support multi-cultralism but can ultimately only complain in online forums and make pointless demonstrations) and this opposition will be easily silenced.

Oh and go ahead flame me if you want.

Why would we flame you? You are far too amusing to merit flames.

Why would we flame you? You are far too amusing to merit flames.

I like how he thinks the opposition can be silenced easily. The arrogance is laughable.

I am anti-immigration.

People shouldnt leave their homelands, they should gather up the courage to stay and improve the conditions of their countries. Also immigration is especially damaging for the survival of the European people, ultimately though this problem will only be properly solved when Europe and America go into another and more serious economic depression. The economic troubles will severely weaken the strength of our current corrupt governments and this will be the time for Nationalist parties to make their move. Their opposition will be weak(consisting of people who strongly support multi-cultralism but can ultimately only complain in online forums and make pointless demonstrations) and this opposition will be easily silenced.

Oh and go ahead flame me if you want.

No point flaming you... the flaws in your argument are self-evident. Cultures that do not evolve, stagnate. If any culture really did have the courage of your claimed convictions, it would be an international pariah, and rapidly become the world-stage equivalent of hillbilly inbreeders.

Diverse cultures are more adaptable that mono-cultures. They are politically more resilient. Not to mention the fact that the offspring of diverse cultures are often synergistic - the 'hybrid' total being greater than a combination of parts.

Add to which, Nationalist parties often gain temporary advantage - but they usually get slapped straight back into place by coalitions of the multicultural. Plus, if they really DO gain solid footing, it fairly rapidly becomes evident that their promised 'utopia' does NOT arrive when their Nationalistic appetites are allowed free-reign - and, once people realise they have been duped with yet another 'easy-fix-that-fails', the Nationalist agenda always fades again, until some new generation 'discovers' it, further down the line.

Seriously - we wouldn't even be HAVING this debate, if people paid more attention to the lessons of history.

No point flaming you... the flaws in your argument are self-evident. Cultures that do not evolve, stagnate. If any culture really did have the courage of your claimed convictions, it would be an international pariah, and rapidly become the world-stage equivalent of hillbilly inbreeders.

Diverse cultures are more adaptable that mono-cultures. They are politically more resilient. Not to mention the fact that the offspring of diverse cultures are often synergistic - the 'hybrid' total being greater than a combination of parts.

Add to which, Nationalist parties often gain temporary advantage - but they usually get slapped straight back into place by coalitions of the multicultural. Plus, if they really DO gain solid footing, it fairly rapidly becomes evident that their promised 'utopia' does NOT arrive when their Nationalistic appetites are allowed free-reign - and, once people realise they have been duped with yet another 'easy-fix-that-fails', the Nationalist agenda always fades again, until some new generation 'discovers' it, further down the line.

Seriously - we wouldn't even be HAVING this debate, if people paid more attention to the lessons of history.

I hate to say it, but is there much doubt that the reason this debate is occurring is because they are unaware of world history. Oh, sure they know some history, but it's usually nationalistic and narrow. When you're just learning history to make a nationalist argument no need to learn these kinds of lessons, no?

Also immigration is especially damaging for the survival of the European people, ultimately though this problem will only be properly solved when Europe and America go into another and more serious economic depression.
I am not going into the other drivel, but this was just too whack to ignore it. Nearly all european states organised in the EU have birth rates too low to support stable populations. We need the influx of immigrants in order to survive, not the other way round.

I am anti-immigration.

People shouldnt leave their homelands, they should gather up the courage to stay and improve the conditions of their countries. Also immigration is especially damaging for the survival of the European people, ultimately though this problem will only be properly solved when Europe and America go into another and more serious economic depression. The economic troubles will severely weaken the strength of our current corrupt governments and this will be the time for Nationalist parties to make their move. Their opposition will be weak(consisting of people who strongly support multi-cultralism but can ultimately only complain in online forums and make pointless demonstrations) and this opposition will be easily silenced.

Oh and go ahead flame me if you want.Damn those pesky forinners, and their blasted forks, pasta, paper, gunpowder, numbers, concept of the 0, letters, words infesting our languages, cars, cheap clothes, cheap toys, computers, food, more food, cars, or whatever they have.

Let's get it straight: Germans, you must only buy German bananas!

Damn those pesky forinners, and their blasted forks, pasta, paper, gunpowder, numbers, concept of the 0, letters, words infesting our languages, cars, cheap clothes, cheap toys, computers, food, more food, cars, or whatever they have.

Let's get it straight: Germans, you must only buy German bananas!

I think that dude watched V For Vendetta and had a massive hard-on during the Nationalist march scenes, where they round up the "darkies", "lefties" and "homos" then put them in camps and torture them to death.

Most of us here in France (or at least in and around major urban areas) are either immigrants, children of immigrants or grand-children of immigrants. My mother immigrated from England, and my father's father is the son of Welsh immigrants. My closest friends almost all have at least one immigrant parent, be they from Italy, Tunisia or elsewhere. When I was in my final year in lycée, in a class with only nine boys, each of us boys was the son of at least one immigrant, the countries of origin ranging from the UK, Poland, Italy, Portugal, Benin to Armenia and others I've now forgotten. I got on well with them. It's always interesting and enriching to hear about foreign cultures and ways of life. Why on earth would I be anti-immigrant?

Yes, that's it, more or less. And that's the point. He's choosing simple phrases that almost anyone could and would put in if they were pretending to be Norwegian. Could be coincidence, but given everything else we know about him, I'm guessing... NO.

Men du forsto ikke denne simple 'frase', så du måtte spørre GnI....Oh, Foresten, spøk betyr ikke å snakke...

I'd guess at something like "Obviously, I spoke, you understood?"

But then - although I'm good at languages - I have no real experience of Norway or Norwegian. Bjork is about as close as I get.:D

Close, but not close enough. You guys missed my point. I said "Obviously, I joked, did you understand?"
I guess I should have added (joke) after I wrote "I speak little norwegian." I thought the wink would be enough...

Perhaps you don't know what dangerous means. Please look it up and reply again. If you need to preserve your society by excluding them, then you find them to be a danger to the preservation of your society, i.e. dangerous.

It is a subjective opinion, one that will oppress the rights of others. Because you can avoid immigrants and reproduce with only Norges if you like and no one will stop you. However, you wish to make it so those that would like to see a multicultural Norway will not be able to do so.

As far as your other claims let's not pretend like you haven't bashed Muslim society by making sweeping generalizations about them. You can quit feigning this seperate but equal crap, because we saw through it like 100 pages ago.

You keep assuming. Some french opposed putting glass pyramids to Loure. That doesnt mean they were afraid of pyramids, they just didnt want the change. Clearly, opposing change doesnt mean being afraid.
And I wouldnt be opressing others freedom if an anti-immigrant party comes into power by democratic elections...

Que? "The European People"? What does this mean exactly? Our culture? Our genes?

If it's European culture, that's silly, because if the culture is worth having people will either adopt it, or continue to uphold it. Otherwise it's a failed idea, and will move on. No one will make anyone become a Buddhist or start eating tamales unless they want to become a tamale-eating Buddhist. And if that's the case, who are you to stop them?

And if its our genes, well, what's the big deal? All it means is that white skin becomes less wide-spread. And that would be bad, because... er... getting sunburned more easily builds character? Because we're hoping to move up North, and with our newly acquired layers of blubber we may be kept warm and thus enabled to use our white hides to their full potential by blending in with the blinding white snow of the North Pole???

I associate most with people who look like me most. So I care if 'people like me' becomes almost extinct. This is a subjective opinion though.

I am not going into the other drivel, but this was just too whack to ignore it. Nearly all european states organised in the EU have birth rates too low to support stable populations. We need the influx of immigrants in order to survive, not the other way round.

Why not try to get birth rates up instead?
Also, if you read the previous posts, you'd see someone also wrote a good post about why immigration is not solution.

Most of us here in France (or at least in and around major urban areas) are either immigrants, children of immigrants or grand-children of immigrants. My mother immigrated from England, and my father's father is the son of Welsh immigrants. My closest friends almost all have at least one immigrant parent, be they from Italy, Tunisia or elsewhere. When I was in my final year in lycée, in a class with only nine boys, each of us boys was the son of at least one immigrant, the countries of origin ranging from the UK, Poland, Italy, Portugal, Benin to Armenia and others I've now forgotten. I got on well with them. It's always interesting and enriching to hear about foreign cultures and ways of life. Why on earth would I be anti-immigrant?

In 50 years, you'll be almost a small USA. How very cool.. (sarcasm)

You keep assuming. Some french opposed putting glass pyramids to Loure. That doesnt mean they were afraid of pyramids, they just didnt want the change. Clearly, opposing change doesnt mean being afraid.
And I wouldnt be opressing others freedom if an anti-immigrant party comes into power by democratic elections...

If they were afraid it would destroy their culture that is afraid. You have openly said that this about destroying your culture and not just a preference. That's fear, my friend. Who do you think you're fooling?

