NationStates Jolt Archive


EU May Have More Than 125 Million Muslims by 2025

Pages : [1] 2
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 17:25
Western censuses rarely ask respondents about their faith. But it is estimated that between 15 and 20 million Muslims now call Europe home

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html


Given continued immigration and high Muslim fertility rates, the National Intelligence Council projects that Europe's Muslim population will double by 2025.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html

So up to 30-40 million muslims by 2025. Plus:

EU has started accession negotiations with Turkey. The proccess will be complete within 10-15 years. Turkey has 70 million population now and growing rapidly. Plus there is Bosnia and then Albania who'll probably be EU members by 2025.
That makes EU muslim population by 2025 more than 125 million.

Doesnt all this remind you of Rome. Rome fell when it was invaded by inferior cultures. Same is happening to Europe now. I call Islamic culture inferior because of the way they treat women and homosexuals and other shitty stuff. Even in Turkey, which is regarded as an example Muslim country, 90% of women are subjected to violence by their husbands or boyfriends.

http://www.omct.org/pdf/vaw/publications/2003/eng_2003_09_turkey.pdf
(page 10)

What do you think? Diskuss....

Edit: Fall of Rome: Barbarians are the primary reason in many theories and they are important reason, if not primary, in many others...


Mainstream theories

Mainstream theories about Rome's fall can be split into several general categories:
[edit]

"Declining empire" theories

Generally, these theories argue that the Roman Empire might have survived, but due to some combination of circumstances didn't. Some historians in this camp believe that Rome "brought it on themselves," i.e., ensured their own collapse by either misguided policies or degradation of character.
[edit]

Vegetius

The historian Vegetius theorized and has recently been supported by the historian Arthur Ferrill that the Roman Empire declined and fell due to a combination of increasing contact with barbarians and the subsequent "barbarization", as well as a surge in decadence and the following lethargy. This resulted in complacency and ill-discipline among the legions, making it primarily a military issue.
[edit]

Gibbon

Edward Gibbon famously placed the blame on a loss of civic virtue among the Roman citizens. They gradually outsourced their duties to defend the Empire to barbarian mercenaries who eventually turned on them. Gibbon considered that Christianity had contributed to this, making the populace less interested in the worldly here-and-now and more willing to wait for the rewards of heaven. "[T]he decline of Rome was the natural and inevitable effect of immoderate greatness. Prosperity ripened the principle of decay; the causes of destruction multiplied with the extent of conquest; and as soon as time or accident had removed the artificial supports, the stupendous fabric yielded to the pressure of its own weight," he wrote.
[edit]


Von Mises

The economist Ludwig von Mises argued that the Roman Empire fell because of its economical decline. Inflation and the price controls promoted by the later emperors destroyed the economic system of the ancient world, this leading into hyperinflation, deterioration of the imperial economical basis and transfer to barter economy instead of a more advanced monetary economy. Long range trade became largely nonexistent, the latifundia became self-sufficient economies and the cities gradually collapsed; the empire simply went into bankruptcy, unable to pay its legions. The theory further argues that the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine empire) survived for over a millennium after the fall of the Western empire because of its smaller economic decline.
[edit]

Richta

On the other hand, some historians have argued that the collapse of Rome was outside the Romans' control. Radovan Richta holds that technology drives history. Thus, the invention of the horseshoe in Germania in the 200s would alter the military equation of pax romana, or a borrowing of the compass from its inventors in China in the 300s would also alter that equation.
[edit]

Bryan Ward-Perkins

Bryan Ward-Perkins' The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization (2005) makes the more traditional and nuanced argument that the empire's demise was brought about through a vicious cycle of political instability, foreign invasion, and reduced tax revenue. Essentially, invasions caused long-term damage to the provincial tax base, which lessened the Empire's medium to long-term ability to pay and equip the legions, with predictable results. Likewise, constant invasions encouraged provincial rebellion as self-help -- further depleting Imperial resources.
[edit]

"Doomed from the start" theories

In contrast with the "declining empire" theories, historians such as Arnold J. Toynbee and James Burke argue that the Roman Empire itself was a rotten system from its inception, and that the entire Imperial era was one of steady decay of its institutions. In their view, the Empire could never have lasted. The Romans had no budgetary system. The Empire relied on booty from conquered territories (this source of revenue ending, of course, with the end of Roman territorial expansion) or on a pattern of tax collection that drove small-scale farmers into destitution (and onto a dole that required even more exactions upon those who could not escape taxation), or into dependency upon a landed élite exempt from taxation. Meanwhile the costs of military defense and the pomp of Emperors continued. Financial needs continued to increase, but the means of meeting them steadily eroded.
[edit]

"There was no fall" theories

Lastly, some historians take issue with the use of the term "fall" (and may or may not agree with "decline"). They note that the transfer of power from a central imperial bureaucracy to more local authorities was both gradual and typically scarcely noticeable to the average citizen.
[edit]


Pirenne

Henri Pirenne published the "Pirenne Thesis" in the 1920s which remains influential to this day. It holds that the Empire continued, in some form, up until the time of the Arab conquests in the 7th century, which disrupted Mediterranean trade routes, leading to a decline in the European economy.
[edit]


"Late Antiquity"

Historians of Late Antiquity, a field pioneered by Peter Brown, have turned away from the idea that the Roman Empire "fell". They see a "transformation" occurring over centuries, with the roots of Medieval culture contained in Roman culture and focus on the continuities between the classical and Medieval worlds. Thus, it was a gradual process with no clear break.

Despite the title, in The Fall of the Roman Empire (2005), Peter Heather argues for an interpretation similar to Brown's, of a logical progression from central Roman power to local, Romanized "barbarian" kingdoms spurred by two centuries of contact (and conflict) with Germanic tribes, the Huns, and the Persians. However, unlike Brown, Heather sees the role of the Barbarians as the most significant factor; without their intervention he believes the western Roman Empire would have persisted in some form.


Source: Wiki
Teh_pantless_hero
27-06-2006, 17:29
Rome fell because of crappy dictators, strong military powers developing outside the empire, and the growth in size and power of the Church.
Trostia
27-06-2006, 17:30
Doesnt all this remind you of Rome. Rome fell when it was invaded by inferior cultures. Same is happening to Europe now. I call Islamic culture inferior because

Coming from the guy who reads and quotes "Angry White Female," I'm inclinded to believe you are a racist. You don't believe a CULTURE is inferior, you believe people born of "non-white" stock are inferior.

That's also why you posted a thread about how black people supposedly have lower average intelligence than other 'races.'

You continually emphasize race, inferiority, superiority, breeding, and highlight nationalist, bigoted views. The vast majority of your threads and posts are about these subjects.

It's just very sad that you consider yourself far too politically correct to admit, honestly, to having them. You try to dress it up with statistics after statistics, thinking that maybe no one will see your underlying assumptions.

I'm getting sick of you. If people like you are a majority in Europe, I say GOOD. I hope you go the way of the dodo. At least radical Muslims don't LIE about what they hate and why.
Skinny87
27-06-2006, 17:30
Yay, more extremist nonsense! Look mate, Rome fell because of the things TPH mentioned above me, not because of immigrants. So go peddle your alarmist tripe somewhere else. Stormfront, perhaps.
Iztatepopotla
27-06-2006, 17:31
Contrary to Rome, Europe is not a monolithic state. So, no.

Besides, just 1000 years or so after the fall of Rome, those "inferior" cultures started to surpass what Rome was, and now Europe is waaaay superior to whatever Rome could have aspired to. The Muslim invasion is a good thing then.
East of Eden is Nod
27-06-2006, 17:31
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html


http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html

So up to 30-40 million muslims by 2025. Plus:

EU has started accession negotiations with Turkey. The proccess will be complete within 10-15 years. Turkey has 70 million population now and growing rapidly. Plus there is Bosnia and then Albania who'll probably be EU members by 2025.
That makes EU muslim population by 2025 more than 125 million.

Doesnt all this remind you of Rome. Rome fell when it was invaded by inferior cultures. Same is happening to Europe now. I call Islamic culture inferior because of the way they treat women and homosexuals and other shitty stuff. Even in Turkey, which is regarded as an example Muslim country, 90% of women are subjected to violence by their husbands or boyfriends.

http://www.omct.org/pdf/vaw/publications/2003/eng_2003_09_turkey.pdf
(page 10)

What do you think? Diskuss....


Oh, you again? You also feared that Germans would be extinct by 2100, right? What are you really afraid of? That your churches might be beautified by the muslims?
Iraqiya
27-06-2006, 17:32
so u think that europe will fall because there would be more people who abuse women?

look at japan, it has traditions stretching back centuries, that are by far obsolete now, and yet it is a world power. culture and "inferiority" have nothing to do with rising and falling in the world.
Bottle
27-06-2006, 17:34
Statistically speaking, Christian men are significantly more likely to abuse their girlfriends and wives than goddess-worshipping pagans. Strong religiosity itself is the second strongest predictor of violence in a home (the first is alcoholism). I would be very surprised if people were honestly ready to argue that religion should be erradicated due to the institutionalized abuse of women.
Deep Kimchi
27-06-2006, 17:35
so u think that europe will fall because there would be more people who abuse women?

look at japan, it has traditions stretching back centuries, that are by far obsolete now, and yet it is a world power. culture and "inferiority" have nothing to do with rising and falling in the world.

In the late 1800s, they did what most Islamic nations refuse to do now - they took their people straight into the 20th century from the 16th century in roughly 20 years.

Did it extremely well, too.

They aren't a good example for your argument, because they did so many things that Islam will not do.
Iztatepopotla
27-06-2006, 17:38
In the late 1800s, they did what most Islamic nations refuse to do now - they took their people straight into the 20th century from the 16th century in roughly 20 years.

Did it extremely well, too.

They aren't a good example for your argument, because they did so many things that Islam will not do.
Although Japan had a very centralized organization revolving around the Emperor. And he still had to put down some rebellions.
Iraqiya
27-06-2006, 17:39
In the late 1800s, they did what most Islamic nations refuse to do now - they took their people straight into the 20th century from the 16th century in roughly 20 years.

Did it extremely well, too.

They aren't a good example for your argument, because they did so many things that Islam will not do.

that is true, in terms of technology and economics, not in terms of culture, they retained their culture from hundreds of years before. the OP was saying that europe was going to fall due to islams inferior culture.
Deep Kimchi
27-06-2006, 17:39
Although Japan had a very centralized organization revolving around the Emperor. And he still had to put down some rebellions.
Yes, it helps to have a culture of obedience to authority if you're going to make big changes.

But they did what no Islamic nation has done. Abandon a way of life and replace it with modernity.
British Stereotypes
27-06-2006, 17:42
Is it just muslims that you hate so much? :confused:
What do you think of Hinduism and Indian culture?
Iztatepopotla
27-06-2006, 17:46
Yes, it helps to have a culture of obedience to authority if you're going to make big changes.

But they did what no Islamic nation has done. Abandon a way of life and replace it with modernity.
Turkey did pretty much the same in the early 20th Century. Problem is that Islam is not homogeneous, so you'll find places like Ankara and Istambul, or Karachi, that are fairly progressive and modern with a countryside that hasn't seen changes in a 1000 years.
Lunatic Goofballs
27-06-2006, 17:50
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html


http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html

So up to 30-40 million muslims by 2025. Plus:

EU has started accession negotiations with Turkey. The proccess will be complete within 10-15 years. Turkey has 70 million population now and growing rapidly. Plus there is Bosnia and then Albania who'll probably be EU members by 2025.
That makes EU muslim population by 2025 more than 125 million.

Doesnt all this remind you of Rome. Rome fell when it was invaded by inferior cultures. Same is happening to Europe now. I call Islamic culture inferior because of the way they treat women and homosexuals and other shitty stuff. Even in Turkey, which is regarded as an example Muslim country, 90% of women are subjected to violence by their husbands or boyfriends.

http://www.omct.org/pdf/vaw/publications/2003/eng_2003_09_turkey.pdf
(page 10)

What do you think? Diskuss....

I think you have a secret fear that brown people might have bigger dicks than pale people.
Xgeng
27-06-2006, 17:52
Oh boy here we go. Rome was a bad example for the insigator of this thread to use. Ok time for a lecture, read carefully and you might learn something.

Ok, Rome did not fall, initially form invading "tribes" or "inferior" races. The decline of the ancient Roman empire was instantiated under the rule of emperor Constantine. Under whom of which a schism within the empire happend when Constantine proposed to move the capital of the Roman empire to the area known as Byzantium, for strategic reasons. Though upon this occurence the Empire consequencially split into the Western Roman Catholic Empire, and the Eastern half, which would later be known as the Byzantine empire. This, as you can imagine, caused political instability within both empires, though the West being under the mandates and platitudes of the pope, was unable to bear the changing times. And yes, then it was destroyed by the confluence of other invading empires and interior instability. The other half however, strategically locating its capitol within a 100 ft, stone wall fortified area, became the longest lasting post-ancient empire known to date. Keep in mind the Byzantine empire later evolved into the Ottoman empire which fell in 1918. So 476 to 1918 is a pretty long time. Therefore Rome is a horrible example to use in this trite and frivulous debate; especially to someone who doesn't know what the hell they are talking about.:sniper:
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 17:53
Rome fell because of crappy dictators, strong military powers developing outside the empire, and the growth in size and power of the Church.

Yay, more extremist nonsense! Look mate, Rome fell because of the things TPH mentioned above me, not because of immigrants. So go peddle your alarmist tripe somewhere else. Stormfront, perhaps.

OP has been edited. Skinny87, take your ignorant posts elsewhere.
HC Eredivisie
27-06-2006, 17:54
I think you have a secret fear that brown people might have bigger dicks than pale people.
Ahahahaa:D
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 17:55
Oh boy here we go. Rome was a bad example for the insigator of this thread to use. Ok time for a lecture, read carefully and you might learn something.

Ok, Rome did not fall, initially form invading "tribes" or "inferior" races. The decline of the ancient Roman empire was instantiated under the rule of emperor Constantine. Under whom of which a schism within the empire happend when Constantine proposed to move the capital of the Roman empire to the area known as Byzantium, for strategic reasons. Though upon this occurence the Empire consequencially split into the Western Roman Catholic Empire, and the Eastern half, which would later be known as the Byzantine empire. This, as you can imagine, caused political instability within both empires, though the West being under the mandates and platitudes of the pope, was unable to bear the changing times. And yes, then it was destroyed by the confluence of other invading empires and interior instability. The other half however, strategically locating its capitol within a 100 ft, stone wall fortified area, became the longest lasting post-ancient empire known to date. Keep in mind the Byzantine empire later evolved into the Ottoman empire which fell in 1918. So 476 to 1918 is a pretty long time. Therefore Rome is a horrible example to use in this trite and frivulous debate; especially to someone who doesn't know what the hell they are talking about.:sniper:

HAHA...
So can we say that Cherokee tribe evolved into USA? ROFL...Thx, ignorant people like you makes these threads so amusing.
And read to OP about your theories of Rome btw, it's been edited...
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 18:09
Contrary to Rome, Europe is not a monolithic state. So, no.

Besides, just 1000 years or so after the fall of Rome, those "inferior" cultures started to surpass what Rome was, and now Europe is waaaay superior to whatever Rome could have aspired to. The Muslim invasion is a good thing then.