Im Anti-illegal Immigration. But For Us In America An Immigration Freeze Would Not Be So Bad Of An Idea. Block All Immigration For 20yrs. Till Our Country Recovers. I See History Repeating,we Might Have A 2nd Civil War Were The Union Is Divided By Liberals And The American Nationals. Just A Dream...but If It Does Come True I Will Definately Be On The American Nationalist Side..

In 50 years, you'll be almost a small USA. How very cool.. (sarcasm)

Yea because the US is such a horrible place to live. :rolleyes:

Yea because the US is such a horrible place to live. :rolleyes:

I never claimed it was. But I never want my country or europe to become like US. We have already many smilarities and that's more than enough...

Hopefully, you'd realise that there's a wide spectrum between being anti-immigrant and neo-nazi
RIGHT ON PEOPLE JUMP THE GUN ON THIS ISSUE SO FAST.WE LOVE OUR COUNTRY WE HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE AS IT IS.WHATS WRONG WITH WANTING TO HAVE STRONG ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LAWS. IN AMERICA OUR MUSLIM POPULATION ARE THE ILLEGAL HISPANIC POPULATION.WITH ONE EXCEPTION THE MUSLIMS ARE IN FRANCE BY LEGAL FRENCH DECRIE.THE ILLEGAL HISPANICS ARE HERE ILLEGALY.AND LIKE FRANCE HAD RIOTS WE IN AMERICA WILL HAVE RIOTS.I JUST HOPE OUR AMERICAN PEOPLE DONT PUT UP WITH THIS BULL S***T.WE SHOULD TAKE EXAMPLE LIKE THE AUSSIES BAND TOGETHER AS AMERICANS AND PUT THEM IN THERE PLACE.

RIGHT ON PEOPLE JUMP THE GUN ON THIS ISSUE SO FAST.WE LOVE OUR COUNTRY WE HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE AS IT IS.WHATS WRONG WITH WANTING TO HAVE STRONG ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LAWS. IN AMERICA OUR MUSLIM POPULATION ARE THE ILLEGAL HISPANIC POPULATION.WITH ONE EXCEPTION THE MUSLIMS ARE IN FRANCE BY LEGAL FRENCH DECRIE.THE ILLEGAL HISPANICS ARE HERE ILLEGALY.AND LIKE FRANCE HAD RIOTS WE IN AMERICA WILL HAVE RIOTS.I JUST HOPE OUR AMERICAN PEOPLE DONT PUT UP WITH THIS BULL S***T.WE SHOULD TAKE EXAMPLE LIKE THE AUSSIES BAND TOGETHER AS AMERICANS AND PUT THEM IN THERE PLACE.
If you look at your keyboard, there's a key just under 'tab' and above 'shift' on the left hand side called 'caps lock'. Tap it once before typing, and your post immediately looks a thousand times better. :)

In 50 years, you'll be almost a small USA. How very cool.. (sarcasm)

First of all, France will never be like America, second of all...you say "almost a small USA" like its a bad thing...In your opinion, whats wrong with America?

Why not try to get birth rates up instead?
Also, if you read the previous posts, you'd see someone also wrote a good post about why immigration is not solution.

Who would that be?

Close, but not close enough. You guys missed my point. I said "Obviously, I joked, did you understand?"
I guess I should have added (joke) after I wrote "I speak little norwegian." I thought the wink would be enough...

Pretty close for a guy with no Norwegian...

I associate most with people who look like me most. So I care if 'people like me' becomes almost extinct. This is a subjective opinion though.

But the whole assertion of 'like me' is so flawed. First you hit the obvious 'problems' - like dark skin or turbans... but then - European hair should really be blonde or red, shouldn't it? And... European eyes should be blue or green, right?

And, since the Norse blood is arguably the MOST 'European'... anyone under 6' tall is out, right...

I hate to say it, but is there much doubt that the reason this debate is occurring is because they are unaware of world history. Oh, sure they know some history, but it's usually nationalistic and narrow. When you're just learning history to make a nationalist argument no need to learn these kinds of lessons, no?

The 'history' of the kind Himmler was so fond of?

Damn - even Hitler thought THAT guy was a nut...

Why not try to get birth rates up instead?
Also, if you read the previous posts, you'd see someone also wrote a good post about why immigration is not solution.

Really?

I don't believe I've yet seen ANY "good" posts "about why immigration is not solution"...?

RIGHT ON PEOPLE JUMP THE GUN ON THIS ISSUE SO FAST.WE LOVE OUR COUNTRY WE HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE AS IT IS.WHATS WRONG WITH WANTING TO HAVE STRONG ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LAWS. IN AMERICA OUR MUSLIM POPULATION ARE THE ILLEGAL HISPANIC POPULATION.WITH ONE EXCEPTION THE MUSLIMS ARE IN FRANCE BY LEGAL FRENCH DECRIE.THE ILLEGAL HISPANICS ARE HERE ILLEGALY.AND LIKE FRANCE HAD RIOTS WE IN AMERICA WILL HAVE RIOTS.I JUST HOPE OUR AMERICAN PEOPLE DONT PUT UP WITH THIS BULL S***T.WE SHOULD TAKE EXAMPLE LIKE THE AUSSIES BAND TOGETHER AS AMERICANS AND PUT THEM IN THERE PLACE.

I believe I speak for all present, when I say..... 'eh'?

Really?

I don't believe I've yet seen ANY "good" posts "about why immigration is not solution"...?

Because they'll destroy his culture. Of course, that's not fear speaking. Nothing fearful about being AFRAID of the destruction of your culture. I love how he compares it to simply not wanting change. He didn't say they would just change his culture, but that they would DESTROY it.

But the whole assertion of 'like me' is so flawed. First you hit the obvious 'problems' - like dark skin or turbans... but then - European hair should really be blonde or red, shouldn't it? And... European eyes should be blue or green, right?

And, since the Norse blood is arguably the MOST 'European'... anyone under 6' tall is out, right...

Whoo....so far I'm still in.

This is like a sick version of survivor! *gets excited*

I cant wait to see who "they" extermina...*ehem* eliminate next round....I hope its not me!

RIGHT ON PEOPLE JUMP THE GUN ON THIS ISSUE SO FAST.WE LOVE OUR COUNTRY WE HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE AS IT IS.WHATS WRONG WITH WANTING TO HAVE STRONG ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION LAWS. IN AMERICA OUR MUSLIM POPULATION ARE THE ILLEGAL HISPANIC POPULATION.WITH ONE EXCEPTION THE MUSLIMS ARE IN FRANCE BY LEGAL FRENCH DECRIE.THE ILLEGAL HISPANICS ARE HERE ILLEGALY.AND LIKE FRANCE HAD RIOTS WE IN AMERICA WILL HAVE RIOTS.I JUST HOPE OUR AMERICAN PEOPLE DONT PUT UP WITH THIS BULL S***T.WE SHOULD TAKE EXAMPLE LIKE THE AUSSIES BAND TOGETHER AS AMERICANS AND PUT THEM IN THERE PLACE.

All caps. Bad spelling. Poor grammer. Lack of proper punctuation. Hmmmm... anyone else thinking what I'm thinking?

Whoo....so far I'm still in.

This is like a sick version of survivor! *gets excited*

I cant wait to see who "they" eliminate next round....I hope its not me!

I'd still be in too, kind of.

Not the sort of place I'd really WANT to live though....

Whoo....so far I'm still in.

This is like a sick version of survivor! *gets excited*

I cant wait to see who "they" eliminate next round....I hope its not me!

Yeah, I'm in too. Of course you and I must be just alike because we look so similar. Everyone knows the best test for whether people have a lot in common is by comparing their physical traits.

I'd still be in too, kind of.

Not the sort of place I'd really WANT to live though....

How can you "kind of" be in? lol...if you dont mind me asking.

Still, better living anywhere than being dead.

Because they'll destroy his culture. Of course, that's not fear speaking. Nothing fearful about being AFRAID of the destruction of your culture. I love how he compares it to simply not wanting change. He didn't say they would just change his culture, but that they would DESTROY it.

Like me.... I'm an arachnophobe, but, it's not because I'm afraid of spiders.... I just oppose what they stand for....

I'd still be in too, kind of.

Not the sort of place I'd really WANT to live though....

Next we have to eliminate the icky gays. Then the dirty Jews with names that sound like Jacob. Then everyone who doesn't think like us. Then everyone with a birth defect. Then everyone with too low of an IQ. Then everyone...

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.

Yeah, I'm in too. Of course you and I must be just alike because we look so similar. Everyone knows the best test for whether people have a lot in common is by comparing their physical traits.


Of course. Jesus, anything otherwise is thoughtcrime and will be dealt with.

*Hears Jacobia think anything otherwise*

Alright mister, you asked for it!

By the way...its weird the first three peopel, me you and grave n idle have all still be in...yet he claims were not his target audiance.

How can you "kind of" be in? lol...if you dont mind me asking.

Still, better living anywhere than being dead.

Well - not quite so blonde any more.... now I'm more of a 'dirty blonde'... or so I'm told...

Yeah, I'm in too. Of course you and I must be just alike because we look so similar. Everyone knows the best test for whether people have a lot in common is by comparing their physical traits.

Secret to a Balanced Society (TM).

Like me.... I'm an arachnophobe, but, it's not because I'm afraid of spiders.... I just oppose what they stand for....
You're not an arachnophobe. You're a homosapiocentric is all. You're not afraid of them, it's just that they'll put up webs and you're opposed to change.

Of course. Jesus, anything otherwise is thoughtcrime and will be dealt with.

*Hears Jacobia think anything otherwise*

Alright mister, you asked for it!

By the way...its weird the first three peopel, me you and grave n idle have all still be in...yet he claims were not his target audiance.

Ah - but that's because, while we would 'look right'... we are all obviously some kind of traitorous scum(s), with our 'judging people on how they treat us' rather than 'bomb the towelheads'... (or whatever the current mantra is, I can't keep up).

Well - not quite so blonde any more.... now I'm more of a 'dirty blonde'... or so I'm told...

Dirty blonde counts. See the blonde is right there in the name. I'm a dirty blonde these days too.

You're not an arachnophobe. You're a homosapiocentric is all. You're not afraid of them, it's just that they'll put up webs and you're opposed to change.

Excellent.

Cheap-imitation-Cola, meet Mr Expensive-Monitor....

Dirty blonde counts. See the blonde is right there in the name. I'm a dirty blonde these days too.

Yes, but that's just because you are a 'dirty' blonde... I read the gossip columns... ;)

Which is an odd thing to say, since immigration is not new, and was the basis (often violently) of most of the 'great' cultures of today.

England without immigration would have been... what?

However, neither Europe nor North America is establishing itself and developing at present. Akin to a snow ball that attracts further snow as it descends the mountain slope, so the West developed in conjunction to immigration, however the snow ball ultimately acquires a critical mass of sorts, a point at which any augmentation merely detracts from it. Europe, if not the USA, has transcended that watershed of sorts. The precedent of immigration ought not to compel us to prosecute it in the present, and thus the "oh, but you're a hybrid nation" argument is a fallacy.

The majority of "indigenous" Great Britian, and unequivocally native England, percieves the colonial age to the present day to be the auream mediocritas of extensive, ethnic immigration, it ought to proceed no further.

Ah - but that's because, while we would 'look right'... we are all obviously some kind of traitorous scum(s), with our 'judging people on how they treat us' rather than 'bomb the towelheads'... (or whatever the current mantra is, I can't keep up).

Yes, I assume if we were agreeing that the fact that we would look like him would be significant as that is the most important trait, by his account. But since we don't agree, suddenly the most important trait is that we don't agree. Interesting how he wants to judge the people who disagree with him by their actions and words and how he wants to judge the people who agree with him by how they look. Interesting, no?

Yes, but that's just because you are a 'dirty' blonde... I read the gossip columns... ;)

Ladies, ladies, ladies...as a light blonde who used to be a toe head, you are both legit blondes...no worries. ;)

Ah - but that's because, while we would 'look right'... we are all obviously some kind of traitorous scum(s), with our 'judging people on how they treat us' rather than 'bomb the towelheads'... (or whatever the current mantra is, I can't keep up).

Eh, I wouldnt include me in that one, sorry Grave.

While I understand what you are saying regarding what Nord has been talking about, I tend to have my shares of problems with arabs. I tend to agree more with the "bomb the towelheads" crowd than the "judge them on how they treat us" crowd, as absurd as that looks...:p

However, neither Europe nor North America is establishing itself and developing at present. Akin to a snow ball that attracts further snow as it descends the mountain slope, so the West developed in conjunction to immigration, however the snow ball ultimately acquires a critical mass of sorts, a point at which any augmentation merely detracts from it. Europe, if not the USA, has transcended that watershed of sorts. The precedent of immigration ought not to compel us to prosecute it in the present, and thus the "oh, but you're a hybrid nation" argument is a fallacy.

The majority of "indigenous" Great Britian, and unequivocally native England, percieves the colonial age to the present day to be the auream mediocritas of extensive, ethnic immigration, it ought to proceed no further.
You know you could have just said, I don't like them durn forinners and got the same message across.

Your message doesn't sound any better in unnecessarily complicated sentences and verbiage.

The classic "maybe they'll act like I have a point if I use fancy language" strategy.

Your point would be a lot stronger if the 'indigenous' people of Europe were slowly dying out. To extend your analogy, if a snowball that is melting wants to continue to exist it's gonna need to pack on some more snow.

Excellent.

Cheap-imitation-Cola, meet Mr Expensive-Monitor....

Interesting how you said that and I did it. Except my monitor is cheap and my cola was expensive.

However, neither Europe nor North America is establishing itself and developing at present. Akin to a snow ball that attracts further snow as it descends the mountain slope, so the West developed in conjunction to immigration, however the snow ball ultimately acquires a critical mass of sorts, a point at which any augmentation merely detracts from it. Europe, if not the USA, has transcended that watershed of sorts. The precedent of immigration ought not to compel us to prosecute it in the present, and thus the "oh, but you're a hybrid nation" argument is a fallacy.

The majority of "indigenous" Great Britian, and unequivocally native England, percieves the colonial age to the present day to be the auream mediocritas of extensive, ethnic immigration, it ought to proceed no further.

I wonder what you mean by 'indigenous' Great Britain?

Not, one assumes, the people that were there before the Normans, the Angles, the Saxons, the Romans, the Celts... etc... because I don't know if there are ANY 'true' Britons left?

So - one assumes you mean 'people who have lived in the UK for a few generations'. As a 'native' of the UK myself, I find myself partly agreeing with your assertion (there definitely ARE people who 'think' like that), but partly disagreeing... since I have known a lot of people, and most of them have been somewhere between 'resigned' about immigration, and positively in FAVOUR of the more cosmopolitan population...

Yes, I assume if we were agreeing that the fact that we would look like him would be significant as that is the most important trait, by his account. But since we don't agree, suddenly the most important trait is that we don't agree. Interesting how he wants to judge the people who disagree with him by their actions and words and how he wants to judge the people who agree with him by how they look. Interesting, no?

I believe it is a survival characteristic.

When you have a contentious platform, you have to tailor it to your audience as much as possible.

That's always the problem with 'hate-agendas', though... everytime you tailor to one prejudice, you open yourself to losing another part of your sympathiser base.

You know you could have just said, I don't like them durn forinners and got the same message across.

Your message doesn't sound any better in unnecessarily complicated sentences and verbiage.

The classic "maybe they'll act like I have a point if I use fancy language" strategy.

Your point would be a lot stronger if the 'indigenous' people of Europe were slowly dying out. To extend your analogy, if a snowball that is melting wants to continue to exist it's gonna need to pack on some more snow.

The population is moribundly large as it is. Deporation of, say, 10 million people, a one child policy, and a closed door immigration policy would allow Europe to de-proletarianise completely, and progress to mechanisation of menial tasks.

I wonder what you mean by 'indigenous' Great Britain?

Not, one assumes, the people that were there before the Normans, the Angles, the Saxons, the Romans, the Celts... etc... because I don't know if there are ANY 'true' Britons left?

So - one assumes you mean 'people who have lived in the UK for a few generations'. As a 'native' of the UK myself, I find myself partly agreeing with your assertion (there definitely ARE people who 'think' like that), but partly disagreeing... since I have known a lot of people, and most of them have been somewhere between 'resigned' about immigration, and positively in FAVOUR of the more cosmopolitan population...

The distinction is hard to establish. Depressingly, it is often an issue of colour, not religion or origin.

While I understand what you are saying regarding what Nord has been talking about, I tend to have my shares of problems with arabs. I tend to agree more with the "bomb the towelheads" crowd than the "judge them on how they treat us" crowd, as absurd as that looks...:p

Curious.

Is this a problem with 'arabs'... or a problem with certain nationalities, or a problem with a certain religious group... or a problem with certain agendas.

For example - I am a white, anglo-saxon (seems somewhat redundant when you write it out) protestant (type... no longer active)... so I have no ethnic conflicts with my current envirnoment in the Bible Belt - but I STRONGLY oppose the almost totalitarian grip the Southern Baptists have over where I live.

The population is moribundly large as it is. Deporation of, say, 10 million people, a one child policy, and a closed door immigration policy would allow Europe to de-proletarianise completely, and progress to mechanisation of menial tasks.

Never going to happen. You watch too much science-fiction, my friend.

There is too much vested money in NOT having a mechanised-menial economy.

The ONLY way we'll ever arrive at one of those 'Jetsons/Star Trek' futures, will be if we manage to finally perfect a techno-communism.

Never going to happen. You watch too much science-fiction, my friend.

There is too much vested money in NOT having a mechanised-menial economy.

The ONLY way we'll ever arrive at one of those 'Jetsons/Star Trek' futures, will be if we manage to finally perfect a techno-communism.

Firstly, I do not watch any. I formulated it all by my 'ickle self, no Star Trek at all. Promise.;)

I simply intend to preserve Brittainia as it should bloody well be.

The distinction is hard to establish. Depressingly, it is often an issue of colour, not religion or origin.

As I've said before, it just doesn't sound like anywhere I'd want to live. Maybe that's the problem with being a 'citizen of the world'... it ruins you for stagnant society.