If Rome didnt fall, Europe would probably be much more advanced now. Besides, when it did fall, there were hundreds of years of dark ages....
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 18:11
Turkey did pretty much the same in the early 20th Century. Problem is that Islam is not homogeneous, so you'll find places like Ankara and Istambul, or Karachi, that are fairly progressive and modern with a countryside that hasn't seen changes in a 1000 years.

Islam is very homogeneous when it comes to treatment of women, as we see the records of majority muslim countries....
La Habana Cuba
27-06-2006, 18:15
The declining Ethnic European birth rate must be reversed, grow your own people.

Many NS Nations here would love to have more control over population growth and immigration treatys to achieve that growth.
Sinuhue
27-06-2006, 18:19
Doesnt all this remind you of Rome. Rome fell when it was invaded by inferior cultures. Same is happening to Europe now. I call Islamic culture inferior because of the way they treat women and homosexuals and other shitty stuff.
Oh, well I think Christian culture is inferior. Wait...which one? What do you mean? Religion does not alone define a culture? What? And Christians from different areas may have widely divergent cultures? No! It CAN'T BE!

Typical My Nordland fare. A huge, and non-homogenous group is defined by his interpretation of a homogenous culture.
Swilatia
27-06-2006, 18:32
by 2025 the EU will have fallen apat.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 18:33
Oh, well I think Christian culture is inferior. Wait...which one? What do you mean? Religion does not alone define a culture? What? And Christians from different areas may have widely divergent cultures? No! It CAN'T BE!

Typical My Nordland fare. A huge, and non-homogenous group is defined by his interpretation of a homogenous culture.

Huntigton, who is a professor in Harvard, would disagree with you that there is no islamic culture.
We've debated this before. You still can not comprehend that just because a set has subsets doesnt mean it isnt a set, can you? There is a Western culture. This doesnt mean all Western countries are very homogenious. Just because Belgium and USA are very different, we cant say there is no western culture.
Londim
27-06-2006, 19:07
I am so sick of all these thread Ny. get over it people and cultures are different. Just because you are frightened, yes frightened, of all of it doesn't give you the excuse to peddle all these racist remarks. I am so happy only a minority of people think like you.
Fartsniffage
27-06-2006, 19:13
If Rome didnt fall, Europe would probably be much more advanced now. Besides, when it did fall, there were hundreds of years of dark ages....

Define Dark ages.
Iztatepopotla
27-06-2006, 19:14
If Rome didnt fall, Europe would probably be much more advanced now. Besides, when it did fall, there were hundreds of years of dark ages....
Which weren't as dark as people make them to be. It is a very big assumption to say that Rome would have advanced faster if it hadn't fallen, since technologically it was already in the decline and the main technical advances were taking place in China and India at the time, and the Middle East later.
Iztatepopotla
27-06-2006, 19:15
Islam is very homogeneous when it comes to treatment of women, as we see the records of majority muslim countries....
Which up to about 100 years ago were very similar to Western countries.
Kazus
27-06-2006, 19:15
Ho deerz what evar shall we do?
Teh_pantless_hero
27-06-2006, 19:16
Define Dark ages.
The life of a blind man.
Fartsniffage
27-06-2006, 19:17
The life of a blind man.

Ah, Nordland is somewhat of an expert then.
Lunatic Goofballs
27-06-2006, 19:17
Define Dark ages.

The period of time where Islamic societies prospered and spread throughout much of the civilized world while european societies plunged into a church-induced oblivion.
Shatov
27-06-2006, 19:20
The period of time where Islamic societies prospered and spread throughout much of the civilized world while european societies plunged into a church-induced oblivion.

I think the collapse of the monetary economy also had something to do with it.
Fartsniffage
27-06-2006, 19:20
The period of time where Islamic societies prospered and spread throughout much of the civilized world while european societies plunged into a church-induced oblivion.

The question was aimed at Nordland as it annoys me when people use terms incorrectly in order to support bad arguments. A little research on his part would show that the dark ages were so called originally due to the sparsity of Latin texts produced during the peroid and not due to it being a particulary unpleasant period of history.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 19:21
Which weren't as dark as people make them to be. It is a very big assumption to say that Rome would have advanced faster if it hadn't fallen, since technologically it was already in the decline and the main technical advances were taking place in China and India at the time, and the Middle East later.

It's a billion times BIGGER assumption that Europe will be better after muslim "invasion".
Iztatepopotla
27-06-2006, 19:22
It's a billion times BIGGER assumption that Europe will be better after muslim "invasion".
Except that I base my assumption in the past while you just pull them out of thin air. So, you're wrong again.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 19:23
Which up to about 100 years ago were very similar to Western countries.

They were supposed to be at home, not work, but I dont think europeans beat women because they dont wear headscarves. Besides, your point is that muslims are at least 100 years backward to Europeans?
Greater Alemannia
27-06-2006, 19:24
The period of time where Islamic societies prospered and spread throughout much of the civilized world while european societies plunged into a church-induced oblivion.

Yes, and after that, Europe had a Renaissance, while islam collapsed into a Dark Ages that THEY'RE STILL IN.
Francis Street
27-06-2006, 19:25
Coming from the guy who reads and quotes "Angry White Female," I'm inclinded to believe you are a racist. You don't believe a CULTURE is inferior, you believe people born of "non-white" stock are inferior.

No, he believes that a culture and religion is inferior. That's why he's talking about Islam rather than black or brown people.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 19:25
Except that I base my assumption in the past while you just pull them out of thin air. So, you're wrong again.

You cant base your assumption in the past because it wasnt the muslims who invaded Rome. You cant compare apples and oranges.
Lunatic Goofballs
27-06-2006, 19:27
The question was aimed at Nordland as it annoys me when people use terms incorrectly in order to support bad arguments. A little research on his part would show that the dark ages were so called originally due to the sparsity of Latin texts produced during the peroid and not due to it being a particulary unpleasant period of history.

Well, my post wasn't meant to be historically accurate it was more of a counter-exaggeration. I know that the Dark Ages is better defined as a period of little scientific and educational progress in most european cultures.

I was more interested in directing attention to the fact that the Dark Ages were only 'dark' to a relatively small and rather unimportant group of people.

As for answering your post directed at Nordland, do you really expect a lucid response? You're getting better from a total wacko like me. :)
Sarkhaan
27-06-2006, 19:28
They were supposed to be at home, not work, but I dont think europeans beat women because they dont wear headscarves. Besides, your point is that muslims are at least 100 years backward to Europeans?
actually, it would be about 50 years since the womens lib movement was in full swing, and more that men beat women because they could. Pick a reason...house was messy, dinner wasn't on the table when he got home from dinner, or just a bad day at work. Maybe it wasn't over headscarves, but it was over equally stupid, pointless, and trivial matters.
Iztatepopotla
27-06-2006, 19:28
They were supposed to be at home, not work, but I dont think europeans beat women because they dont wear headscarves. Besides, your point is that muslims are at least 100 years backward to Europeans?
Not very knowledgeable of life in Spain, Italy, and Portugal are you? Honour killings, forced marriages, wife beatings, etc. The whole lot in short.

And my point is that societies change. Inside Islam there are progressive currents that fight for women's rights, just like there were in Europe, and countries like Turkey and Pakistan have done lots of improvement, even though they're not there yet.
Iztatepopotla
27-06-2006, 19:30
You cant base your assumption in the past because it wasnt the muslims who invaded Rome. You cant compare apples and oranges.
Therefore you can't say that the current situation is like Rome at the time of the barbarian invasions.
Sarkhaan
27-06-2006, 19:30
Yes, and after that, Europe had a Renaissance, while islam collapsed into a Dark Ages that THEY'RE STILL IN.
and that makes what point? While Christian Europe faltered, the rest of the world kept moving. While Islamic Middle East falters, the rest of the world keeps moving. Did you have a point in this, or no?
Lunatic Goofballs
27-06-2006, 19:31
Yes, and after that, Europe had a Renaissance, while islam collapsed into a Dark Ages that THEY'RE STILL IN.

Actually, I have to agree. Islam is "in my opinion" in a dark age due to being mired by relatively small groups of infuential radicals unable to evolve with the rest of the modern world. I suspect that'll change soon. Soner than many people mght think.
Fartsniffage
27-06-2006, 19:32
Well, my post wasn't meant to be historically accurate it was more of a counter-exaggeration. I know that the Dark Ages is better defined as a period of little scientific and educational progress in most european cultures.

I was more interested in directing attention to the fact that the Dark Ages were only 'dark' to a relatively small and rather unimportant group of people.

As for answering your post directed at Nordland, do you really expect a lucid response? You're getting better from a total wacko like me. :)

Even that definition was only accurate until aboot 100 years ago. Mordern scolars recognise that the dark ages were no slower or more represive than the periodss that preceeded or followed them and dark is now taken to mean 'without light', as in there aren't many surviving records.

And no, I didn't expect a lucid response from Noldland, it's just that his flailing attempts to defend an indefensible position amuse me.
Francis Street
27-06-2006, 19:35
Statistically speaking, Christian men are significantly more likely to abuse their girlfriends and wives than goddess-worshipping pagans. Strong religiosity itself is the second strongest predictor of violence in a home (the first is alcoholism). I would be very surprised if people were honestly ready to argue that religion should be erradicated due to the institutionalized abuse of women.
Yes, traditionalist Christian men and traditionalist Muslim men.

Oh, well I think Christian culture is inferior. Wait...which one? What do you mean? Religion does not alone define a culture? What? And Christians from different areas may have widely divergent cultures? No! It CAN'T BE!

Typical My Nordland fare. A huge, and non-homogenous group is defined by his interpretation of a homogenous culture.
I agree that Muslims don't all share the same culture, but for the sake of this argument they may as well. Middle Eastern Muslims are almost universally more socially conservative (i.e. discriminatory) than Europeans. That's what we're concerned about. If Muslims become a significant demographic we could see things like alcohol, drugs and pre-marital sex banned because the Qu'aran disagrees with them.

I am so sick of all these thread Ny. get over it people and cultures are different. Just because you are frightened, yes frightened, of all of it doesn't give you the excuse to peddle all these racist remarks. I am so happy only a minority of people think like you.
Is it racist to insist that more than just white people must abide by human rights?
Londim
27-06-2006, 19:37
No this comment is more towards the fact that Ny portrays it immigration as a bad thing for everyone..
Lunatic Goofballs
27-06-2006, 19:49
Even that definition was only accurate until aboot 100 years ago. Mordern scolars recognise that the dark ages were no slower or more represive than the periodss that preceeded or followed them and dark is now taken to mean 'without light', as in there aren't many surviving records.

And no, I didn't expect a lucid response from Noldland, it's just that his flailing attempts to defend an indefensible position amuse me.

Hmm. Groovy. :)

*adds a few things to the 'Learn more about' list.*
Francis Street
27-06-2006, 20:54
No this comment is more towards the fact that Ny portrays it immigration as a bad thing for everyone..
I agree that this is not the case. Immigration is often good. But fundamentalism must be controlled lest it damage society. Traditional values are destructive.
Lamented personalspace
27-06-2006, 21:19
it doesnt really matter if this happens,what are you afraid of ny nordland?
Francis Street
27-06-2006, 21:40
it doesnt really matter if this happens,what are you afraid of ny nordland?
He's afraid of saying goodbye to liberty and hello to theocracy.
Yootopia
27-06-2006, 21:45
I'm just going to sum up most people's posts here - Ny Nordland : We hate you.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 21:51
Not very knowledgeable of life in Spain, Italy, and Portugal are you? Honour killings, forced marriages, wife beatings, etc. The whole lot in short.

And my point is that societies change. Inside Islam there are progressive currents that fight for women's rights, just like there were in Europe, and countries like Turkey and Pakistan have done lots of improvement, even though they're not there yet.

Pure speculation. What makes you think muslims will change? Actually it might be getting even worse. Remember, the secular turks elected an islamist party...
Empress_Suiko
27-06-2006, 22:02
I fail to see a bad thing here. Like I said before Europe needs this, and if they fall because of it that their own fault. With the growth in China and India combined with Russia the world would only feel a slight pinch economically.
Baratstan
27-06-2006, 22:04
Ny Nordland, what would you like to see done about this?
Empress_Suiko
27-06-2006, 22:09
Ny Nordland, what would you like to see done about this?


Are you sure you want the answer to that question?
Yootopia
27-06-2006, 22:16
Ny Nordland, what would you like to see done about this?
It probably involves gas chambers and flame-throwers, sadly. It is best not for mankind as a whole to know.
Heikoku
27-06-2006, 22:17
Oh boy. Yet another "Let's bash the sand-niggers" thread. Okay, time for STYLE!

*Snikt*

Watch this:

I'm calling Godwin to prevent it from going Godwin - and because it IS an acceptable comparison.

Shakespeare, Ny Nordland, from me to you!

Shall I compare thee to Nazi soldiers?
Thou art more subtle and more PC.
The Gestapo said "we should kill them all"
And you only claim they are inferior
You present specious, false "evidence"
and claim cultural superiority
And the SS were xenophobic too
like you really do seem to enjoy being
Alas, thy danger is more limited
Although more annoying than Gestapo
You are a troll, and that does aggravate
Anyone that wants actual debate
So long as neonazi movements live
So long live the threads you create with glee.
Lamented personalspace
27-06-2006, 22:39
is ny nordland racist?
I just looked up some of his previous threads,its all muslims are inferior, no immigrationall crime is caused by immigrants and some races are superior to others-i mean wtf?
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 22:46
Therefore you can't say that the current situation is like Rome at the time of the barbarian invasions.

Barbarians were culturally inferior to Rome and muslims (to me, for mentioned reasons) is culturally inferior to Europe. They have this in common to cause a fall, for me.
However, they havent got anything in common to compare what might happen afterwards. So your comparison isnt valid while mine is.
Besides, even if muslims could do something better than europeans, they can always do it in their own countries. There are tonnes of majority muslim countries in the world. They dont need to "invade" Europe to fulfill their "vision". If you like muslims so much, maybe you should move to one of those countries.
Empress_Suiko
27-06-2006, 22:46
is ny nordland racist?
I just looked up some of his previous threads,its all muslims are inferior, no immigrationall crime is caused by immigrants and some races are superior to others-i mean wtf?


If he annoys you so much, just report his racist threads and then ignore him.
Empress_Suiko
27-06-2006, 22:48
Barbarians were culturally inferior to Rome and muslims (to me, for mentioned reasons) is culturally inferior to Europe. They have this in common to cause a fall, for me.
However, they havent got anything in common to compare what might happen afterwards. So your comparison isnt valid while mine is.
Besides, even if muslims could do something better than europeans, they can always do it in their own countries. There are tonnes of majority muslim countries in the world. They dont need to "invade" Europe to fulfill their "vision". If you like muslims so much, maybe you should move to one of those countries.


They come to europe because their countries are oppressive hellholes. If you want them to stop coming help them fix their own countries instead of ignoring them.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 22:49
I fail to see a bad thing here. Like I said before Europe needs this, and if they fall because of it that their own fault. With the growth in China and India combined with Russia the world would only feel a slight pinch economically.