I have to say - London and Leicester are my two favourite spots in the country... maybe in the world (although New York is right in there). I've lived in incestuous backwaters, and I've lived in 'cosmopolises'... and I know which I prefer, by a vast distance.

Firstly, I do not watch any. I formulated it all by my 'ickle self, no Star Trek at all. Promise.;)

I simply intend to preserve Brittainia as it should bloody well be.

You 'intend to preserve Brittainia'?

Well - good luck with that. You might find it a big task, for just one person, however.

I'd also strongly disagree with your vision of how it 'should be'.

What exactly IS your 'insular vision' of how it 'should be'?

And - how do you justify it?

The population is moribundly large as it is. Deporation of, say, 10 million people, a one child policy, and a closed door immigration policy would allow Europe to de-proletarianise completely, and progress to mechanisation of menial tasks.

I'm going to assume both your choice of verbiage and your points are meant to be humorous. I don't believe you're so detached from reality as to think either one of them are sound. Much of what you propose are not directly related in any way. You have to make huge logical leaps to connect them at all.

Nonsense! They have laws which I am not in favour of. Why would I go there?

And Scotland needs more immigration so that it can sustain itself. With families averaging 1.1 child, it's not hard to see what's happening there. Besides, you've yet to give me an argument why someone shouldn't be allowed to come to the country, aside from personal beliefs which are none of my business anyway.

Then they should give native Scots a tax incentive to have more Scottish children; just like the Greeks are going for more Greek children.

As I've said before, it just doesn't sound like anywhere I'd want to live. Maybe that's the problem with being a 'citizen of the world'... it ruins you for stagnant society.

I have to say - London and Leicester are my two favourite spots in the country... maybe in the world (although New York is right in there). I've lived in incestuous backwaters, and I've lived in 'cosmopolises'... and I know which I prefer, by a vast distance.

Compolitan and Multicultural constitute very different entities. I find a cosmopolitan society to entirely acceptable, however the multiculturalism implemented in Britain, with sub-urban and inner-cities ghettoes bereft of any vestige of Brittania, is utterly wrong. Cosmopolitan cities are laudable, however destroying rural Britain is not.

Personally I disagree, I prefer Durham, Oxford, Cambridge and Chichester.

You 'intend to preserve Brittainia'?

Well - good luck with that. You might find it a big task, for just one person, however.

I'd also strongly disagree with your vision of how it 'should be'.

What exactly IS your 'insular vision' of how it 'should be'?

And - how do you justify it?

Firstly, I can identify with it. Secondly, I live in it. Thirdly, its more comfortable.

However, modern Britain is not what I want in the slightest.

Curious.

Is this a problem with 'arabs'... or a problem with certain nationalities, or a problem with a certain religious group... or a problem with certain agendas.

For example - I am a white, anglo-saxon (seems somewhat redundant when you write it out) protestant (type... no longer active)... so I have no ethnic conflicts with my current envirnoment in the Bible Belt - but I STRONGLY oppose the almost totalitarian grip the Southern Baptists have over where I live.

Well...I'll introduce myself. I'm white...I'm aNorthern/Central European-American Jew.

That said I have been raised Jewish in a Jewish family. I have been raised politcally aware (I'm 16) and aware of the tensions between Jews and Muslims...mostly in the middle east.

I have done alot of research on the topic...I ever did my senior year semester research paper on the conflict in the middle east, (to an A) on it.

I tend to have problems with the arab hostility and "wont stop till we wipe Israel off the face of the earth" mentally many of them have. And, while I realize that a vast majority of the arabs are non violent, that doesnt stop them from having/preaching these beleifs in a non violent way. My trip to Israel only furthered my position on the conflict between Jews and Muslims.

Its mostly when arabs say things like.....

"We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO (in front of an Arab audience in Stockholm in 1996)

Or....."Whoever thinks of stopping the uprising before it achieves its goals, I will give him ten bullets in the chest." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO

Or....On whether the PLO police force will work with Israel against terrorism:

"Anyone who thinks the Palestinian police will try to prevent attacks outside the borders of the autonomous area is making a bitter mistake." --- Sufian Abu Zaida, a leader of Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction in Gaza (Maariv, 25 April 1994)
"If there are those who oppose the agreement with Israel, the gates are open to them to intensify the armed struggle." -- Jibril Rajoub, PLO security chief for the West Bank, during a lecture at Bethlehem University (Yediot Aharonot, 27 May 1994)

This may be the most important as it shows what the Arabs plan to do with the Jews:
The Palestinian flag "will fly over the walls of Jerusalem, the churches of Jerusalem and the mosques of Jerusalem." -- Yasser Arafat, Former Chairman of the PLO (Jordanian TV, 13 September 1993)Á

But hey!? What about the Temples of Jersusalem?:rolleyes:

Those are all people that arabs, violent and non violent alike, praise, love and support.

Also, another problem with the people generally, is that they care more about a fucking cartoon in Scanadanavia, than about the live beheadings that are shown in their own countries. :rolleyes:

And that, is my problem with arabs, in a nutshell.

And I'm not even rolling out the quotes of the President of Iran, because I assume everyone is familiar with them.

Well...I'll introduce myself. I'm white...I'm aNorthern/Central European-American Jew.

That said I have been raised Jewish in a Jewish family. I have been raised politcally aware (I'm 16) and aware of the tensions between Jews and Muslims...mostly in the middle east.

I have done alot of research on the topic...I ever did my senior year semester research paper on the conflict in the middle east, (to an A) on it.

I tend to have problems with the arab hostility and "wont stop till we wipe Israel off the face of the earth" mentally many of them have. And, while I realize that a vast majority of the arabs are non violent, that doesnt stop them from having/preaching these beleifs in a non violent way. My trip to Israel only furthered my position on the conflict between Jews and Muslims.

Its mostly when arabs say things like.....

"We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO (in front of an Arab audience in Stockholm in 1996)

Or....."Whoever thinks of stopping the uprising before it achieves its goals, I will give him ten bullets in the chest." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO

Or....On whether the PLO police force will work with Israel against terrorism:

"Anyone who thinks the Palestinian police will try to prevent attacks outside the borders of the autonomous area is making a bitter mistake." --- Sufian Abu Zaida, a leader of Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction in Gaza (Maariv, 25 April 1994)
"If there are those who oppose the agreement with Israel, the gates are open to them to intensify the armed struggle." -- Jibril Rajoub, PLO security chief for the West Bank, during a lecture at Bethlehem University (Yediot Aharonot, 27 May 1994)

This may be the most important as it shows what the Arabs plan to do with the Jews:
The Palestinian flag "will fly over the walls of Jerusalem, the churches of Jerusalem and the mosques of Jerusalem." -- Yasser Arafat, Former Chairman of the PLO (Jordanian TV, 13 September 1993)Á

But hey!? What about the Temples of Jersusalem?:rolleyes:

Those are all people that arabs, violent and non violent alike, praise, love and support.

Also, another problem with the people generally, is that they care more about a fucking cartoon in Scanadanavia, than about the live beheadings that are shown in their own countries. :rolleyes:

And that, is my problem with arabs, in a nutshell.

And I'm not even rolling out the quotes of the President of Iran, because I assume everyone is familiar with them.

So does George W. Bush and Pat Buchanan represent how you feel about Christians? About white people? Or do you only generalize about Arabs?

Compolitan and Multicultural constitute very different entities. I find a cosmopolitan society to entirely acceptable, however the multiculturalism implemented in Britain, with sub-urban and inner-cities ghettoes bereft of any vestige of Brittania, is utterly wrong. Cosmopolitan cities are laudable, however destroying rural Britain is not.

Personally I disagree, I prefer Durham, Oxford, Cambridge and Chichester.

If 'Ghettoes' are what you object to, then I can agree they are not a good thing... and they HAVE been something that the UK has largely avoided... certainly, in comparison to a lot of other places.

The problem with ghettoes, of course - is that they are EXACTLY the result of just teh kind of prejudices we have been discussing, though. The 'isolated community' is an artifact of refusal to allow integration.

I'm not surprised you like cities that could be described as fairly WASP-centric... just disappointed.

So does George W. Bush and Pat Buchanan represent how you feel about Christians? About white people? Or do you only generalize about Arabs?

First of all...I like George Bush.

Second of all...Bush, as can be seen by his polls, does NOT get widespread support.

These arab leaders do....most notably, Arafat, who was a Israel hating terrorist.

First of all...I like George Bush.

Second of all...Bush, as can be seen by his polls, does NOT get widespread support.

These arab leaders do....most notably, Arafat, who was a Israel hating terrorist.

Bush did get widespread support twice and he still should not be the basis of how we judge people even at his most popular. Second, don't confuse "most vocal" with "most". I doubt that such comments get the support of most Muslims or most Arabs. It is certainly not my experience that they do.

Well...I'll introduce myself. I'm white...I'm aNorthern/Central European-American Jew.

That said I have been raised Jewish in a Jewish family. I have been raised politcally aware (I'm 16) and aware of the tensions between Jews and Muslims...mostly in the middle east.

I have done alot of research on the topic...I ever did my senior year semester research paper on the conflict in the middle east, (to an A) on it.

I tend to have problems with the arab hostility and "wont stop till we wipe Israel off the face of the earth" mentally many of them have. And, while I realize that a vast majority of the arabs are non violent, that doesnt stop them from having/preaching these beleifs in a non violent way. My trip to Israel only furthered my position on the conflict between Jews and Muslims.

Its mostly when arabs say things like.....

"We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO (in front of an Arab audience in Stockholm in 1996)

Or....."Whoever thinks of stopping the uprising before it achieves its goals, I will give him ten bullets in the chest." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO

Or....On whether the PLO police force will work with Israel against terrorism:

"Anyone who thinks the Palestinian police will try to prevent attacks outside the borders of the autonomous area is making a bitter mistake." --- Sufian Abu Zaida, a leader of Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction in Gaza (Maariv, 25 April 1994)
"If there are those who oppose the agreement with Israel, the gates are open to them to intensify the armed struggle." -- Jibril Rajoub, PLO security chief for the West Bank, during a lecture at Bethlehem University (Yediot Aharonot, 27 May 1994)

This may be the most important as it shows what the Arabs plan to do with the Jews:
The Palestinian flag "will fly over the walls of Jerusalem, the churches of Jerusalem and the mosques of Jerusalem." -- Yasser Arafat, Former Chairman of the PLO (Jordanian TV, 13 September 1993)Á

But hey!? What about the Temples of Jersusalem?:rolleyes:

Those are all people that arabs, violent and non violent alike, praise, love and support.

Also, another problem with the people generally, is that they care more about a fucking cartoon in Scanadanavia, than about the live beheadings that are shown in their own countries. :rolleyes:

And that, is my problem with arabs, in a nutshell.

And I'm not even rolling out the quotes of the President of Iran, because I assume everyone is familiar with them.

I've already stated before that I have Jewish family - although I am told that, since my grandfather was Jewish, and my grandmother was not - I, myself, am not.

I'm not religious at all - so that element is of little importance to me.

The problem is, as I see it 'you are against arabs' for a situation that 'we' (non-arab countries) made.... and not just recently, but repeatedly, over the course of history.

But - the worst of it is, the creation of a false Israel... like creating geographic borders has anything to do with the 'people' of Israel. And - there is actually the problem. Islam, as a religion derived from Judaism - sees the GEOGRAPHIC state of Israel as a pretender... to their way of thinking, the GEOGRAPHICAL Israel is an affront to the scripture. And- not only do they see it as false, but it was a state FORCED on them, an enforced relocation of some people (and we all know how THAT has worked out, historically), and an enforced settlement by some other people.

It was a situation just MADE to breed tension. It's like "Jews for Jesus" trying to set up shop in a synagogue.

And the problem is - the west has constantly sided WITH this 'pretender'. Not just sided, either.... armed, and supported.... so what MIGHT have been possibly resolved locally - has actually becaome ALSO an issue about Western interference in the Middle East.

It is no wonder passions are stirred up, and people are so polarised on the issue.

But - I still don't see what this has to do with 'arabs'... since not everyone who might be described as 'arab' is Muslim... and not everyone who might be described as Muslim is 'arab'.

And, neither group is supportive of what you oppose, in entirety.

As for 'turning their heads' to the atrocities done in the Middle East - here in the West, our hands are not clean. Indeed - living in America, one cannot help but be aware we are walking daily, on lands stolen and bought with blood, in the name of the God of Jacob and Isaiah.

Bush did get widespread support twice and he still should not be the basis of how we judge people even at his most popular. Second, don't confuse "most vocal" with "most". I doubt that such comments get the support of most Muslims or most Arabs. It is certainly not my experience that they do.

The people that make those comments get the support.

Yeah, Bush got widspread support when we got bombed and when he invaded Afghanastan. Duh.

Those people and their parties are dedicated to the elimination of Israel and the elimination of Jews....thats their goal.

Arabs...ALOT of arabs, tend to support those people, their parties, and their idealogy, even if not by means of violence.

These arab leaders do....most notably, Arafat, who was a Israel hating terrorist.

The Russians refer to the Chechen rebels as 'terrorists'... the Chechens call themselves something more like 'partisans' or 'patriots'. One man's 'insurgent' is another man's 'freedom fighter'.

The people that make those comments get the support.

Yeah, Bush got widspread support when we got bombed and when he invaded Afghanastan. Duh.

Those people and their parties are dedicated to the elimination of Israel and the elimination of Jews....thats their goal.

Arabs...ALOT of arabs, tend to support those people, their parties, and their idealogy, even if not by means of violence.

How many is a lot? What percentage? What percentage of people have to hold a belief in order to justify discriminating against all of them?

Palestine and Israel are both guilty of some pretty massive attrocities. Should I hold that all Jews support those attrocities because so many Jews support the existance and leadership of Israel?

The Russians refer to the Chechen rebels as 'terrorists'... the Chechens call themselves something more like 'partisans' or 'patriots'. One man's 'insurgent' is another man's 'freedom fighter'.

Not to mention it's a pretty one-sided view considering the attrocities committed by Israel. It's not the place to get into it here, but the Israel-Palestine conflict is hardly the best example of proving that Arabs are somehow widely willing to accept violence. One could come the same conclusion about Jews on the same basis.

But - the worst of it is, the creation of a false Israel... like creating geographic borders has anything to do with the 'people' of Israel. And - there is actually the problem. Islam, as a religion derived from Judaism - sees the GEOGRAPHIC state of Israel as a pretender... to their way of thinking, the GEOGRAPHICAL Israel is an affront to the scripture. And- not only do they see it as false, but it was a state FORCED on them, an enforced relocation of some people (and we all know how THAT has worked out, historically), and an enforced settlement by some other people.

Its not a false Israel, then was Israel then, this is Israel now. Who cares if it was forced upon them. Both sides fought for it, in blood, Jews just happen to of won. Why should that war be any different from all the others. The spoils of war always go to the victors.

It was a situation just MADE to breed tension. It's like "Jews for Jesus" trying to set up shop in a synagogue.

Nice analogy. Haha, I actually giggled at that. :p

And the problem is - the west has constantly sided WITH this 'pretender'. Not just sided, either.... armed, and supported.... so what MIGHT have been possibly resolved locally - has actually becaome ALSO an issue about Western interference in the Middle East.

And I hope we do until the end of time, because the moment we stop, Israel falls, the Jews die, and the arabs win. Israel, though it sometimes uses violent offensive strategies, is technically on the defensive. Its just trying to live till tomorrow...A wish that the arabs to not want to see fufilled.

But - I still don't see what this has to do with 'arabs'... since not everyone who might be described as 'arab' is Muslim... and not everyone who might be described as Muslim is 'arab'.

And, neither group is supportive of what you oppose, in entirety.

Ok, to be fair, I'm at odds with Arabs/Muslims of the middle east/North Africa and anywhere else in the world that support the actions and idealogy of the Arabs/Muslims in the middle east/North Africa.

Also, theres always exceptions...but I guess not enough to diffuse the situation.

As for 'turning their heads' to the atrocities done in the Middle East - here in the West, our hands are not clean. Indeed - living in America, one cannot help but be aware we are walking daily, on lands stolen and bought with blood, in the name of the God of Jacob and Isaiah.

Yeah, but we are not talking about here in the West, we are talking about over there in the middle east. Anyway I dont feel ashamed early Americans taking this land. It was war, and there always will be war. And the rules of war will always be the same. I see no difference why the war with the Indians should be any different.

The Russians refer to the Chechen rebels as 'terrorists'... the Chechens call themselves something more like 'partisans' or 'patriots'. One man's 'insurgent' is another man's 'freedom fighter'.

If you belive this are subjunctive, yes.

But I dont. I beleive in good and evil and I beleive that it DOES exist in this world. People who blow up school children like the Chechens are not fit to lick a Russians boot.

How many is a lot? What percentage? What percentage of people have to hold a belief in order to justify discriminating against all of them?

Palestine and Israel are both guilty of some pretty massive attrocities. Should I hold that all Jews support those attrocities because so many Jews support the existance and leadership of Israel?

The Jews fight because the second they dont, they're slaughtered. The arabs fight because they simply dont like the Jews.

The Jews fight because the second they dont, they're slaughtered. The arabs fight because they simply dont like the Jews.

You sort of happily declare that they are the 'victors' and deserve the spoils, but then you pretend like what they are doing is defensive. They aggressively took land (justified or not) from the Arabs that are do not believe the war is over. You can't pretend like war works like "we got what we want, so we declare this war OVER." The fact is that there is not peace and there is not peace because many Palestinians have suffered under the Israel boot, their fathers, brothers, sisters, mothers, and CHILDREN have died. Your view is so one-sided as to make it almost useless. It's clear your judgement of them starts with inequality. Why should anyone be surprised that it ends at inequality?