Since you arent European, your opinions are irrevelant with regards to the cultural future of Europe.
Ariddia
27-06-2006, 22:50
That makes EU muslim population by 2025 more than 125 million.


Good. More cultural diversity.

As I've said before, the only Muslims I know are amongst the most intelligent, open-minded, educated and progressive people I know. On all those aspects they'd put you to shame in a heartbeat. I'm proud to call them friends.


I call Islamic culture inferior because of the way they treat women and homosexuals and other shitty stuff.

Funny how one of the Muslims I know is a feminist, and I've heard another speak up in favour of gay rights.

But then, facts don't enter into the simplistic, narrow workings of your limited mind. I suppose it's comforting for you to rely on hateful, ultra-simplistic nonsense. It enables you to avoid having to think, and to avoid dealing with the complexity of the real world.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 22:52
Ny Nordland, what would you like to see done about this?

I've said this many times before, but here goes. Much more strict limitation of immigration measures. Pro-natal policies (combination/advanced version of Franch and Nordic System) to counter demographic trends. Deportation of some muslims who cant integrate. Deportation can be done in a humane manner. It doesnt have to be "lets kick their asses out of here.", it can be done via economical incentives. They can be given loans until they can get their life back in order in their new homes.
Empress_Suiko
27-06-2006, 22:53
Since you arent European, your opinions are irrevelant with regards to the cultural future of Europe.



:rolleyes:
Heikoku
27-06-2006, 22:53
Since you arent European, your opinions are irrevelant with regards to the cultural future of Europe.

Since you aren't a muslim, your opinions are irrelevant in regards of the Muslim culture.

You make this way too easy! Come on, somebody, give me an ACTUAL challenge! I can beat this guy up with POETRY, for crying out loud...
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 22:54
It probably involves gas chambers and flame-throwers, sadly. It is best not for mankind as a whole to know.

Wow. Purest straw men. Congrats.
You are very open minded too. Guessing my opinions, without listening me, so accurately. :rolleyes: (sarcasm, if you havent get the roll eyes)
Empress_Suiko
27-06-2006, 22:56
Since you aren't a muslim, your opinions are irrelevant in regards of the Muslim culture.

You make this way too easy! Come on, somebody, give me an ACTUAL challenge! I can beat this guy up with POETRY, for crying out loud...




he could become a Muslim?
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 22:58
Oh boy. Yet another "Let's bash the sand-niggers" thread. Okay, time for STYLE!

*Snikt*

Watch this:

I'm calling Godwin to prevent it from going Godwin - and because it IS an acceptable comparison.

Shakespeare, Ny Nordland, from me to you!

Shall I compare thee to Nazi soldiers?
Thou art more subtle and more PC.
The Gestapo said "we should kill them all"
And you only claim they are inferior
You present specious, false "evidence"
and claim cultural superiority
And the SS were xenophobic too
like you really do seem to enjoy being
Alas, thy danger is more limited
Although more annoying than Gestapo
You are a troll, and that does aggravate
Anyone that wants actual debate
So long as neonazi movements live
So long live the threads you create with glee.

You wrote a song for me?? You are so romantic...*cries*
Heikoku
27-06-2006, 22:58
Wow. Purest straw men. Congrats.
You are very open minded too. Guessing my opinions, without listening me, so accurately. :rolleyes: (sarcasm, if you havent get the roll eyes)

Okay, who here thinks this guy uses the expression "straw man" whenever he doesn't UNDERSTAND a point? *Raises hand*

"Controlling their population"... Well, yes, that's what EUGENICS is.

"We Europeans are superior"... Yeah, that's pretty much what being a nazi is all about.

You're making this thread damn hard not to godwin.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 22:59
They come to europe because their countries are oppressive hellholes. If you want them to stop coming help them fix their own countries instead of ignoring them.

I'm for increasing aid to them...
Empress_Suiko
27-06-2006, 23:00
I'm for increasing aid to them...



That won't work, The governments of those nations will just steal it.
Trostia
27-06-2006, 23:01
No, he believes that a culture and religion is inferior. That's why he's talking about Islam rather than black or brown people.

No, he's talking about Islam because he knows his ideas would be less popular if it was as blatantly racist as he feels.

Do yourself a favor and look at, well, every post he made on this forum. Look into particularly a thread called "Angry White Female," apparently some neo-nazi blogger he reads. Look at his threads regarding Race and IQ. If you can't come to the conclusion that I have then maybe you just don't want to admit an ugly truth about Nazi Nordland here.

Shakespeare, Ny Nordland, from me to you!

Shall I compare thee to Nazi soldiers?
Thou art more subtle and more PC.
The Gestapo said "we should kill them all"
And you only claim they are inferior
You present specious, false "evidence"
and claim cultural superiority
And the SS were xenophobic too
like you really do seem to enjoy being
Alas, thy danger is more limited
Although more annoying than Gestapo
You are a troll, and that does aggravate
Anyone that wants actual debate
So long as neonazi movements live
So long live the threads you create with glee.

OMG!

Since you arent European, your opinions are irrevelant with regards to the cultural future of Europe.

That's okay. Your opinion with regards to the cultural future of Europe is also irrelevant. Not because you're not European, but because you're an ignorant, bigoted troll with basically no power ranting on an internet forum. Not exactly a leader of government and culture, see. ;)
Heikoku
27-06-2006, 23:01
You wrote a song for me?? You are so romantic...*cries*

No, I beat you up in the argument while using a Shakespeare POEM, like an angel without a sense of mercy, like Mike Tyson would beat up a crippled person, like, basically, I would win an argument against someone clinically insane. I can do this all day. All you have to fall back on are your bigoted assumptions. I have facts, I could sing them, I could make them into haikus, and I could beat you, with ease and style. That big is the difference between us.
East of Eden is Nod
27-06-2006, 23:01
Wow. Purest straw men. Congrats.
You are very open minded too. Guessing my opinions, without listening me, so accurately. :rolleyes: (sarcasm, if you havent get the roll eyes)

Will you please stop your pointless rampage? Your knowledge about Islam, Muslims and Muslim countries as well as Europe, her history, and her possible future is obviously very limited and your unsubstantial racist crap you should keep to yourself.
Jenrak
27-06-2006, 23:01
I'm for increasing aid to them...

There's the problem. To have equal distribution you must place it through to the government. The govenment is the source of the hellhole. If you give them aid, it must be done through an authority figure who is capable of equally distributing it otherwise it would simply result in a dangerous anarchy (New Orleans as an example) in who would get what. The problem is that the government will not distribute fairly, which causes the problem. You can't increase aid to leaders you cannot trust, therefore the people must find new leaders on which aid can be more equally given. Hence immigration.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:03
Good. More cultural diversity.

As I've said before, the only Muslims I know are amongst the most intelligent, open-minded, educated and progressive people I know. On all those aspects they'd put you to shame in a heartbeat. I'm proud to call them friends.



Funny how one of the Muslims I know is a feminist, and I've heard another speak up in favour of gay rights.

But then, facts don't enter into the simplistic, narrow workings of your limited mind. I suppose it's comforting for you to rely on hateful, ultra-simplistic nonsense. It enables you to avoid having to think, and to avoid dealing with the complexity of the real world.

I've given statistics about the treatment of women in the examplary muslim country, Turkey. The status of women is clear in another muslim majority countries. And you try to counter this data with anectodal evidences?
And then you insult my mind? HAHA :rolleyes:
You are like a garbagemen debating quantum physics with a physicist. And the garbagemen isnt some physicist who lost his job, but rather, blabbering, just like you.
Note that, I dont want to mean any offense to the garbagemen. I just want to highlight his utter irrevelancy.
Londim
27-06-2006, 23:03
I still go by my belief that Ny Nordland has never once attempted to make friends of people from different cultures and instead forms all his opinions on a few pictures he sees on tv or newspapers.
Warta Endor
27-06-2006, 23:05
My Nordland, I've really, really really an important question for you:

How many Muslems do you know Personally?
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:05
Since you aren't a muslim, your opinions are irrelevant in regards of the Muslim culture.

You make this way too easy! Come on, somebody, give me an ACTUAL challenge! I can beat this guy up with POETRY, for crying out loud...

I wouldnt give a damn if they werent moving to Europe in masses. That's when my opinions become revelant. When most of rapes in Oslo done by muslims, that's when my opinions of their culture become revelant.
Trostia
27-06-2006, 23:06
Good. More cultural diversity.

As I've said before, the only Muslims I know are amongst the most intelligent, open-minded, educated and progressive people I know. On all those aspects they'd put you to shame in a heartbeat. I'm proud to call them friends.



Funny how one of the Muslims I know is a feminist, and I've heard another speak up in favour of gay rights.

But then, facts don't enter into the simplistic, narrow workings of your limited mind. I suppose it's comforting for you to rely on hateful, ultra-simplistic nonsense. It enables you to avoid having to think, and to avoid dealing with the complexity of the real world.

Sorry, you aren't European so I don't have to address your argume-

Oh wait you are! Damn. Guess I'll have to ignore it completely instead. If backed into a corner I'll simply say you "can't comprehend" it and make speculations about your ethnic background to show how racist I'm not. ;)

(This post has been covered in sarcasm.)
East of Eden is Nod
27-06-2006, 23:07
I've given statistics about the treatment of women in the examplary muslim country, Turkey. The status of women is clear in another muslim majority countries. And you try to counter this data with anectodal evidences?
And then you insult my mind? HAHA :rolleyes:
You are like a garbagemen debating quantum physics with a physicist. And the garbagemen isnt some physicist who lost his job, but rather, blabbering, just like you.
Note that, I dont want to mean any offense to the garbagemen. I just want to highlight his utter irrevelancy.

Turkey is not the exemplary muslim country. Turkey is secular. You know basically nothing. And you know nothing on quantum physics.
Jenrak
27-06-2006, 23:08
I've given statistics about the treatment of women in the examplary muslim country, Turkey. The status of women is clear in another muslim majority countries. And you try to counter this data with anectodal evidences?
And then you insult my mind? HAHA :rolleyes:

How egotistic. You mistake "religion" with "culture". Both are similiar but different aspects. For example, let's say there is a buddhist in China, and a buddhsit in Japan. Both are buddhists, but both will have different ideals and traditions on how their life works. Have you possibly even tried to talk to Muslims in any communities nearby? Do 90% of them use violence against their wives/girlfriends? I have yet to find a Muslim who has actually done that, and I have met quite a number of Muslims.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:10
Okay, who here thinks this guy uses the expression "straw man" whenever he doesn't UNDERSTAND a point? *Raises hand*

"Controlling their population"... Well, yes, that's what EUGENICS is.

"We Europeans are superior"... Yeah, that's pretty much what being a nazi is all about.

You're making this thread damn hard not to godwin.

Deportation is EUGENICS? God, you really havent got a clue, have you? That's why you think you are winning. Do pigs fly too, in your delusional fantasy land?
Unlike Nazis, I dont argue for anything violent. And nazis were pro-immigrant, by definition, as discussed in this thread:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=489203
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:13
No, I beat you up in the argument while using a Shakespeare POEM, like an angel without a sense of mercy, like Mike Tyson would beat up a crippled person, like, basically, I would win an argument against someone clinically insane. I can do this all day. All you have to fall back on are your bigoted assumptions. I have facts, I could sing them, I could make them into haikus, and I could beat you, with ease and style. That big is the difference between us.

I see that you suffer from megalomania. Have you taken your medication this morning?
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:15
Will you please stop your pointless rampage? Your knowledge about Islam, Muslims and Muslim countries as well as Europe, her history, and her possible future is obviously very limited and your unsubstantial racist crap you should keep to yourself.

Yeah. I made this up: The fact that 90% of women in Turkey are subject to violence by their husbands or their bf's. :rolleyes:
It is amazing that ignorant people like you can accuse others of ignorancy. :eek:
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:17
There's the problem. To have equal distribution you must place it through to the government. The govenment is the source of the hellhole. If you give them aid, it must be done through an authority figure who is capable of equally distributing it otherwise it would simply result in a dangerous anarchy (New Orleans as an example) in who would get what. The problem is that the government will not distribute fairly, which causes the problem. You can't increase aid to leaders you cannot trust, therefore the people must find new leaders on which aid can be more equally given. Hence immigration.

They can always immigrate to Canada, which is multi cultural, rich and underpopulated.
Besides, most of them immigrate because of economical hardship. Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship, but still wealthy...
Londim
27-06-2006, 23:18
My Nordland, I've really, really really an important question for you:

How many Muslims do you know Personally?

I quote this because I am also interested in Ny Nordlands answer. So please answer us.
Heikoku
27-06-2006, 23:19
I see that you suffer from megalomania. Have you taken your medication this morning?

Leeeeeet's seeeeee...

The guy believes he's superior because he's a Christian/an European, or, in short, a member of the Aryan race. And I am the megalomaniac.

How many contradicting ideas can your little head hold at the same time?
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:19
Turkey is not the exemplary muslim country. Turkey is secular. You know basically nothing. And you know nothing on quantum physics.

So which one is the best muslim country, when it comes to democracy and human rights, if it isnt Turkey?
Oh, and I know about quantum physics, dont assume...
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:20
Sorry, you aren't European so I don't have to address your argume-

Oh wait you are! Damn. Guess I'll have to ignore it completely instead. If backed into a corner I'll simply say you "can't comprehend" it and make speculations about your ethnic background to show how racist I'm not. ;)

(This post has been covered in sarcasm.)

Trostia/Santa Barbara/whatever aka incest guy blabbering again? :rolleyes:
Heikoku
27-06-2006, 23:21
Oh, and I know about quantum physics, dont assume...

Knowing about the EXISTANCE of the subject isn't knowing the subject. :p

Ah well. I'm done beating up the troll. Have at him, folks, he's easy as hell.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:22
How egotistic. You mistake "religion" with "culture". Both are similiar but different aspects. For example, let's say there is a buddhist in China, and a buddhsit in Japan. Both are buddhists, but both will have different ideals and traditions on how their life works. Have you possibly even tried to talk to Muslims in any communities nearby? Do 90% of them use violence against their wives/girlfriends? I have yet to find a Muslim who has actually done that, and I have met quite a number of Muslims.

For religion and culture, refer:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11250024&postcount=25

As for violence, are you still making anectodal "evidences" which cover 100 people at most against statistics that cover a whole country? :rolleyes:
Trostia
27-06-2006, 23:23
Trostia/Santa Barbara/whatever aka incest guy blabbering again? :rolleyes:

Yes. I made a comment about you and incest. Once.

On the other hand, the vast majority of your posts and threads are about race, religion, differences relating to "superiority" and "inferiority," nationalist, bigoted bullshit. The evidence clearly shows my statements correct, whereas yours are just the whining of a guy who can't handle someone criticizing his neo-nazi bullshit.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Jenrak
27-06-2006, 23:23
They can always immigrate to Canada, which is multi cultural, rich and underpopulated.
There's a factor of cost to travel there, and uncertainty of acceptance by the immigration law. Not every single person is accepted into a country. It's much cheaper to be applying for citizenship (or just crossing) in a closer country.

Besides, most of them immigrate because of economical hardship. Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship, but still wealthy...
To the powerful.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:26
Leeeeeet's seeeeee...