You sort of happily declare that they are the 'victors' and deserve the spoils, but then you pretend like what they are doing is defensive. They aggressively took land (justified or not) from the Arabs that are do not believe the war is over. You can't pretend like war works like "we got what we want, so we declare this war OVER." The fact is that there is not peace and there is not peace because many Palestinians have suffered under the Israel boot, their fathers, brothers, sisters, mothers, and CHILDREN have died. Your view is so one-sided as to make it almost useless. It's clear your judgement of them starts with inequality. Why should anyone be surprised that it ends at inequality?

The Arabs started the war...if the Israelis beat them, why shouldnt they reap the rewards?

Just about every arab country in the world declared war on Israel at the same time...and Israel still won.

The Arabs started the war...if the Israelis beat them, why shouldnt they reap the rewards?

Just about every arab country in the world declared war on Israel at the same time...and Israel still won.
The Arabs started the war and created Israel? How did the Arabs start a war with Israel before it existed?

Israel didn't win alone. They had western support. The West won out over the Arabs and then acts like we don't understand why Arabs don't like the West. Israel didn't win anything without the support of the West and still couldn't hold that land without the West. It was a strategic action and it has had a profound effect on the instability of the Middle East.

EDIT: Out of curiosity, how do you think the US would react if order to give 56% of its land to the black population of the US under threat of violence by the Union of African nations or something like that. The creation of Israel was an act of war by your own admission and then you act like they started it.

The Arabs started the war and created Israel? How did the Arabs start a war with Israel before it existed?

Israel didn't win alone. They had western support. The West won out over the Arabs and then acts like we don't understand why Arabs don't like the West. Israel didn't win anything without the support of the West and still couldn't hold that land without the West. It was a strategic action and it has had a profound effect on the instability of the Middle East.

Once Israel declared itself a state, all arab countries attacked it.

Once Israel declared itself a state, all arab countries attacked it.

Israel didn't declare itself a state. They took the land from under Arab control and gave 56% of Palestine to a population of 650,000 people while giving the remaining 44% to 1.3 million people. I seem to remember a part of US trying to declare itself a country. Seems to me that was considered an act of aggression. Interesting how one-sided history can be, no? At least, you're not being one-sided about it. Nothing about what you're saying is an attempt to justify horrible Israeli attrocities while holding up similar attrocities on the part of Palestinian rebels. /sarcasm

Its not a false Israel, then was Israel then, this is Israel now. Who cares if it was forced upon them. Both sides fought for it, in blood, Jews just happen to of won. Why should that war be any different from all the others. The spoils of war always go to the victors.


The point is - no matter what you and I think - the Muslims believe that the 'state of Israel' is non-scriptural. That the Hebrews are a dispersed people, and thus, that ANY state built the way our 'Israel' was - MUST be a 'false Israel'.

Can you quote scripture to SUPPORT the modern state of Israel as THE 'legitimate' Israel? You have to remember, the Muslims consider Torah to be an integral part of their religion. If they believe Israel is 'false'... they are not decidingm arbitrarily.


Nice analogy. Haha, I actually giggled at that. :p


Thanks. I'll be here all week. :)


And I hope we do until the end of time, because the moment we stop, Israel falls, the Jews die, and the arabs win. Israel, though it sometimes uses violent offensive strategies, is technically on the defensive. Its just trying to live till tomorrow...A wish that the arabs to not want to see fufilled.


Israel IS theoretically fighting a war of defense, yes. The problem is - they ARE the 'interloper'. They are the 'occupying power'. And, human nature does not ever adapt well to occupying powers.

Personally - I believe the West should pull out of Israel completely. Let the citizens of Israel, if they so chose, settle elsewhere. I just don't believe it is 'worth' this conflict in the middle-east to back an enforced-occupation.


Ok, to be fair, I'm at odds with Arabs/Muslims of the middle east/North Africa and anywhere else in the world that support the actions and idealogy of the Arabs/Muslims in the middle east/North Africa.

Also, theres always exceptions...but I guess not enough to diffuse the situation.


That's the problem, though... nobody seems to be working on defusing the situation. Nobody seems to want to - and I'm talking about EITHER side.


Yeah, but we are not talking about here in the West, we are talking about over there in the middle east. Anyway I dont feel ashamed early Americans taking this land. It was war, and there always will be war. And the rules of war will always be the same. I see no difference why the war with the Indians should be any different.

There was no 'war with the Indians'. We arrived on this land, and were originally welcomed.Until, basically, we found out that there were no hard and fast systems of ownership, then we carried the sword across the land, and we called it 'god's will'.

If you don't feel ashamed of what happened, the chances are you haven't yet learned MOST of our 'brave frontier history'.

If you belive this are subjunctive, yes.

But I dont. I beleive in good and evil and I beleive that it DOES exist in this world. People who blow up school children like the Chechens are not fit to lick a Russians boot.

Wasn't it decided that the explosives were indirectly detonated by Russian armour firing at the building?

As for 'subjective' versus 'good and evil'... perhaps you are right. But - the fact that Russia has been slaughtering civillians in Chechnya for a decade, with no attention paid by the West... makes me wonder how you are choosing where to draw the line of 'good' and 'evil'.

Wasn't it decided that the explosives were indirectly detonated by Russian armour firing at the building?

As for 'subjective' versus 'good and evil'... perhaps you are right. But - the fact that Russia has been slaughtering civillians in Chechnya for a decade, with no attention paid by the West... makes me wonder how you are choosing where to draw the line of 'good' and 'evil'.

OMG...Did I say subjunctive???!!!

*Dies of humiliation*

*Damn Spanish homework*

Yes well the Russians are guilty too, but I see anyone who targets a school as evil.

I had never heard about the Russians indirectly detoning the building...but still the Chechens PLANTED the bombs there in the first place.

OMG...Did I say subjunctive???!!!

*Dies of humiliation*

*Damn Spanish homework*

Yes well the Russians are guilty too, but I see anyone who targets a school as evil.

I had never heard about the Russians indirectly detoning the building...but still the Chechens PLANTED the bombs there in the first place.

This is arguably true... but then, how far can you push people before they will look for ANY way to respond?

I mean - the West STILL isn't involved in Chechnya, is it... instead, we pussyfoot around the former Soviets, just in case we reawaken an asskicking... the same reason we sit on our patooties while China threatens war with Taiwan (I believe, the US has actually OFFICALLY stated that we would remain uninvolved, now).

So - Tiny Chechnya, at the mercy of Russian predation... with NO HOPE of external attention, let alone aid.... they have never really had a lot of choices, not even bad ones.

This is arguably true... but then, how far can you push people before they will look for ANY way to respond?

I mean - the West STILL isn't involved in Chechnya, is it... instead, we pussyfoot around the former Soviets, just in case we reawaken an asskicking... the same reason we sit on our patooties while China threatens war with Taiwan (I believe, the US has actually OFFICALLY stated that we would remain uninvolved, now).

So - Tiny Chechnya, at the mercy of Russian predation... with NO HOPE of external attention, let alone aid.... they have never really had a lot of choices, not even bad ones.

Yes, the world has problems...and while I may not be able to come up with solutions, I can most definitely come up with ways one WONT get solutions. Bombing or PLACING bombs around schools full of schoolchildred would be one way.

By the way..I'm agreeing with you on all the problems you have we need to face above...

Yes, the world has problems...and while I may not be able to come up with solutions, I can most definitely come up with ways one WONT get solutions. Bombing or PLACING bombs around schools full of schoolchildred would be one way.

By the way..I'm agreeing with you on all the problems you have we need to face above...

Well, since we are agreeing... (;))... do you not see that all of these little situations the Chechnya's and Taiwan's and Israel's of this world, will just continue for ever, AS LONG as we think in terms of who OWNS which piece of rock, and which people they should ALLOW to be there?

" Personally - I believe the West should pull out of Israel completely. Let the citizens of Israel, if they so chose, settle elsewhere. I just don't believe it is 'worth' this conflict in the middle-east to back an enforced-occupation. "

Israel can hold their own. What gets me is how a great majority of western people think we can "beat" or "conform" these peoples/cultures in the east. How mighty haughty. Iran(Persia)-Iraq(Mesopotamia)-Pakistan and the rest of these middle eastern countries are of ancient cultures. They have been fighting over there for thousands of years. War is part of their culture. Why in hell would we think we can go over there and change things? I don't give a damn how much "modern technology" the west has, they(emphasis on the US) will never beat these people. Especially the way we handle things nowadays. With the military bowing down when the public screams cause some pow's got smacked or don't get filet mignon or 500 thread count bed sheets. We should NOT be over there period. But tell that to your Jewish Lobby and the PNAC.

" Personally - I believe the West should pull out of Israel completely. Let the citizens of Israel, if they so chose, settle elsewhere. I just don't believe it is 'worth' this conflict in the middle-east to back an enforced-occupation. "

Israel can hold their own. What gets me is how a great majority of western people think we can "beat" or "conform" these peoples/cultures in the east. How mighty haughty. Iran(Persia)-Iraq(Mesopotamia)-Pakistan and the rest of these middle eastern countries are of ancient cultures. They have been fighting over there for thousands of years. War is part of their culture. Why in hell would we think we can go over there and change things? I don't give a damn how much "modern technology" the west has, they(emphasis on the US) will never beat these people. Especially the way we handle things nowadays. With the military bowing down when the public screams cause some pow's got smacked or don't get filet mignon or 500 thread count bed sheets. We should NOT be over there period. But tell that to your Jewish Lobby and the PNAC.

Oh, I agree.

Also - I have to admit a little vicarious interest in seeing what WOULD happen if, as some claim, the 'scripture were put to the test', by abandoning the (alleged) state of Israel.

What scripture are you talking about? I'm not versed, but are you talking about when Israel will basically be at war with everyone? And that they will not be defeated?

Or rather, when everyone is at war with Israel.

Well, since we are agreeing... (;))... do you not see that all of these little situations the Chechnya's and Taiwan's and Israel's of this world, will just continue for ever, AS LONG as we think in terms of who OWNS which piece of rock, and which people they should ALLOW to be there?

Sort of, BUT, if your moving this conversation towards a global civilization, I dont think we can agree. There are just too many different types of people for a "we are all citizens of 1 earth" kinda mentality. Plus it would make nationalism obselete...:(

Sort of, BUT, if your moving this conversation towards a global civilization, I dont think we can agree. There are just too many different types of people for a "we are all citizens of 1 earth" kinda mentality. Plus it would make nationalism obselete...:(

You say that like nationalism is a good thing. Nationalism is the reason people are killing each other in the Middle East. I know of very few good things that come from nationalism.

You say that like nationalism is a good thing. Nationalism is the reason people are killing each other in the Middle East. I know of very few good things that come from nationalism.

Exactly... almost word for word what I was thinking.

I'm looking forward to a future where we can put this my-tribe-must-survive mentality behind us. Looking at the race for arms... it's only a matter of time before one of two things happens... we find a way to get along... or it becomes irrelevent in some messy and irrevocable fashion.

Exactly... almost word for word what I was thinking.

I'm looking forward to a future where we can put this my-tribe-must-survive mentality behind us. Looking at the race for arms... it's only a matter of time before one of two things happens... we find a way to get along... or it becomes irrelevent in some messy and irrevocable fashion.

I'm unconcerned about the tribe. I'm more concerned with what that bastard next door is doing to my hedge.

I'm unconcerned about the tribe. I'm more concerned with what that bastard next door is doing to my hedge.

Garden centres just don't sell enough Triffids, these days...

Garden centres just don't sell enough Triffids, these days...

And i'm kept awake at night from the noise the bloody Midwich cuckoos make in his trees...

And i'm kept awake at night from the noise the bloody Midwich cuckoos make in his trees...

It's a risk.

You COULD plant some algae and fungi in amongst the hedge as a deterrent.. although it might not be enough to prevent such mindless damage.

That's the trouble with lichen...

It's a risk.

You COULD plant some algae and fungi in amongst the hedge as a deterrent.. although it might not be enough to prevent such mindless damage.

That's the trouble with lichen...

I'm desperately trying to think of any other John Wyndham books but aside from the Chrysalids, drawing a mental blank, and it's too late to make a pun about that ;)

I'm desperately trying to think of any other John Wyndham books but aside from the Chrysalids, drawing a mental blank, and it's too late to make a pun about that ;)

Well - they showed "Chocky" on TV when I was a kid, and I believe that was Wyndham. Similarly - you could have stretched "Midwich Cuckoos" to "Village of the Damned" - which I believe was based on that book.

The Kraken Awakes would have been possible, too.

Other than that - I have read two compilations ("Consider Her Ways" and "Exiles on Asperus"), but I'm sure there is other stuff.

I quite like Wyndham. :) (And, I'm a little surprised to find anyone else even KNOWS of him).

Well - they showed "Chocky" on TV when I was a kid, and I believe that was Wyndham. Similarly - you could have stretched "Midwich Cuckoos" to "Village of the Damned" - which I believe was based on that book.

The Kraken Awakes would have been possible, too.

Other than that - I have read two compilations ("Consider Her Ways" and "Exiles on Asperus"), but I'm sure there is other stuff.

I quite like Wyndham. :) (And, I'm a little surprised to find anyone else even KNOWS of him).

Without sounding overly arrogant (it's not, i'm one of the last generation of a particular working class culture where reading = the most important thing on earth, and i sit gazing round at people about five years younger than me who haven't picked up a book in their life and it saddens me), I'm quite obscenely well read (and British, which helps) which accounts for the Wyndham knowledge. I was trying to think of something to do with Chocky and Village of the Damned but my evening has consisted of ripping my entire cd collection to my pc in preperation to selling it so i'm more than a little fuzzy and vague at the moment. Plus i was conflating him in my head with John Christopher, author of the "Tripods" series ("Tripods" "Triffids", ah...)

50s version of Triffids is the bomb though. Howard Keel!

Without sounding overly arrogant (it's not, i'm one of the last generation of a particular working class culture where reading = the most important thing on earth, and i sit gazing round at people about five years younger than me who haven't picked up a book in their life and it saddens me), I'm quite obscenely well read (and British, which helps) which accounts for the Wyndham knowledge. I was trying to think of something to do with Chocky and Village of the Damned but my evening has consisted of ripping my entire cd collection to my pc in preperation to selling it so i'm more than a little fuzzy and vague at the moment. Plus i was conflating him in my head with John Christopher, author of the "Tripods" series ("Tripods" "Triffids", ah...)

50s version of Triffids is the bomb though. Howard Keel!

Nothing wrong with Tripods, either... although I have to admit that my only real interaction with Tripods was the TV version...

But, even when I still lived in the UK, I noticed... well, what you refer to... this lack of any literary sophistication. It was hard enough finding people who were aware of Asimov or Dick, without stretching to Aldiss, Blish or Wyndham.

Nothing wrong with Tripods, either... although I have to admit that my only real interaction with Tripods was the TV version...

But, even when I still lived in the UK, I noticed... well, what you refer to... this lack of any literary sophistication. It was hard enough finding people who were aware of Asimov or Dick, without stretching to Aldiss, Blish or Wyndham.

To not be aware of Aldiss or Bliss, shameless (mind you, what scares me more is that "Stand on Zanzibar" by Brunner isn't part of the national curriculum. Or "The Sheep Look Up" by the same). I remember similar shock about five years back when Moorcock wrote a letter to NME castigating Tony Blair, and the letters editor had to explain *who he was*.

Asimov. Hmmm. I read so much of him as a teen, i went and re-read some the other day, and thought how shockingly badly constructed most of the short stories were, clunky dialogue and characterisation. Some of this might be to do with not really reading genre after a certain age (ok, with the exception of about 4 or 5 authors - Tim Powers, Guy Gavriel Kay, George RR Martin in fantasy, Ken McLeod and the mighty Ian M Banks in Sci-fi), or, to be more precise, reading other genre writers but merely as chaff, to keep my brain ticking over on bus journeys until i could get my hands on some Phillip Roth or John Fowles in the house.

Dick, though, Dick is another matter. Some of his short stories are as bad as Asimov for clunkiness, and both show their roots in the magazine world and "quick, lets have someone do 10 lines of exposition so we don't have to flesh out a background", but he wins through with his massively unhinged paranoia about every level of reality.

To not be aware of Aldiss or Bliss, shameless (mind you, what scares me more is that "Stand on Zanzibar" by Brunner isn't part of the national curriculum. Or "The Sheep Look Up" by the same). I remember similar shock about five years back when Moorcock wrote a letter to NME castigating Tony Blair, and the letters editor had to explain *who he was*.

Asimov. Hmmm. I read so much of him as a teen, i went and re-read some the other day, and thought how shockingly badly constructed most of the short stories were, clunky dialogue and characterisation. Some of this might be to do with not really reading genre after a certain age (ok, with the exception of about 4 or 5 authors - Tim Powers, Guy Gavriel Kay, George RR Martin in fantasy, Ken McLeod and the mighty Ian M Banks in Sci-fi), or, to be more precise, reading other genre writers but merely as chaff, to keep my brain ticking over on bus journeys until i could get my hands on some Phillip Roth or John Fowles in the house.

Dick, though, Dick is another matter. Some of his short stories are as bad as Asimov for clunkiness, and both show their roots in the magazine world and "quick, lets have someone do 10 lines of exposition so we don't have to flesh out a background", but he wins through with his massively unhinged paranoia about every level of reality.

I believe you touch, there, on what it is that makes Asimov 'clunky'... he never quite got over writing episodes, I believe. Dick's strength was always in the short-story, anyway... so anything longer is basically a series of shorts.

I stayed mainly 'in' genre - with the obvious 'required' exertions into Anne Rice (her 'genre' stuff, but also her more risque ouvre), Bret Easton Ellis and Ian McEwan...

Within 'genre', I moved more towards what have become termed 'feminist fantasyists'... like Sheri S Tepper, Ursula le Guin, Sharon Shinn, Margaret Atwood, Robin McKinley... and 'similar' writers: Anne MacCaffrey and Julian May, for example.

As expressed before, I'm a fan of those 'core' authors... Wyndham, Blish, Aldiss, etc.