The guy believes he's superior because he's a Christian/an European, or, in short, a member of the Aryan race. And I am the megalomaniac.

How many contradicting ideas can your little head hold at the same time?

You are speculating if I'm Christian. You are also speculating if I think "Aryans" are superior. Then you come up to conclusions based on your speculations. Not to mention you call my head small when the quality of your posts are clear. :rolleyes: HAHA, you can only amuse me. Maybe feel some pity for you...
Trostia
27-06-2006, 23:28
HAHA, you can only amuse me. Maybe feel some pity for you...

Yes. It's great fun trolling for attention, and getting to feel condescendingly superior to other people, isn't it?

It's good to see you're admitting to having these basic drives. Now if only you could be as honest as New Mitanni (the nazi who agrees with you).
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:28
Knowing about the EXISTANCE of the subject isn't knowing the subject. :p

Ah well. I'm done beating up the troll. Have at him, folks, he's easy as hell.

Speculations and delusions. Yes, Heikoku, you beat me. I pity you for your mental state. So believe whatever makes you happy...
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:31
Yes. I made a comment about you and incest. Once.

On the other hand, the vast majority of your posts and threads are about race, religion, differences relating to "superiority" and "inferiority," nationalist, bigoted bullshit. The evidence clearly shows my statements correct, whereas yours are just the whining of a guy who can't handle someone criticizing his neo-nazi bullshit.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

You havent made a comment of me and incest. You made comments of incest, involving me, in your mind. You made other incest comments involving other people. You got banned for it.
And stop saying neo-nazi like a broken record. Makes you look even more stupid than you really are when you use words that you dont even know what they mean.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:33
There's a factor of cost to travel there, and uncertainty of acceptance by the immigration law. Not every single person is accepted into a country. It's much cheaper to be applying for citizenship (or just crossing) in a closer country.


To the powerful.

When we let them immigrate, qualified people are coming here as well, further depriving the originating country of highly skilled workforce which further hampers their efforts to develop and hurts much more people than the number of people who immigrated.
Jenrak
27-06-2006, 23:34
For religion and culture, refer:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11250024&postcount=25

As for violence, are you still making anectodal "evidences" which cover 100 people at most against statistics that cover a whole country? :rolleyes:

I don't believe you understand the word "anecdotal" to it's full extent.

an·ec·dot·al Audio pronunciation of "anecdotal" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nk-dtl)
adj.

1. also an·ec·dot·ic (-dtk) or an·ec·dot·i·cal (--kl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes.
2. Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: “There are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander] stems” (C. Claiborne Ray).

The second one is the one you are referring to, though extremely slight. Let's have an analysis - for you to care about this, you worry about the Muslims in your community. If you are so genuinely worried about others in farther communities, you would probably not have such a narrow view (as the majority of Muslims are by example a very respectable bunch). Therefore, you are most likely worried about your immediate problems and bias against muslims. I suggest you take a look at Muslims at the nearby communities first, and get to know them. See if they are a respectable amount. Why? Because let's say your statistic is completely relevant and totally true (as this seems to most likely not the case, as this is 90% of SURVEYED peoples (who do not expand to simply muslims - as Turkey is home to other religions and traditions as well). Therefore you are assuming that by a single statistic on a single nation you are making a broad view on a massive group as a whole. You are under concern of Europe for the sake of European safety - you are bashing Islam on numbers, not experience. Numbers are not always right.

A more creditable argument is the crime rate in Mecca, for instance. Perhaps I would start believing your narrow-minded garbage if you had a more respectable analysis of Muslim. But I lost the little respect I had for you when you called them as "Inferior".
Trostia
27-06-2006, 23:35
You havent made a comment of me and incest. You made comments of incest, involving me, in your mind. You made other incest comments involving other people. You got banned for it.

And you made racist threads, quoting some racist white bitch, entering into flaming when your arguments failed. You got banned for it.

This is a history lesson? Or are you actually whining cuz I said some narsty things about your family? Get over it.


And stop saying neo-nazi like a broken record. Makes you look even more stupid than you really are when you use words that you dont even know what they mean.

As long as you advocate nazi behaviour, and have nazis agree with you, I'm going to call it like I see it. If that bothers you, why don't you cry about it?
Jenrak
27-06-2006, 23:36
When we let them immigrate, qualified people are coming here as well, further depriving the originating country of highly skilled workforce which further hampers their efforts to develop and hurts much more people than the number of people who immigrated.

You make the people coming from the originating countries more desperate, hence when they do come they become more prone to violence and impoverished conditions, giving you another reason to try and bash them. I don't find that as a qualify excuse.
East of Eden is Nod
27-06-2006, 23:46
Ny Nordland is not the one to decide who comes to Europe or not. Nor he or his country is in a position to dictate anything on the rest of Europe. He's just a loudmouth.
Trostia
27-06-2006, 23:47
Ny Nordland is not the one to decide who comes to Europe or not. Nor he or his country is in a position to dictate anything on the rest of Europe. He's just a loudmouth.

True, but then no one here is exactly a political leader.

It does irk when he thinks he is and declares other peoples opinions or arguments "irrelevant" due to not being a superior ubermensch living in the great white north, though.
Gregmackie
27-06-2006, 23:48
'EU May Have More Than 125 Million Muslims by 2025'
Who. Cares.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:50
I don't believe you understand the word "anecdotal" to it's full extent.

an·ec·dot·al Audio pronunciation of "anecdotal" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nk-dtl)
adj.

1. also an·ec·dot·ic (-dtk) or an·ec·dot·i·cal (--kl) Of, characterized by, or full of anecdotes.
2. Based on casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis: “There are anecdotal reports of children poisoned by hot dogs roasted over a fire of the [oleander] stems” (C. Claiborne Ray).



anecdote:
One entry found for anecdote.
Main Entry: an·ec·dote
Pronunciation: 'a-nik-"dOt
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural anecdotes also an·ec·dota /"a-nik-'dO-t&/
Etymology: French, from Greek anekdota unpublished items, from neuter plural of anekdotos unpublished, from a- + ekdidonai to publish, from ex out + didonai to give -- more at EX-, DATE
: a usually short narrative of an interesting, amusing, or biographical incident

anecdotal
One entry found for anecdotal.
Main Entry: an·ec·dot·al
Pronunciation: "a-nik-'dO-t&l
Function: adjective
1 a : of, relating to, or consisting of anecdotes <an anecdotal biography> b : ANECDOTIC 2 <my anecdotal uncle>
2 : based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers <anecdotal evidence>
3 : of, relating to, or being the depiction of a scene suggesting a story <anecdotal painting> <anecdotal detail>

Get it now?


The second one is the one you are referring to, though extremely slight. Let's have an analysis - for you to care about this, you worry about the Muslims in your community. If you are so genuinely worried about others in farther communities, you would probably not have such a narrow view (as the majority of Muslims are by example a very respectable bunch). Therefore, you are most likely worried about your immediate problems and bias against muslims. I suggest you take a look at Muslims at the nearby communities first, and get to know them. See if they are a respectable amount. Why? Because let's say your statistic is completely relevant and totally true (as this seems to most likely not the case, as this is 90% of SURVEYED peoples (who do not expand to simply muslims - as Turkey is home to other religions and traditions as well). Therefore you are assuming that by a single statistic on a single nation you are making a broad view on a massive group as a whole. You are under concern of Europe for the sake of European safety - you are bashing Islam on numbers, not experience. Numbers are not always right.

A more creditable argument is the crime rate in Mecca, for instance. Perhaps I would start believing your narrow-minded garbage if you had a more respectable analysis of Muslim. But I lost the little respect I had for you when you called them as "Inferior".

People are rarely what they seem. Most people who know some of the bombers involved in London bombings thought they were good people. One of the bombers was working voluntarily at a school or something. I dont operate by anectodal evidences. Statistics and data show the bigger picture. So your suggestions are silly, at best.
Btw surveys are asked on limited amount of people but they show the bigger picture. Political surveys usually predict election results, with a few point error margin.
Francis Street
27-06-2006, 23:53
I'm just going to sum up most people's posts here - Ny Nordland : We hate you.
How intelligent.

It probably involves gas chambers and flame-throwers, sadly. It is best not for mankind as a whole to know.
Oh boy. Yet another "Let's bash the sand-niggers" thread. Okay, time for STYLE!
This whole thread has been a farce of straw man attacks on Ny Nordland. I don't agree with most of what he says, but at least I try to understand where he's coming from rather than screaming racism as a kneejerk reaction. NN hasn't suggested killing anyone.

They come to europe because their countries are oppressive hellholes.
And they (by which I mean the fundie Muslims, not all Muslims) want to make our countries into oppressive hellholes as well.

Since you aren't a muslim, your opinions are irrelevant in regards of the Muslim culture.

Yes, he can, when said culture is trying to force its morality on him and telling him and others how to live.
Ny Nordland
27-06-2006, 23:54
Ny Nordland is not the one to decide who comes to Europe or not. Nor he or his country is in a position to dictate anything on the rest of Europe. He's just a loudmouth.

No shit! Is there ANY politician on NSG? Anyone with actual powers? Should we all stop debating anything related to politics?
East of Eden is Nod
27-06-2006, 23:55
How intelligent.



This whole thread has been a farce of straw man attacks on Ny Nordland. I don't agree with most of what he says, but at least I try to understand where he's coming from rather than screaming racism as a kneejerk reaction. NN hasn't suggested killing anyone.


And they (by which I mean the fundie Muslims, not all Muslims) want to make our countries into oppressive hellholes as well.


Yes, he can, when said culture is trying to force its morality on him and telling him and others how to live.

And that from a guy from Ireland. Religious fundamentalism must indeed be familiar to you.
Trostia
27-06-2006, 23:56
This whole thread has been a farce of straw man attacks on Ny Nordland.

I guess you didn't do that forum search and a lot of reading, or else you might see it's not a strawman.

Yes, he can, when said culture is trying to force its morality on him and telling him and others how to live.

Oh okay, then I guess I, a non-European, can also make comments regarding Europe since we have NN, a European, trying to force his morality and arguments on us. Seems fair to me, yes? Yes.
Gregmackie
27-06-2006, 23:56
No shit! Is there ANY politician on NSG? Anyone with actual powers? Should we all stop debating anything related to politics?
:p
Jenrak
27-06-2006, 23:57
Get it now?

I have since the beginning.

People are rarely what they seem. Most people who know some of the bombers involved in London bombings thought they were good people. One of the bombers was working voluntarily at a school or something. I dont operate by anectodal evidences. Statistics and data show the bigger picture. So your suggestions are silly, at best.
Btw surveys are asked on limited amount of people but they show the bigger picture. Political surveys usually predict election results, with a few point error margin.

Yes, my assumptions are silly compared to "Muslims are a detrimental force to Europe". That's real brilliant there, buddy. You can hide your beliefs behind numbers, but you are generalizing a group, and a large one at that.
East of Eden is Nod
28-06-2006, 00:02
No shit! Is there ANY politician on NSG? Anyone with actual powers? Should we all stop debating anything related to politics?

Actual power lies in the people, not politicians. Whatever you may feel the urge to discuss, it has no majority in Europe. If you fear that Europe may one day be taken over by muslims, then why do you not go elsewhere?
Assis
28-06-2006, 00:04
europeans that are worried should just press their governments ban any form of religious hatred - regardless of colour, creed or faith - trial offenders - regardless of colour, creed or faith - and send them off to exile.

either that or torture them, the only allowed method being:

restrain them, remove their boots and tickle their feet with a feather.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 00:05
And that from a guy from Ireland. Religious fundamentalism must indeed be familiar to you.

Where are you from?
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 00:08
I guess you didn't do that forum search and a lot of reading, or else you might see it's not a strawman.



Oh okay, then I guess I, a non-European, can also make comments regarding Europe since we have NN, a European, trying to force his morality and arguments on us. Seems fair to me, yes? Yes.

When have I ever argued for things like concentration camps? :rolleyes: Double Strawmen from Santa Baraba. All he can come up with :rolleyes:
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 00:10
I have since the beginning.



Yes, my assumptions are silly compared to "Muslims are a detrimental force to Europe". That's real brilliant there, buddy. You can hide your beliefs behind numbers, but you are generalizing a group, and a large one at that.

I'm not generalising. I'm looking at the situation in ALL majority muslim countries. And I'm considering the possibilities what might happen if Muslims become the majority in Europe....
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 00:12
Actual power lies in the people, not politicians. Whatever you may feel the urge to discuss, it has no majority in Europe. If you fear that Europe may one day be taken over by muslims, then why do you not go elsewhere?

Really? No majority in Europe? Here's a majority in one country:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=488249

If you like muslims so much, why dont you move to one of those islamic countries? There are tonnes of them already...
Gregmackie
28-06-2006, 00:14
If the amount of muslims did get get to 125million, would this actually mean as so much? Would the next generation of muslims not be less religious than the previous ones, if that makes sense. I mean like how, i consider myself christian, but don't actually follow christian teachings and suchlike...
Jenrak
28-06-2006, 00:21
I'm not generalising. I'm looking at the situation in ALL majority muslim countries. And I'm considering the possibilities what might happen if Muslims become the majority in Europe....

And how bad would that be? What would be the problem if Muslims were the majortiy?

Really? No majority in Europe? Here's a majority in one country:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=488249

If you like muslims so much, why dont you move to one of those islamic countries? There are tonnes of them already...

A prerequisite in this is intellectual reasoning. Your reasoning is backed up by your xenophobic attitude towards others.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 00:27
And how bad would that be? What would be the problem if Muslims were the majortiy?



A prerequisite in this is intellectual reasoning. Your reasoning is backed up by your xenophobic attitude towards others.

The problem if Muslims were the majortiy would be the problems in current majority muslim countries. Isnt it obvious? :rolleyes:
CanuckHeaven
28-06-2006, 00:27
I think you have a secret fear that brown people might have bigger dicks than pale people.
Way too funny!!!! :D
Psychotic Mongooses
28-06-2006, 01:00
The problem if Muslims were the majortiy would be the problems in current majority muslim countries. Isnt it obvious? :rolleyes:

Poverty and corruption?

I don't see that happening too much in the EU to be honest.
Deep Kimchi
28-06-2006, 01:01
Poverty and corruption?

I don't see that happening too much in the EU to be honest.

If they vote in sharia law, sure. Won't take long at all.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 01:02
Poverty and corruption?

I don't see that happening too much in the EU to be honest.

Opression of women and homosexuals, along with other shitty stuff. Duh! :rolleyes:
Psychotic Mongooses
28-06-2006, 01:05
If they vote in sharia law, sure. Won't take long at all.

Sharia law isn't in place in all 'Muslim countries', so thats a flaw in your argument.


Opression of women and homosexuals, along with other shitty stuff. Duh!

You do realise that homosexuality has only been decriminalised/accepted quite recently in some European countries don't you?

As for oppression of women, see my Sharia Law comment above.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 01:08
Sharia law isn't in place in all 'Muslim countries', so thats a flaw in your argument.



You do realise that homosexuality has only been decriminalised/accepted quite recently in some European countries don't you?

As for oppression of women, see my Sharia Law comment above.

There is no sharia law in turkey, it is democratic, but still 90% of women are subjected to violance. Read the OP. :rolleyes: DUH!
People started to debate the obvious. Next we'll start to debate if we should click quote or reply when replying posts....
Psychotic Mongooses
28-06-2006, 01:26
There is no sharia law in turkey, it is democratic, but still 90% of women are subjected to violance. Read the OP. :rolleyes: DUH!
People started to debate the obvious. Next we'll start to debate if we should click quote or reply when replying posts....

No shit. Turkey has a lot of problems with human rights.

The domestic violence statistics in the 49 page art. sounds like rural Ireland in the 50's and 60's.

But they weren't Muslim.

Might be a spanner in your theory there.
CanuckHeaven
28-06-2006, 01:53
The problem if Muslims were the majortiy would be the problems in current majority muslim countries. Isnt it obvious? :rolleyes:
Obviously you won't live long enough to see this happen, so why worry about it?

It seems that you are consumed/obsessed with this Muslim thing?
Trostia
28-06-2006, 02:09
When have I ever argued for things like concentration camps? :rolleyes: Double Strawmen from Santa Baraba. All he can come up with :rolleyes:

Who says you have to openly argue for "concentration camps" to be a bigoted, racist nazi?

That's fallacious reasoning.

And I never said you "argued for concentration camps" either - so THAT is a strawman. Of course you don't argue for concentration camps - you just argue that races are inferior or superior than other races, and 'cultures' are inferior than others (yours being the superior one), you read nazi-trash on the web, and quote them as a source, and consider immigration to be genocide against white people...

Wake up, NN. You're not fooling me. Either grow some stones and admit you're a racist or just get back into the closet where you belong.
Baratstan
28-06-2006, 12:06
I've said this many times before, but here goes. Much more strict limitation of immigration measures. Pro-natal policies (combination/advanced version of Franch and Nordic System) to counter demographic trends. Deportation of some muslims who cant integrate. Deportation can be done in a humane manner. It doesnt have to be "lets kick their asses out of here.", it can be done via economical incentives. They can be given loans until they can get their life back in order in their new homes.

So, sending them back to an 'inferior' culture that treats them worse than the western culture? It seems you care more about trying to preserve European liberties than helping the human population as a whole become more fairly treated.
Londim
28-06-2006, 17:15
Ny you still haven't answered a few questions such as:

How many muslims do you know?
Have you ever been attacked by a muslim?
Are muslims a big problem in you area?

If you do not answer these questions then I will be forced to believe that
you know no muslims so have no idea what great people a majority of them are.
Bottle
28-06-2006, 17:30
Opression of women and homosexuals, along with other shitty stuff. Duh! :rolleyes:
Out of curiosity, is your ire directed exclusively at male heterosexual Muslims? Would your alarm disappear if only female Muslims and gay Muslims were allowed to live in Europe?
Deep Kimchi
28-06-2006, 17:45
How many muslims do you know?

At least 20. Two extremely closely.
Have you ever been attacked by a muslim?In the US, no. Overseas, yes.
Are muslims a big problem in you area?No. Partly because the opportunity here allows them to open small businesses and thrive. All of the ones I know were formerly in Europe, where they say that opportunities do not exist in the same way that they do in the US to make money.
Londim
28-06-2006, 17:54
At least 20. Two extremely closely.
In the US, no. Overseas, yes.
No. Partly because the opportunity here allows them to open small businesses and thrive. All of the ones I know were formerly in Europe, where they say that opportunities do not exist in the same way that they do in the US to make money.

The questions were really for Ny but okay anyone can answer them
Crown Prince Satan
28-06-2006, 17:57
You do realise that homosexuality has only been decriminalised/accepted quite recently in some European countries don't you?
Bastard liberal Europeans... I am working to ensure that the same doesn't happen in the US... If that doesn't work, I'll just have to use more subversive tactics to get rid of them all...

Can't have homos populating the world... I need all little things reproducing like rabbits, so that this world collapses once and for all.
Krakatao0
28-06-2006, 18:11
is ny nordland racist?
I just looked up some of his previous threads,its all muslims are inferior, no immigrationall crime is caused by immigrants and some races are superior to others-i mean wtf?
Yes. He claims to be Swedish and names himself after a swedish neonazi organisation. His name translated to the USA would be the New Stormfront or the New KKK. No one but a racist or a racist troll would pick such a name.
Heikoku
28-06-2006, 20:01
Yes. He claims to be Swedish and names himself after a swedish neonazi organisation. His name translated to the USA would be the New Stormfront or the New KKK. No one but a racist or a racist troll would pick such a name.

Linkie here:

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:7MOqIuOJ8nsJ:users.westnet.gr/~cgian/swedfa.htm+Nordland+Sweden&hl=en&gl=br&ct=clnk&cd=1

If I recall correctly, one is banned if he uses this kind of nick, no?
Tactical Grace
28-06-2006, 20:51
Edit: Fall of Rome: Barbarians are the primary reason in many theories and they are important reason, if not primary, in many others...
No, actually they are not.

If you bothered reading anything about the collapse of that society, and indeed any other, you will find that the 'barbarians' were merely a long-term ongoing problem that finished off the already-weakened Empire and scavenged its corpse.

The weakening was a result of internal disorder, mismanagement and poor economic planning, all indiginous, internally generated issues. Barbarian incursions are merely the vultures that appear when you are already fucked.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:11
No, actually they are not.

If you bothered reading anything about the collapse of that society, and indeed any other, you will find that the 'barbarians' were merely a long-term ongoing problem that finished off the already-weakened Empire and scavenged its corpse.

The weakening was a result of internal disorder, mismanagement and poor economic planning, all indiginous, internally generated issues. Barbarian incursions are merely the vultures that appear when you are already fucked.

Read the OP. There are some historians who think Barbarians were the primary reason. There are other theories, including the one you are defending. There is no consenssus however. If you, yourself did bother to read even the OP, you would have known.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:15
No shit. Turkey has a lot of problems with human rights.

The domestic violence statistics in the 49 page art. sounds like rural Ireland in the 50's and 60's.

But they weren't Muslim.

Might be a spanner in your theory there.

You havent backed your claim about 50's RURAL Ireland. Was it also 90%? Anyway...I see no/few change for the better though. And there are changes for the worse as well. Turks have recently elected a islamist government.
Trostia
28-06-2006, 21:16
I find it amusing since the whole derogatory phrase of "barbarians" was first applied against those northerly tribes... in other words, the people who Ny Nordland now considers "civilized."

I suppose if our "Roman Empire" were to fall to "Muslim barbarians", 2000 years from now Ny Nordland would argue that said Muslims are now the "civilized" ones?

Heh, no such luck. Only white northerners are civilized according to him. Black people are stupid, according to him. (But asians, he reckons, are smarter. So he's not racist! ;) ) Muslims according to him are just "inferior."

Blah blah blah. (To Ny Nordland: This is your cue to whine about how one time I made an "incest comment" and how much that hurt your sensitive self.)
Cabra West
28-06-2006, 21:19
Read the OP. There are some historians who think Barbarians were the primary reason. There are other theories, including the one you are defending. There is no consenssus however. If you, yourself did bother to read even the OP, you would have known.

I find that extremely hard to believe, as if I remember correctly the Roman Empire was not only capable to hold the very same Barbarians at bay for centuries, no they had actually even conquered and ruled vast parts of Barbarian territories....
Odd, don't you think?
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:21
Obviously you won't live long enough to see this happen, so why worry about it?

It seems that you are consumed/obsessed with this Muslim thing?

I'll probably be alive within 50 years. If not, I care about future generations which is beyond understanding for some people like you, I guess...
About the consumed/obsessed thing, I made 4,5 threads about them out of 20? If making threads and writing about them is considered obsession, OK! I might be a bit carried away though, especially after the "Muslim Rape Epidemic in Sweden/Norway" thread.
But then you should also admit that you are obsessed with stupid answers. You either laugh at silly jokes or bring irrevelant points. Are you always this shallow?
Yootopia
28-06-2006, 21:23
Yes. He claims to be Swedish and names himself after a swedish neonazi organisation. His name translated to the USA would be the New Stormfront or the New KKK. No one but a racist or a racist troll would pick such a name.
He's Norwegian, not Swedish.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:28
So, sending them back to an 'inferior' culture that treats them worse than the western culture? It seems you care more about trying to preserve European liberties than helping the human population as a whole become more fairly treated.

Immigration helps very few people at best. Europe has been receiving immigration for decades but the countries that are giving emigration is still poor. And many immigrants themselves arent happy, as we see in the riots in France. Besides, many immigrants are high skilled and that causes brain drain which is bad for the country giving emigration. For example there is a severe shortage of doctors in Africa, partly because doctors emigrate.
Instead of this, I think we should increase the aid to developing countries, erease more debts and stuff like that that'll help the developing country itself and this would be more effective to help more people...
Deep Kimchi
28-06-2006, 21:29
Immigration helps very few people at best. Europe has been receiving immigration for decades but the countries that are giving emigration is still poor. And many immigrants themselves arent happy, as we see in the riots in France. Besides, many immigrants are high skilled and that causes brain drain which is bad for the country giving emigration. For example there is a severe shortage of doctors in Africa, partly because doctors emigrate.
Instead of this, I think we should increase the aid to developing countries, erease more debts and stuff like that that'll help the developing country itself and this would be more effective to help more people...


I guess that explains why the United States is a superpower. It was built by immigrants (even the First People came from somewhere else).

Yes, as we can see from the US example, immigration and blended societies are a terrible, unworkable idea.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:31
Ny you still haven't answered a few questions such as:

How many muslims do you know?
Have you ever been attacked by a muslim?
Are muslims a big problem in you area?

If you do not answer these questions then I will be forced to believe that
you know no muslims so have no idea what great people a majority of them are.

I've met with plenty of muslims when I was in Egypt. I havent got any muslim friends though. However these are all irrevelant. People, who knew criminals who did the London bombings, thought they were good people as well. People are rarely what they seem outside.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11255791&postcount=59

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11255740&postcount=56
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:35
Yes. He claims to be Swedish and names himself after a swedish neonazi organisation. His name translated to the USA would be the New Stormfront or the New KKK. No one but a racist or a racist troll would pick such a name.

:rolleyes:
LOL. This is funny actually. In a pathetic way. Have I "claimed" to be swedish? You know that Sweden and Norway are different countries?
Are all people from the Nordland in Sweden and Nordland in Norway all nazis as well? Is Kylie Minogue a stalinist fascist because she made a song called Red Women?
How old are you people?
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:44
I find it amusing since the whole derogatory phrase of "barbarians" was first applied against those northerly tribes... in other words, the people who Ny Nordland now considers "civilized."

I suppose if our "Roman Empire" were to fall to "Muslim barbarians", 2000 years from now Ny Nordland would argue that said Muslims are now the "civilized" ones?


Read my debate with Iztatepopotla in pages 3,4,5. Is being a broken record all you are capable of?


Heh, no such luck. Only white northerners are civilized according to him. Black people are stupid, according to him. (But asians, he reckons, are smarter. So he's not racist! ;) ) Muslims according to him are just "inferior."

Blah blah blah. (To Ny Nordland: This is your cue to whine about how one time I made an "incest comment" and how much that hurt your sensitive self.)

I've never said those bolded areas. For ex: I said islamic culture is inferior. I didnt say muslims are. I'm not surprised though. Your calibré has been clear for a very long time. I guess, besides being a broken record, bringing up straw men all the time is all you are capable of.
Trostia
28-06-2006, 21:51
Read my debate with Iztatepopotla in pages 3,4,5. Is being a broken record all you are capable of?


You've been a broken record ever since you started posting here. Waaah, Muslims rape us Nordlanders and should all be deported. Waah, I don't know why my reading of "Angry White Female" should get me called racist. Waaah, why is everyone intelligent disagreeing with me, it must be a PC conspiracy to commit "genocide" against "whites!"


I've never said those bolded areas. For ex: I said islamic culture is inferior. I didnt say muslims are. I'm not surprised though. Your calibré has been clear for a very long time. I guess, besides being a broken record, bringing up straw men all the time is all you are capable of.

I'm paraphrasing, but its not surprising that you're trying to squirm out of shit thats a matter of public record. You and facts have never agreed too much.

I've pointed out a strawman you've used already in this thread, can you be a smart little boy and go find it out? Or is whining about strawmen and not actually knowing what a strawman is, all you are capable of?

Your caliber has also been pretty clear. You're either a racist, bigoted idiot - or just an idiot.
Desperate Measures
28-06-2006, 21:52
Why is this an issue?
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:56
I find that extremely hard to believe, as if I remember correctly the Roman Empire was not only capable to hold the very same Barbarians at bay for centuries, no they had actually even conquered and ruled vast parts of Barbarian territories....
Odd, don't you think?

I am not sure. I'm not a historian. I just know that it isnt fair to dismiss well established explanations just because it isnt the only explanation and other explanations suit your arguments better.
As far as I know, the asian invasion from east pushed germanic barbarians to west and into the Rome. This destabilized the Empire greatly. Besides, Rome has been sacked many times by barbarians and any blow to the city is a deadly blow to the Empire

Wiki:


The city of Rome has been sacked on several occasions. Among the most famous:

* 387 BC: Battle of the Allia - Rome is sacked by the Gauls
* 410 AD: Sack of Rome - Rome is sacked by Alaric, King of the Visigoths
* 455 - Rome is sacked by Geiseric, King of the Vandals
* 546 - Rome is sacked and depopulated by Totila, King of the Ostrogoths, during the war between the Ostrogoths and the Byzantines



Sack of Rome (410)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Sack of Rome occurred on August 24, 410. The city was attacked by the Visigoths, led by Alaric I. The Roman capital had been moved to the Italian city of Ravenna by the young emperor Honorius, after the Visigoths entered Italy.

This was the first time in almost 800 years that Rome had fallen to an enemy. The previous sack of Rome was by Gauls under their leader Brennus in 387 BC. Many historians see this as an end of the Western Roman Empire.


As you can see, many historians disagree with you and Tactical Grace. If Tactical Grace would have bothered to read other theories except the one he put so confidentally in his post, he would have known too...
Trostia
28-06-2006, 21:57
I guess that explains why the United States is a superpower. It was built by immigrants (even the First People came from somewhere else).

Yes, as we can see from the US example, immigration and blended societies are a terrible, unworkable idea.

Well, Ny Nordland, whats your response to this?

I'll make it multiple choice so you can devote even less of your strained resources to it.

A) It's a strawman
B) La la la, I'm not reading you...
C) The USA was "meant" to be multicultural and European nations are "meant" to be mono-ethnic.
D) OMG DEEP KIMCHI IS STUPID.
E) It's all part of a US-led plot to commit "genocide" against Europeans.
F) (Nonsensical raving)
G) (Pile of random statistics that don't really refute the argument but which can make me later say I have "facts" and Deep Kimchi is just being mean)
Deep Kimchi
28-06-2006, 21:57
As you can see, many historians disagree with you and Tactical Grace. If Tactical Grace would have bothered to read other theories except the one he put so confidentally in his post, he would have known too...

It's pretty obvious to me that the United States is currently the world's only superpower. It's also obvious that the United States is a nation of immigrants.