I find it hard to imagine a world where Moorcock needs introduction... "Behold the Man" has to be one of the greats...

Well...I'll introduce myself. I'm white...I'm aNorthern/Central European-American Jew.

That said I have been raised Jewish in a Jewish family. I have been raised politcally aware (I'm 16) and aware of the tensions between Jews and Muslims...mostly in the middle east.

I have done alot of research on the topic...I ever did my senior year semester research paper on the conflict in the middle east, (to an A) on it.

I tend to have problems with the arab hostility and "wont stop till we wipe Israel off the face of the earth" mentally many of them have. And, while I realize that a vast majority of the arabs are non violent, that doesnt stop them from having/preaching these beleifs in a non violent way. My trip to Israel only furthered my position on the conflict between Jews and Muslims.

Its mostly when arabs say things like.....

"We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO (in front of an Arab audience in Stockholm in 1996)

Or....."Whoever thinks of stopping the uprising before it achieves its goals, I will give him ten bullets in the chest." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO

Or....On whether the PLO police force will work with Israel against terrorism:

"Anyone who thinks the Palestinian police will try to prevent attacks outside the borders of the autonomous area is making a bitter mistake." --- Sufian Abu Zaida, a leader of Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction in Gaza (Maariv, 25 April 1994)
"If there are those who oppose the agreement with Israel, the gates are open to them to intensify the armed struggle." -- Jibril Rajoub, PLO security chief for the West Bank, during a lecture at Bethlehem University (Yediot Aharonot, 27 May 1994)

This may be the most important as it shows what the Arabs plan to do with the Jews:
The Palestinian flag "will fly over the walls of Jerusalem, the churches of Jerusalem and the mosques of Jerusalem." -- Yasser Arafat, Former Chairman of the PLO (Jordanian TV, 13 September 1993)Á

But hey!? What about the Temples of Jersusalem?:rolleyes:

Those are all people that arabs, violent and non violent alike, praise, love and support.

Also, another problem with the people generally, is that they care more about a fucking cartoon in Scanadanavia, than about the live beheadings that are shown in their own countries. :rolleyes:

And that, is my problem with arabs, in a nutshell.

And I'm not even rolling out the quotes of the President of Iran, because I assume everyone is familiar with them.

You are 16 and 6'4"?

Tydelig, jeg spøkte, forstod du det??? :rolleyes:
Har du kjöpt en frasebok til turister, eller funnet en oversetningsmaskin som virker?

Hvorfor bruker du ikke tjoderbindningsmassper?

Exactly... almost word for word what I was thinking.

I'm looking forward to a future where we can put this my-tribe-must-survive mentality behind us. Looking at the race for arms... it's only a matter of time before one of two things happens... we find a way to get along... or it becomes irrelevent in some messy and irrevocable fashion.
I just don't get nationalism.

I love my country. I think America is a really kickass place. I think the American system of government is pretty damn brilliant, albeit with a few crucial problems at the moment. I love living here, and I like the vast majority of my fellow Americans.

But I know that being American doesn't innoculate somebody against stupidity, or cruelty, or bigotry. Members of my "tribe" are just as capable of making mistakes as anybody else. We're a bunch of individuals who share some common values, but we have as many differences as similarities. How could I possibly make some blanket statement about how "my people" are more important than any other group of people?

I believe you touch, there, on what it is that makes Asimov 'clunky'... he never quite got over writing episodes, I believe. Dick's strength was always in the short-story, anyway... so anything longer is basically a series of shorts.

I stayed mainly 'in' genre - with the obvious 'required' exertions into Anne Rice (her 'genre' stuff, but also her more risque ouvre), Bret Easton Ellis and Ian McEwan...

Within 'genre', I moved more towards what have become termed 'feminist fantasyists'... like Sheri S Tepper, Ursula le Guin, Sharon Shinn, Margaret Atwood, Robin McKinley... and 'similar' writers: Anne MacCaffrey and Julian May, for example.

As expressed before, I'm a fan of those 'core' authors... Wyndham, Blish, Aldiss, etc.

I find it hard to imagine a world where Moorcock needs introduction... "Behold the Man" has to be one of the greats...

Behold the Man has to be one of the best alternate modern gospels written, coming second only to Kazantzakis. As a teenager, I loved Moorcock, but I wonder how much of that has to do with teenage angst. The whole Eternal Warrior thing really plays into that, in my mind. I haven't read much Wyndham, but that has more to do with living in rural Canada when I discovered his writings, so it was hard finding his books. Lately, I've been into Iain M. Banks, Card, and rereading Herbert. Asimov is clunky, but I find most male american writers are for some reason.

Oh, and I love immigrants!

Behold the Man has to be one of the best alternate modern gospels written, coming second only to Kazantzakis. As a teenager, I loved Moorcock, but I wonder how much of that has to do with teenage angst. The whole Eternal Warrior thing really plays into that, in my mind. I haven't read much Wyndham, but that has more to do with living in rural Canada when I discovered his writings, so it was hard finding his books. Lately, I've been into Iain M. Banks, Card, and rereading Herbert. Asimov is clunky, but I find most male american writers are for some reason.

Oh, and I love immigrants!

Oooh, kept on topic too... nicely played. :)

I agree it seems to be largely a male thing, in the American writers... and I constantly find myself thinking it's because men (seem to) tend to write towards a goal... success, perhaps. Thus - they are likely to try to get published as quickly as possible, which lends itself to serial work.. and it's just hard to shake off, maybe.

Herbert, I think, MIGHT be an exception.

Regarding Moorcock... the Eternal Champion stuff was actually my least favourite of his offerings. I guess it was just the most 'popular' material.

Oooh, kept on topic too... nicely played. :)

I agree it seems to be largely a male thing, in the American writers... and I constantly find myself thinking it's because men (seem to) tend to write towards a goal... success, perhaps. Thus - they are likely to try to get published as quickly as possible, which lends itself to serial work.. and it's just hard to shake off, maybe.

Herbert, I think, MIGHT be an exception.

Regarding Moorcock... the Eternal Champion stuff was actually my least favourite of his offerings. I guess it was just the most 'popular' material.

I don't find this clunkiness with writers from other countries, though. Do UK sci-fi writers tend to write for serials and magazines before having novels published? If not, would having a large influx of UK writers emigrating to the US create a shift that would dilute or remove the clunkiness from aspiring male US writers? An analogy would be south asian influence on British cuisine.

I believe you touch, there, on what it is that makes Asimov 'clunky'... he never quite got over writing episodes, I believe. Dick's strength was always in the short-story, anyway... so anything longer is basically a series of shorts.

I stayed mainly 'in' genre - with the obvious 'required' exertions into Anne Rice (her 'genre' stuff, but also her more risque ouvre), Bret Easton Ellis and Ian McEwan...

Within 'genre', I moved more towards what have become termed 'feminist fantasyists'... like Sheri S Tepper, Ursula le Guin, Sharon Shinn, Margaret Atwood, Robin McKinley... and 'similar' writers: Anne MacCaffrey and Julian May, for example.

As expressed before, I'm a fan of those 'core' authors... Wyndham, Blish, Aldiss, etc.

I find it hard to imagine a world where Moorcock needs introduction... "Behold the Man" has to be one of the greats...

I never got into Rice that much (one of my courses in Uni when I did American Studies was "The American Horror Genre 1958-1984", and one week we studied both her and Nancy A Collins, which provoked my quite incisive remark that Anne Rice was a hippy writer whereas Nancy Collins was a punk one. Being 6 in 1977, you can understand where my sensibilities lie) - the first two or three were good but god did she go on. The risque stuff was...well, i've read much better porn, to be honest.

Love Atwood. Absolutely adore.

Was - and to a degree - still remain a big fan of Julian May - her "Saga of the Exiles" and then the Galactic Mileu trilogy/quatrology have a big place in my heart.

McEwan is the bomb. Big fan. Also of roughly that generation, Kurieshi. Was a big fan of Ellis, but i've switched round, i find the emotional blankness of his work a bit of a cop out.

And Behold the Man? Absolute classic. I was a big fan of certain elements of the Eternal Champion series (Corum and Hawkmoon, to be honest, i never really fancied the whole Elric thing - although the "Elric at the End of Time" book of stories does feature his own masterful destruction of the very mythos he'd helped create, with the story "The Stone Thing", first time i read it i howled with laughter). But the real meat was the Jerry Cornelius and the Dancers at The End of Time stories. Masterful.

If 'Ghettoes' are what you object to, then I can agree they are not a good thing... and they HAVE been something that the UK has largely avoided... certainly, in comparison to a lot of other places.

The problem with ghettoes, of course - is that they are EXACTLY the result of just teh kind of prejudices we have been discussing, though. The 'isolated community' is an artifact of refusal to allow integration.

I'm not surprised you like cities that could be described as fairly WASP-centric... just disappointed.

WASP? White (blank) (blank) Professional I assume?

As for ghettoes, they are the resultant of misconducted immigration, they would not exist were immigration not a truth.

White Anglo Saxon Protestant I believe

You are 16 and 6'4"?

6'3, 6'4....not sure on the EXACT number, why?