Tell me, if immigration is so bad, and immigrants are so bad, how did the United States turn out to be able to beat less diverse nations? Eh?
Magnus Valerius
28-06-2006, 21:59
If Europeans are so concerned about Muslims and their increasing numbers in Europe, why don't they get crackin' and increase their own fertility rates to counter the Muslim migrants? Either that or put harsh immigration quotas on Muslims.

...Luckily, I live in California, so this problem is not my concern. :D
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 21:59
I guess that explains why the United States is a superpower. It was built by immigrants (even the First People came from somewhere else).

Yes, as we can see from the US example, immigration and blended societies are a terrible, unworkable idea.

Native Americans in Canada allowed immigration of Europeans. And now their culture is mostly destroyed/became reccessive. My point is immigration destroys local cultures.
This doesnt apply to USA though. It was an immigration culture to begin with. Comparing Denmark and USA about immigration is comparing apples and car exhausts...
Trostia
28-06-2006, 22:01
Native Americans in Canada allowed immigration of Europeans.

Ha! No, Native Americans were CONQUERED by Europeans.

But I forgot - you already think "immigration" is the same as "invasion" do you not?


This doesnt apply to USA though. It was an immigration culture to begin with. Comparing Denmark and USA about immigration is comparing apples and car exhausts...

Ah, I see you went with option C). Thank you for using Trostia's Choose-an-idiotic-NN-Response, please play again.
Deep Kimchi
28-06-2006, 22:03
Ah, I see you went with option C). Thank you for using Trostia's Choose-an-idiotic-NN-Response, please play again.

That sounded like F to me.

And even the First People came here from somewhere else. The "Native Americans" are such only by the distinction of arriving first. And by no means were they a monoculture.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:05
You've been a broken record ever since you started posting here. Waaah, Muslims rape us Nordlanders and should all be deported. Waah, I don't know why my reading of "Angry White Female" should get me called racist. Waaah, why is everyone intelligent disagreeing with me, it must be a PC conspiracy to commit "genocide" against "whites!"


You are repeating the same argument. I'm discussing about the same discussion from different angles. Is talking about US foreign policy in several threads being a broken record? No. Is repeating that USA supported bin Ladin during Soviet era, when it was discussed a couple pages ago, being a broken record? Yes. And hence you are one. I wish that you are capable of understanding the difference of those 2 situations.



I'm paraphrasing, but its not surprising that you're trying to squirm out of shit thats a matter of public record. You and facts have never agreed too much.

I've pointed out a strawman you've used already in this thread, can you be a smart little boy and go find it out? Or is whining about strawmen and not actually knowing what a strawman is, all you are capable of?

Your caliber has also been pretty clear. You're either a racist, bigoted idiot - or just an idiot.

LOL. This coming from you? I mean YOU, Trostia? ROFL
Trostia
28-06-2006, 22:10
You are repeating the same argument. I'm discussing about the same discussion from different angles.

Your angle is always the same. I hate pointing out the obvious to you, it makes me feel kinda sad and embarassed for you.

Generally I'm here to make sure everyone else knows who they're dealing with, since you lie about your own motives and even what you yourself write. If you weren't so dishonest, I wouldn't have so much of a problem with you.

Ironically I have respect for Deep Kimchi - though he once said killing Muslims was better than sex and I find some of his attitudes appalling - cuz at least he doesn't feel your absurd need to lie just to look better.


LOL. This coming from you? I mean YOU, Trostia? ROFL

Yes, I know its absurd for me to call someone else a racist, since I'm so obviously racist myself that you have no problem citing threads I've started that illustrate my racist beliefs. Well? I'm waiting for that. Tick tock, tick tock. ;)

ROFLCOPTER
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:11
It's pretty obvious to me that the United States is currently the world's only superpower. It's also obvious that the United States is a nation of immigrants.

Tell me, if immigration is so bad, and immigrants are so bad, how did the United States turn out to be able to beat less diverse nations? Eh?

USA is the strongest country, no doubt. However it's hardly the best. It ranks low among many per-capita indicators, quality of life isnt #1, high rates of crime etc etc....
But it is overall a good country. Anyone who likes it can try to go there. However this doesnt mean all the world should be like USA.
About your "beating out" comments. China is very homogenous. And even by the most conservative expactations it is expected to surpass USA economically within a few decades.
Trostia
28-06-2006, 22:15
About your "beating out" comments. China is very homogenous. And even by the most conservative expactations it is expected to surpass USA economically within a few decades.

LOL!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalities_of_China

The People's Republic of China (PRC) is a multi-ethnic unitary state and, as such, officially recognizes 56 nationalities or mínzú (??), within China: the Han being the majority (>92%), and the remaining 55 nationalities being the national minorities

If you're arguing for a successful, single-ethnic state you may want to choose a nation you're less ignorant about. Or do you just disregard the fact that they HAVE minorities (instead of deporting them)?
Empress_Suiko
28-06-2006, 22:18
LOL!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalities_of_China



If you're arguing for a successful, single-ethnic state you may want to choose a nation you're less ignorant about. Or do you just disregard the fact that they HAVE minorities (instead of deporting them)?



China has never been Homogenous. Maybe he should try South Korea?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_South_Korea


It's still not 100% Homogenous.
Empress_Suiko
28-06-2006, 22:22
USA is the strongest country, no doubt. However it's hardly the best. It ranks low among many per-capita indicators, quality of life isnt #1, high rates of crime etc etc....
But it is overall a good country. Anyone who likes it can try to go there. However this doesnt mean all the world should be like USA.
About your "beating out" comments. China is very homogenous. And even by the most conservative expactations it is expected to surpass USA economically within a few decades.



The USA is in the top 5 in GDP per capita above most EU nations, but diversity is not the reason the USA is so strong, and the fact is the diversity in the US is overrated. The USA was well over 80% white until the late 90's and was over 90% until the 80's. It is still 75% white with most non-whites cluster in certian areas.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:23
LOL!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalities_of_China



If you're arguing for a successful, single-ethnic state you may want to choose a nation you're less ignorant about. Or do you just disregard the fact that they HAVE minorities (instead of deporting them)?

92% is Han. Han is an ethnicity. 92% of China is of same ethnicity. Isnt this homogenous?
USA is on the other hand something like 70% white. Which is made of numerious ethnicities. And 30% Others. Which is made of several races and numerious ethnicities.
Simple enough for you now? Get it? Or will you require other explanations, as usual. I feel like a kindergarten teacher when I'm replying to you.
Londim
28-06-2006, 22:25
Never has a nation been homogenous. Now Ny one more question:

Why do YOU feel so threatened?
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:26
China has never been Homogenous. Maybe he should try South Korea?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_South_Korea


It's still not 100% Homogenous.

:rolleyes: Is making idiotic arguments contagious? We say sky is blue. Does it mean sky is 100% of the time 100% blue?
Even 9 year olds can apply such common sense....
Trostia
28-06-2006, 22:27
92% is Han. Han is an ethnicity. 92% of China is of same ethnicity. Isnt this homogenous?

Nope. Please look up the word and get back to me.


USA is on the other hand something like 70% white.

So you think 92% is homogenous, but 70% is not? Where do you draw the line exactly? I'm just curious what your brain thinks is real.


Simple enough for you now? Get it? Or will you require other explanations, as usual. I feel like a kindergarten teacher when I'm replying to you.

Yeah... if a kindergarten teacher was a fucking bigoted closet nazi who is incapable of rational thought. Luckily I never had such a teacher, though I'd guess maybe you did.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:28
Your angle is always the same. I hate pointing out the obvious to you, it makes me feel kinda sad and embarassed for you.

Generally I'm here to make sure everyone else knows who they're dealing with, since you lie about your own motives and even what you yourself write. If you weren't so dishonest, I wouldn't have so much of a problem with you.

Ironically I have respect for Deep Kimchi - though he once said killing Muslims was better than sex and I find some of his attitudes appalling - cuz at least he doesn't feel your absurd need to lie just to look better.



Yes, I know its absurd for me to call someone else a racist, since I'm so obviously racist myself that you have no problem citing threads I've started that illustrate my racist beliefs. Well? I'm waiting for that. Tick tock, tick tock. ;)

ROFLCOPTER

This post isnt worth an answer beyond this.
Empress_Suiko
28-06-2006, 22:29
:rolleyes: Is making idiotic arguments contagious? We say sky is blue. Does it mean sky is 100% of the time 100% blue?
Even 9 year olds can apply such common sense....



Like I have said to others, there is no reason for flames just because you are losing. Now either post civil or don't post at all.
Trostia
28-06-2006, 22:29
This post isnt worth an answer beyond this.

I accept your concession.
Trostia
28-06-2006, 22:32
Never has a nation been homogenous. Now Ny one more question:

Why do YOU feel so threatened?

Same reason he reads Angry White Female. (Do a google search. It's a favorite of Stormfront nazis.)

Same reason he makes arguments that black people are less intelligent than white people.

Same reason he calls immigration an "invasion" or "genocide."

Same reason he calls other cultures "inferior."

He's a bigoted, hateful little racist. Pure and simple.
Assis
28-06-2006, 22:32
EU May Have More Than 125 Million Muslims by 2025
i'm much more concerned about the 8 billion people that will be populating the world by 2025 - to be honest - or the 9 billion by 2050, when we are loosing farmland due to soil erosion and seeing crops fails due to weather going mental and when freshwater is becoming ever more scarce and intoxicated with dangerous chemicals...

2/3 of the world's population may be living in water stressed countries by 2025 (whereby the water use levels are 10% over the renewable freshwater resources)

much more worrying...
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:33
Nope. Please look up the word and get back to me.


http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11259470&postcount=173



So you think 92% is homogenous, but 70% is not? Where do you draw the line exactly? I'm just curious what your brain thinks is real.


There is a serious difference between 92% and 70%. Besides, one is ethnicity and other is race. I know etnicity is a hard concept for Americans to grasp since it is an immigrant society.


Yeah... if a kindergarten teacher was a fucking bigoted closet nazi who is incapable of rational thought. Luckily I never had such a teacher, though I'd guess maybe you did.

Now you get what I mean when I refer to your calibré?
Desperate Measures
28-06-2006, 22:36
I must be missing something. I still don't see how this matters.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:37
i'm much more concerned about the 8 billion people that will be populating the world by 2025 - to be honest - or the 9 billion by 2050, when we are loosing farmland due to soil erosion and seeing crops fails due to weather going mental and when freshwater is becoming ever more scarce and intoxicated with dangerous chemicals...

2/3 of the world's population may be living in water stressed countries by 2025 (whereby the water use levels are 10% over the renewable freshwater resources)

much more worrying...

Irrevelant here. However, it'd make a good thread. Make it.
Trostia
28-06-2006, 22:39
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11259470&postcount=173


I'm sure you think that linking to your own posts is actually providing a definition. It isn't. I repeat: look up the definition of the word "homogenous."


There is a serious difference between 92% and 70%.

Oh, indeed. 22% difference.

So, where do you draw the line? I hate having to ask the same questions but you always manage not to answer them. At what specific percentage do YOU label a society "homogenous?" 90%? 80% 71%?

Besides, one is ethnicity and other is race. I know etnicity is a hard concept for Americans to grasp since it is an immigrant society.

I know the definition of "homogenous" is difficult for you to understand since you are from an inferior culture and English is obviously not your first language.


Now you get what I mean when I refer to your calibré?

No. Do tell me! I love getting my "calibre" analyzed by anonymous online racists who make assumptions like: Jocabia who you assumed was Jewish, or me who you assumed was Hispanic. Obviously you're a great telepath and know a great deal about me!
Assis
28-06-2006, 22:45
Irrevelant here. However, it'd make a good thread. Make it.
i will... not that i believe the environment is such a big issue on people's minds, even if it should (and it's certainly not for lack of information). still, thanks for the suggestion.
Desperate Measures
28-06-2006, 22:47
Nordland, I'd really like a serious answer to this question. Have you ever had any negative associations with people from other races outside of the internet? I'm just wondering.
Baratstan
28-06-2006, 22:48
Immigration helps very few people at best. Europe has been receiving immigration for decades but the countries that are giving emigration is still poor. And many immigrants themselves arent happy, as we see in the riots in France. Besides, many immigrants are high skilled and that causes brain drain which is bad for the country giving emigration. For example there is a severe shortage of doctors in Africa, partly because doctors emigrate.

The effects of immigration are not necessarily uniform in all situations, and with an aging population in Europe and more elderly dependants to be supported by a shrinking working population, immigration may be important to maintain the quality of life. A pro-natalist policy alone would not automatically solve the problem completely or in time.

Instead of this, I think we should increase the aid to developing countries, erease more debts and stuff like that that'll help the developing country itself and this would be more effective to help more people...

That sounds much more workable than resticting immigration itself :), eliminating the push factors in the countries that are a source of immigration could mean a better quality of life for more people and reduce immigration.
Empress_Suiko
28-06-2006, 22:48
I'm sure you think that linking to your own posts is actually providing a definition. It isn't. I repeat: look up the definition of the word "homogenous."


Linking to a flame is not a good idea.


Maybe this would help him.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homogenous


FYI, the USA is 75% white not 70%!
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:51
Nordland, I'd really like a serious answer to this question. Have you ever had any negative associations with people from other races outside of the internet? I'm just wondering.

Yes.
Desperate Measures
28-06-2006, 22:52
Yes.
OK.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 22:58
The effects of immigration are not necessarily uniform in all situations, and with an aging population in Europe and more elderly dependants to be supported by a shrinking working population, immigration may be important to maintain the quality of life. A pro-natalist policy alone would not automatically solve the problem completely or in time.


How do you know? It hasnt been tried good enough, strong enough. Pro-natal policies might just work. Besides, we can do lots of other stuff. Like raising retiring age. I dont know. I wouldnt want to retire at something 60 and do nothing and wait to die in a old people's house. I think they might be happier when they are productive. Besides, most european countries got already very high levels of unemployement. If jobs are scarce, why mass immigration?


That sounds much more workable than resticting immigration itself :), eliminating the push factors in the countries that are a source of immigration could mean a better quality of life for more people and reduce immigration.

However it'd take time. In the mean time immigration must be restricted to protect local cultures and to prevent brain drain in emigration countries.
Tactical Grace
28-06-2006, 23:05
Read the OP. There are some historians who think Barbarians were the primary reason. There are other theories, including the one you are defending. There is no consenssus however. If you, yourself did bother to read even the OP, you would have known.
I did actually, and debated whether or not to issue an official warning for trolling and lock this thread. However, I figured I should leave it open, because on this occasion there is value in more people reading the argument and witnessing a stellar example of racist rhetoric.

There is consensus on the Barbarians vs. Rome idea. A few academics may be attracted to the romantic notion of the Empire under siege, but it's aesthetically-pleasing drivel. The debasement of Roman currency, poor financial controls, internal power struggles akin to war and periods where changes of leadership were so frequent, not every player's name was recorded, point to a system which collapsed along pre-existing flaws, under the weight of its own contradictions. Particularly in the realm of the theory of societal collapse, anything which runs contrary to Joseph A Tainter's 'Collapse of Complex Societies', the seminal work in this area, is bunk.

Returning to the racism, your comments on islamic culture being inferior are absolute bullshit, and betray ignorance, denial and a sense of personal insecurity. Pretty much anyone who subscribes to a 'culture under attack' theory, in actual fact doubts one's own ability to compete in an international marketplace. The fact is, if you are not good enough, you will be defeated, and it is right and proper that you should be. That you launch ad hominem attacks on someone else's background instead of focusing on constructively working towards improving your own situation, shows that you have an incorrect sense of priorities, and are in fact a barrier to people on 'your side' who would be doing better without you.
Kerylla
28-06-2006, 23:11
I've never said those bolded areas. For ex: I said islamic culture is inferior. I didnt say muslims are. I'm not surprised though. Your calibré has been clear for a very long time. I guess, besides being a broken record, bringing up straw men all the time is all you are capable of.
Umm, you do realise that muslims are the followers of the Islamic religion, therefore you saying Islamic Culture is inferior is the same as you saying that muslims are, right?
Londim
28-06-2006, 23:13
How do you know? It hasnt been tried good enough, strong enough. Pro-natal policies might just work. Besides, we can do lots of other stuff. Like raising retiring age. I dont know. I wouldnt want to retire at something 60 and do nothing and wait to die in a old people's house. I think they might be happier when they are productive. Besides, most european countries got already very high levels of unemployement. If jobs are scarce, why mass immigration?



However it'd take time. In the mean time immigration must be restricted to protect local cultures and to prevent brain drain in emigration countries.

China tried it for a good century. At first it was great enough people to fil the jobs but then a crisis occured. People had been brainwashed into believing having many kids was a good thing. But the government realised its mistake and tried to stop it by bringing in anti natal policies. Only recently have things been evening out. Look it up if you don't believe me.
Tactical Grace
28-06-2006, 23:14
Umm, you do realise that muslims are the followers of the Islamic religion, therefore you saying Islamic Culture is inferior is the same as you saying that muslims are, right?
He does, yes, because he is actually a xenophobe. ;)
Desperate Measures
28-06-2006, 23:17
Umm, you do realise that muslims are the followers of the Islamic religion, therefore you saying Islamic Culture is inferior is the same as you saying that muslims are, right?
Well, if Nordland had been born in an Islamic Culture he'd have obviously realized how inferior the entire thing was and head North-East. But then he'd have been part of his problem... I need to sit down and think about this for a while.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 23:31
I did actually, and debated whether or not to issue an official warning for trolling and lock this thread. However, I figured I should leave it open, because on this occasion there is value in more people reading the argument and witnessing a stellar example of racist rhetoric.

There is consensus on the Barbarians vs. Rome idea. A few academics may be attracted to the romantic notion of the Empire under siege, but it's aesthetically-pleasing drivel. The debasement of Roman currency, poor financial controls, internal power struggles akin to war and periods where changes of leadership were so frequent, not every player's name was recorded, point to a system which collapsed along pre-existing flaws, under the weight of its own contradictions. Particularly in the realm of the theory of societal collapse, anything which runs contrary to Joseph A Tainter's 'Collapse of Complex Societies', the seminal work in this area, is bunk.


Not few academics, many...


Sack of Rome (410)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Sack of Rome occurred on August 24, 410. The city was attacked by the Visigoths, led by Alaric I. The Roman capital had been moved to the Italian city of Ravenna by the young emperor Honorius, after the Visigoths entered Italy.

This was the first time in almost 800 years that Rome had fallen to an enemy. The previous sack of Rome was by Gauls under their leader Brennus in 387 BC. Many historians see this as an end of the Western Roman Empire.





Returning to the racism, your comments on islamic culture being inferior are absolute bullshit, and betray ignorance, denial and a sense of personal insecurity. Pretty much anyone who subscribes to a 'culture under attack' theory, in actual fact doubts one's own ability to compete in an international marketplace.


I define the islamic culture as the culture in majority muslim countries. And women and many others in all those countries, as we see from statistics, are subject to incredible levels of opression, violence. I see this as inferior. If you dont know about the treatment of women and other people in these societies, it is your ignorancy. If you'll argue that this opressive culture isnt inferior, it'd be be even more bullshit than your current post I am answering to. About Denial and a sense of personal insecurity, they are your own irrevelant ad hominem attacks and they arent worth even a reply.


The fact is, if you are not good enough, you will be defeated, and it is right and proper that you should be. That you launch ad hominem attacks on someone else's background instead of focusing on constructively working towards improving your own situation, shows that you have an incorrect sense of priorities, and are in fact a barrier to people on 'your side' who would be doing better without you.

If you read the debate, you'll see that I give reasonable answers to reasonable people. I really dont need to convince dogmatic people who answer me with their own insults. It is pointless to argue against their dogmas.
Ny Nordland
28-06-2006, 23:34
He does, yes, because he is actually a xenophobe. ;)

Islamic culture changes while muslims stay as muslims. If I'd say muslims are inferior, it'd mean that any muslim whether it was in 20th century or 13th or 25 th would be inferior. When I say islamic culture, I refer to their current culture.
Tactical Grace, Dont assume when you can not understand my points.
Assis
28-06-2006, 23:51
And women and many others in all those countries, as we see from statistics, are subject to incredible levels of opression, violence. I see this as inferior.

here you go again with generalisations based on nothing but ignorance...

The United Arab Emirates is firmly committed to the enhancement of the status of women and the country's Constitution guarantees equal rights for both men and women. The basic rights of women are enshrined in the Saharjah (Moslem law), and the UAE Women's Federation, headed by H H Sheikha Fatima bent Mubarak, wife of the country's President, H H Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Niehyan, was founded in 1975 and to encourage the country's women to play a full role in society. Among its major activities is the promotion of women's education, with a particular emphasis on adult literacy programme. Female literacy rates now match those of males, while there are now more women at University than men. Women are also providing a growing proportion of the national workforce occupying posts ranging from senior civil servants to engineers and bankers, as well as traditional jobs in teaching and healthcare. Legal rights achieved as a result of lobbying by the Federation include generous maternity leave.

Women in the UAE have had the complete support and commitment of Sheikh Zayed and the UAE Government in their quest to play a full role in the development of the country. The belief that women are entitled to take their place in society is grounded in the UAE Constitution which states that the principles of social justice should apply to all. Under the Constitution women enjoy the same legal status, claim to titles, access to education and the right to practice professions as men. The guarantees enshrined in the Constitution have been incorporated into implementing legislation. However, a legislative framework by itself, although valuable, would not have been sufficient to achieve emancipation. The President’s wife Sheikha Fatima bint Mubarak, therefore, has worked tirelessly since the establishment of the Federation to implement Sheikh Zayed’s vision of a modern society based on Arab and Islamic traditions, recognizing that it was only by organizing women that real progress could be made.

source: http://www.uae.gov.ae/Government/women.htm

WOW! i wanna live in Dubai! oh wait, they're muslim and inferior....
Assis
28-06-2006, 23:55
she looks so miserable... poor woman.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41346000/jpg/_41346027_fatma_x203.jpg
Francis Street
29-06-2006, 00:05
And that from a guy from Ireland. Religious fundamentalism must indeed be familiar to you.
Yes, it is, which is why I know that it must be opposed.

I guess you didn't do that forum search and a lot of reading, or else you might see it's not a strawman.
You accuse him of being a Nazi. He has never said that Muslims in Europe must be systematically killed in death camps, or attacked at night by militants. The worst he has suggested has been a deportation programme. I don't agree with him, but to say he's a Nazi is just trolling.

Oh okay, then I guess I, a non-European, can also make comments regarding Europe since we have NN, a European, trying to force his morality and arguments on us. Seems fair to me, yes? Yes.
NN isn't trying to force his preferred policies on America.

I love how liberals, who are meant to support civil rights, are taking the side of fundie Muslims who want to remove them.

Actual power lies in the people, not politicians. Whatever you may feel the urge to discuss, it has no majority in Europe. If you fear that Europe may one day be taken over by muslims, then why do you not go elsewhere?
Where else has made as much cultural progress as Europe? The EU and human rights are the best thing ever to happen to humanity. We can't allow that to be undone. Maybe he also just likes his homeland.

Obviously you won't live long enough to see this happen, so why worry about it?
Preserving the planet for the people who come after. If we took your attitude, we should do nothing about global warming.

Or does this only apply when it doesn't offend your beloved religious looneys?

You do realise that homosexuality has only been decriminalised/accepted quite recently in some European countries don't you?

Do you want it to be recriminalised?

Poverty and corruption?

I don't see that happening too much in the EU to be honest.
You don't see corruption in the EU? Economic prosperity can be easily undone by placing a lot of silly restrictions based on obscure religious passages. Ever wonder why the Middle East has so much resources but such bad economies?
Assis
29-06-2006, 00:50
You accuse him of being a Nazi. He has never said that Muslims in Europe must be systematically killed in death camps, or attacked at night by militants. The worst he has suggested has been a deportation programme. I don't agree with him, but to say he's a Nazi is just trolling.
just a minute FS. i know that people generally associate the word "Nazi" with what you are saying but - to be very objective - i don't actually believe all Nazi party members supported death camps. ever heard of Oskar Schindler? a lot of people became members of the Nazi party well before the camps even existed and, when they eventually did exist, it would be too dangerous to leave the party. just a note for clarification that generalisations are poor arguments.
I love how liberals, who are meant to support civil rights, are taking the side of fundie Muslims who want to remove them.
again, NN has implied over deporting all muslims before, not just fundamentalists. anyone saying supporting muslims = supporting fundamentalists is using subversive rhetoric.
Where else has made as much cultural progress as Europe?
Dubai and Lebanon are very culturally rich muslim nations.
The EU and human rights are the best thing ever to happen to humanity. We can't allow that to be undone. Maybe he also just likes his homeland.
then i would suggest he learns how to work with moderate muslims to improve inter-cultural relationships.
Preserving the planet for the people who come after. If we took your attitude, we should do nothing about global warming.
read my previous answer.
Or does this only apply when it doesn't offend your beloved religious looneys?
again: supporting muslims ≠ supporting fundamentalists.

Do you want it to be recriminalised?
have you tried to discuss gay rights with moderate muslims? i know gay muslims. did you know there is a gay rights organisation in Lebanon? have you ever considered how this western "war on terror" is being extremely damaging to human and gay rights in the middle east, through giving increasing power to extremists?... who are you going to blame? the muslims only?
You don't see corruption in the EU? Economic prosperity can be easily undone by placing a lot of silly restrictions based on obscure religious passages.
not in Dubai.
Ever wonder why the Middle East has so much resources but such bad economies?
not in Dubai. my point is, it has nothing to do with islam. it has to do with fundamentalism and - quite often - western hypocrisy and fiddling with local politics, which - again - give more and more power to fundamentalists. the west is digging its own grave, like it has been doing for centuries with its constant political manipulation and wars in the middle east. instead of working with muslim nations to improve human rights, it has chosen to support oppressors in saudi arabia and using countries like iran and iraq to fight wars, like during the cold war. things are not as linear as islam = poverty or islam = violence or islam = no human rights. anyone saying so is either ignorant of life in the middle east or a xenophobe. where do you personally want to be?
CanuckHeaven
29-06-2006, 08:37
Preserving the planet for the people who come after. If we took your attitude, we should do nothing about global warming. Or does this only apply when it doesn't offend your beloved religious looneys?
Obviously you put your own spin on my reply and spruced it up with a little flame.

You have failed miserably at trying to understand what I was trying to convey to the poster.
Baratstan
29-06-2006, 14:04
How do you know? It hasnt been tried good enough, strong enough. Pro-natal policies might just work. Besides, we can do lots of other stuff. Like raising retiring age. I dont know. I wouldnt want to retire at something 60 and do nothing and wait to die in a old people's house. I think they might be happier when they are productive. Besides, most european countries got already very high levels of unemployement. If jobs are scarce, why mass immigration?

With the possible consequences of not being able to support a growing section of the population adequetly, depending on pro-natalist policies alone would be too dangerous a gamble, even with a raised retirement age - It can't be guaranteed that the working population will rise sufficiently and in adequate time. Immigrants often do the jobs many locals won't do, and without enough immigrants the EU could become too short of the manpower it needs to support itself, as mentioned in an EU report a couple of years ago

http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do (http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/03/380&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en)

However it'd take time. In the mean time immigration must be restricted to protect local cultures and to prevent brain drain in emigration countries.

Immigration should always be resricted (to a point), but other methods need to be employed if immigration is to be reduced effectively, so funding of medical programs in sources of immigration of highly skilled doctors and surgeons for example. If immigration is resticted in one country the immigrants will simply go to another MEDC, and resticting immigration in all the countries would be immensley more difficult than helping the source countries of immigration, and such solutions don't need to take years to implement.
Psychotic Mongooses
29-06-2006, 14:13
Do you want it to be recriminalised?

Yeah, that's what I said.


You don't see corruption in the EU? Economic prosperity can be easily undone by placing a lot of silly restrictions based on obscure religious passages. Ever wonder why the Middle East has so much resources but such bad economies?
Engrained and systematic corruption.

Oh I know there is corruption in the EU as you get in any bureaucracy. However, compare the EU as a whole to say, Pakistan or Myanmar, or Algeria etc etc.

Even the most hardened of cynics could not say there is systemic and engrained corruption on that scalce in the EU.
Ny Nordland
29-06-2006, 22:46
here you go again with generalisations based on nothing but ignorance...



source: http://www.uae.gov.ae/Government/women.htm

WOW! i wanna live in Dubai! oh wait, they're muslim and inferior....

Funny that ignorance accusations come from you. I guess you are no better than some others.
Here is UAE, your examplary muslim country:


domestic abuse of women, sometimes enabled by police



legal and societal discrimination against women and noncitizens



The law prohibits women from serving in the judiciary.


Muslim women are forbidden to marry non-Muslims. In such cases, both parties can be arrested and tried. However, Muslim men are free to marry all women "of the book," i.e., Muslim, Christian, and Jewish women (see section 5).


Women

There is broad legal and societal discrimination against women. Shari'a, or Islamic law, governs the personal status of women, but civil law governs their activities in the civic and commercial sphere. The government was generally not effective in enforcing women's rights and protecting women from abuse.


http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61701.htm

Besides many other abuses, women are subjected to islamic law, in some cases. The same law which lets men 4 wives and other male biased rights. And you were arguing what, Assis? That my "generalizations" are based on nothing but ignorance? :rolleyes:
So come on people. Disprove me. Find just 1 majority muslim country with good human rights records. Just 1. Prove me that islamic culture isnt inferior. Maybe only after you, yourselves read the records and statistics of majority muslim countries, after you search google, you will stop arguing against the existance of gravity...
Ny Nordland
29-06-2006, 22:54
just a minute FS. i know that people generally associate the word "Nazi" with what you are saying but - to be very objective - i don't actually believe all Nazi party members supported death camps. ever heard of Oskar Schindler? a lot of people became members of the Nazi party well before the camps even existed and, when they eventually did exist, it would be too dangerous to leave the party. just a note for clarification that generalisations are poor arguments.


Nazis were pro immigrant ( Nazis are pro immigrant, by definition:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=489203) and violent, unlike me.


again, NN has implied over deporting all muslims before, not just fundamentalists. anyone saying supporting muslims = supporting fundamentalists is using subversive rhetoric.

Not all but most of them. It's an alien culture here. There are tonnes of muslim countries already that they can live in anyways.


Dubai and Lebanon are very culturally rich muslim nations.

then i would suggest he learns how to work with moderate muslims to improve inter-cultural relationships.

read my previous answer.

again: supporting muslims ≠ supporting fundamentalists.


Appearences can be deceiving. Good muslims:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11255791&postcount=59
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11255740&postcount=56



have you tried to discuss gay rights with moderate muslims? i know gay muslims. did you know there is a gay rights organisation in Lebanon? have you ever considered how this western "war on terror" is being extremely damaging to human and gay rights in the middle east, through giving increasing power to extremists?... who are you going to blame? the muslims only?

not in Dubai.

not in Dubai. my point is, it has nothing to do with islam. it has to do with fundamentalism and - quite often - western hypocrisy and fiddling with local politics, which - again - give more and more power to fundamentalists. the west is digging its own grave, like it has been doing for centuries with its constant political manipulation and wars in the middle east. instead of working with muslim nations to improve human rights, it has chosen to support oppressors in saudi arabia and using countries like iran and iraq to fight wars, like during the cold war. things are not as linear as islam = poverty or islam = violence or islam = no human rights. anyone saying so is either ignorant of life in the middle east or a xenophobe. where do you personally want to be?

Where are you from Assis?
Trostia
29-06-2006, 22:59
You accuse him of being a Nazi.

I never capitalized "nazi." Please look up the word "colloquial."

The worst he has suggested has been a deportation programme. I don't agree with him, but to say he's a Nazi is just trolling.

He's read, and quoted, and agreed with "Angry White Female," who if not a German National Socialist, is every bit as racist, bigoted, hateful and ignorant as Nazis. He argues for segregation, he's argued for racial superiority (unless of course you don't think intelligence is a superior trait to have!), he assumed Jocabia must be a Jew, and he sure likes referring to entire peoples as "inferior."

Trolling? Either that's what he's doing... or he's a nazi.

NN isn't trying to force his preferred policies on America.

I love how liberals, who are meant to support civil rights, are taking the side of fundie Muslims who want to remove them.

Oh, because I don't believe all Islam is inferior, and I oppose NN, I must be a "liberal?" Har.

Whether he's trying to force his policies on the US is irrelevant and more a sign of practical limitations than anything else.

So come on people. Disprove me. Find just 1 majority muslim country with good human rights records. Just 1. Prove me that islamic culture isnt inferior. Maybe only after you, yourselves read the records and statistics of majority muslim countries, after you search google, you will stop arguing against the existance of gravity...

The burden of proof lies on you, my little friend.

Proof, being a subjective term, is impossible in this situation. Proof is dependent on your ability to be convinced. You will NEVER be convinced that you are wrong. Thus you are asking for the impossible, due to the close-minded bigotry which underlies your every post and thread.
Ny Nordland
29-06-2006, 23:03
With the possible consequences of not being able to support a growing section of the population adequetly, depending on pro-natalist policies alone would be too dangerous a gamble, even with a raised retirement age - It can't be guaranteed that the working population will rise sufficiently and in adequate time. Immigrants often do the jobs many locals won't do , and without enough immigrants the EU could become too short of the manpower it needs to support itself, as mentioned in an EU report a couple of years ago

http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do (http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/03/380&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en)



Whats the avg unemployement rate in EU? 10 percent? more? How can there be any labour shortage for a decade or 2?
About the bolded area, I thought you were more idealistic then that. So it's ok for you when immigrants do the dirty jobs when natives fatten their asses on welfare?
About pro natalist policies.

France (pro-natalish): 1.9 births per women
Norway(pro-natalish): 1.78 birth per women
Germany (sux): 1.3 births per women

They do make a difference.


Immigration should always be resricted (to a point), but other methods need to be employed if immigration is to be reduced effectively, so funding of medical programs in sources of immigration of highly skilled doctors and surgeons for example. If immigration is resticted in one country the immigrants will simply go to another MEDC, and resticting immigration in all the countries would be immensley more difficult than helping the source countries of immigration, and such solutions don't need to take years to implement.

I dont say all countries. They can always go to Americas. Kimchi were mentioning how USA is successful with immigrants.....Canada is hugely underpopulated as well. Only 30 million in world's 2nd largest country. :eek:
Francis Street
29-06-2006, 23:05
just a minute FS. i know that people generally associate the word "Nazi" with what you are saying but - to be very objective - i don't actually believe all Nazi party members supported death camps. ever heard of Oskar Schindler? a lot of people became members of the Nazi party well before the camps even existed and, when they eventually did exist, it would be too dangerous to leave the party. just a note for clarification that generalisations are poor arguments.
They didn't know about the death camps but agreed with the nationalist ideology. Being a Nazi in the 1930s is not the same as being one now. We now know what they did, and to support Nazism now is to support death camps.

It's a fallacy to say that all bigotry is Nazism.

again, NN has implied over deporting all muslims before, not just fundamentalists. anyone saying supporting muslims = supporting fundamentalists is using subversive rhetoric.
I agree. Except that many "liberals" take the side of all Muslims, and condemn fundamentalism quietly, if at all.

Dubai and Lebanon are very culturally rich muslim nations.
Yes, but not as much as Europe.

then i would suggest he learns how to work with moderate muslims to improve inter-cultural relationships.

read my previous answer.
I agree.

again: supporting muslims ≠ supporting fundamentalists.
True, but see my above answer. Gauthier will never be seen criticising fundamentalist Muslims because his small Ameri-centric mind is so angry with relatively moderate Christian fundies.

have you tried to discuss gay rights with moderate muslims? i know gay muslims. did you know there is a gay rights organisation in Lebanon? have you ever considered how this western "war on terror" is being extremely damaging to human and gay rights in the middle east, through giving increasing power to extremists?... who are you going to blame? the muslims only?
Why is everyone who criticising Muslim extremism assumed to be a Bushevik war hawk? No I do not support the ridiculous, and tragic war on terror.

But in the end I will blame the violators for human rights violations.

not in Dubai.
Their economy has been built around such restrictions. Europe's has not.

not in Dubai. my point is, it has nothing to do with islam. it has to do with fundamentalism and - quite often - western hypocrisy and fiddling with local politics, which - again - give more and more power to fundamentalists. the west is digging its own grave, like it has been doing for centuries with its constant political manipulation and wars in the middle east.
I don't blame Islam. I blame the people who use it as a reason for their actions.

Yet, the Middle East including Dubai has less of a collective GDP than Spain.
Francis Street
29-06-2006, 23:09
Obviously you put your own spin on my reply and spruced it up with a little flame.
Not really.You said that we shouldn't do anything about the future if it won't personally affect us. I've heard that argument used by libertarians who don't want to do anything about global warming.

Yeah, that's what I said.

If you want continued conservative Muslim immigration that's what you'll get.
Gravlen
29-06-2006, 23:11
So come on people. Disprove me. Find just 1 majority muslim country with good human rights records. Just 1. Prove me that islamic culture isnt inferior. Maybe only after you, yourselves read the records and statistics of majority muslim countries, after you search google, you will stop arguing against the existance of gravity...
How do you define a "good human rights record"?

Can you give a couple of examples of non-muslim countries with adequate records?
Francis Street
29-06-2006, 23:13
Proof, being a subjective term, is impossible in this situation. Proof is dependent on your ability to be convinced. You will NEVER be convinced that you are wrong. Thus you are asking for the impossible, due to the close-minded bigotry which underlies your every post and thread.
Will you ever be convinced not to talk in such emotionally explosive language?

Nazi now matter how you use it can only refer to the German National Socialist Party, now defunct, or groups that admire and emulate said party. It's not just a term to be directed at all bigots.

Yes, you are liberal. I know your views.
Francis Street
29-06-2006, 23:14
How do you define a "good human rights record"?

Can you give a couple of examples of non-muslim countries with adequate records?
Norway and the Republic of Ireland. Both far greater human rights record than any Middle Eastern nation you can think of.
Ny Nordland
29-06-2006, 23:17
How do you define a "good human rights record"?

Can you give a couple of examples of non-muslim countries with adequate records?

Ex:
Legally: Any EU member state, I guess
Society: No major violence and opression against women, homosexuals, etc....
Trostia
29-06-2006, 23:20
Will you ever be convinced not to talk in such emotionally explosive language?

O, pardon my language. No.


Nazi now matter how you use it can only refer to the German National Socialist Party, now defunct, or groups that admire and emulate said party. It's not just a term to be directed at all bigots.

No, "An adherent or advocate of policies characteristic of Nazism; a fascist."

I'd say hatred based on religion is characteristic of Nazism. Beliefs in racial superiority too. I'm sure you disagree.


Yes, you are liberal. I know your views.

Oh, so I'm pro-welfare? Wow! Even I didn't know that - you must be a fuckin' psychic.
Gravlen
29-06-2006, 23:27
Ex:
Legally: Any EU member state, I guess
Society: No major violence and opression against women, homosexuals, etc....
Right, so ignoring South America, southern part of Africa, eastern part of asia, we're left with Europe. The western part of Europe. That narrows the field down quite a bit. Let's see...

So if they're like, say Italy, they'll be fine?
Heikoku
29-06-2006, 23:27
So Ny Nordland now asks us to beat him by proving a negative? That's impossible.

And yet, that's precisely what I'll do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burkina_Faso#Politics

Who's the man? Who's the man?? I'm THE MAN! :D
Trostia
29-06-2006, 23:31
So Ny Nordland now asks us to beat him by proving a negative? That's impossible.

And yet, that's precisely what I'll do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burkina_Faso#Politics

Who's the man? Who's the man?? I'm THE MAN! :D

Won't count. He'll dismiss or ignore it. Kinda like how he insisted China is a "homogenous country" lol. Then he ignored trying to pin down how come China with 92% of one ethnicity was "homogenous" but the USA with 75% was "multiethnic."

He has a psychological inability to accept anything that disagrees with his prejudice.
Gravlen
29-06-2006, 23:33
Norway and the Republic of Ireland. Both far greater human rights record than any Middle Eastern nation you can think of.
Indeed. However, nobody said anything about "middle eastern" nations...
Ny Nordland
29-06-2006, 23:36
So Ny Nordland now asks us to beat him by proving a negative? That's impossible.

And yet, that's precisely what I'll do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burkina_Faso#Politics

Who's the man? Who's the man?? I'm THE MAN! :D

This answer is so idiotic, I guess it was sarcastic. However, I cant be sure, given the quality of Heikoku's previous posts. So Burkina_Faso:

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61556.htm
Ny Nordland
29-06-2006, 23:39
Won't count. He'll dismiss or ignore it. Kinda like how he insisted China is a "homogenous country" lol. Then he ignored trying to pin down how come China with 92% of one ethnicity was "homogenous" but the USA with 75% was "multiethnic."

He has a psychological inability to accept anything that disagrees with his prejudice.

If 75% of USA's population consisted of same ethnicity, you might have a point. But I gather that you still can not comprehend the difference between race and ethnicity. I'm not surprised though. You are just well...you...
Gravlen
29-06-2006, 23:42
I'll go with Malaysia (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61615.htm)...

http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/mys-summary-eng

Not perfect, but getting better.
Trostia
29-06-2006, 23:43
If 75% of USA's population consisted of same ethnicity, you might have a point. But I gather that you still can not comprehend the difference between race and ethnicity. I'm not surprised though. You are just well...you...

You see? You can't help it. You're fussing over whether I say "race" or "Ethnicity" in an attempt to avoid the point. Ya know, the point that just went sailing over your head?

On what basis is the USA "not homogenous" and China "homogenous?"

You have NO basis. Your only basis is that you wanted China as an example of "homogenous" and so you decided to label it thus - despite your obvious lack of knowledge about China.

I gather you still can't comprehend the difference between "Genocide" and "immigration" either. Eh?
Ny Nordland
29-06-2006, 23:52
I'll go with Malaysia (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61615.htm)...

http://web.amnesty.org/report2006/mys-summary-eng

Not perfect, but getting better.

As of 2005, still inferior:

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61615.htm
Trostia
29-06-2006, 23:54
As of 2005, still inferior:

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61615.htm

I see you're still citing what the US government thinks. Didn't you know that since the US government is not Malaysian, its opinion is irrelevant? ;)

Or does that tactic only work when you're trying to dismiss non-Europeans without addressing their arguments.
Gravlen
30-06-2006, 00:01
As of 2005, still inferior:

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61615.htm
Not "inferior", not after your own definition:
Ex:
Legally: Any EU member state, I guess
Society: No major violence and opression against women, homosexuals, etc....
...nor after the State Departments assesment.
The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas.That was from 2004, and the situation was better in 2005.
Alif Laam Miim
30-06-2006, 00:03
I imagine if Rome ever fell at all. The barbarian lords that conquered the Empire soon fell in the way of the "Roman" ways, adopting their customs, their laws, heck, even their language in some places. Who really won?

And China is too big to be homogenous - there's Turks, Mongols, Han Chinese, Canton Chinese, Tibetans, along with all of the others living in China.
Ny Nordland
30-06-2006, 00:09
I imagine if Rome ever fell at all. The barbarian lords that conquered the Empire soon fell in the way of the "Roman" ways, adopting their customs, their laws, heck, even their language in some places. Who really won?

And China is too big to be homogenous - there's Turks, Mongols, Han Chinese, Canton Chinese, Tibetans, along with all of the others living in China.

The overwhelming majority is Han Chineese, by ethnicity. If we go by race, what? Something like 99.999% Asian?
Trostia
30-06-2006, 00:15
I'm sure Koreans and Chinese will be delighted to know that Ny Nordland believes they are the same race: Non-White.
Ny Nordland
30-06-2006, 00:17
Not "inferior", not after your own definition:
...nor after the State Departments assesment.


Gravlen, you are one of the few reasonable people here. I expect more of you. Isnt practicing Islamic law opressive for women? And I included oppression in my definition. All you had to do was to write women in your web browsers search section and voilla...1 violation, among many, that proves they are part of the inferior islamic culture:


Shari'a laws are administered by state authorities through Islamic courts and bind all Muslims, most of whom are ethnic Malays. These laws and the degree of their enforcement vary from state to state. In 2002 the government established a committee to recommend ways to harmonize Shari'a throughout the country; however, any recommendations must be adopted by individual state legislatures. Efforts to harmonize state Shari'a with federal laws have also proven difficult. Shari'a courts do not give equal weight to the testimony of women. Many NGOs also complained that women did not receive fair treatment from Shari'a courts, especially in matters of divorce and child custody (see sections 2.c. and 5).




That was from 2004, and the situation was better in 2005.



http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61615.htm

This is the link I gave you. It's the report of 2005.
Righteous Munchee-Love
30-06-2006, 00:18
I'm sure Koreans and Chinese will be delighted to know that Ny Nordland believes they are the same race: Non-White.

I wondered along these lines, too. I bet a lot of Russians, Arabs, Indians etc. would be quite astonished to find they all belong to the Asian race.
Trostia
30-06-2006, 00:30
The overwhelming majority is Han Chineese, by ethnicity.

"Majority" doesn't translate to "homogenous," kiddo.

There are 56 ethnic groups in mainland China. In the US, 31.

And those minority ethnic groups in China - the ones you pretend do not exist - outnumber by far all Norwegians. Just a fun fact to make you feel appropriately small and irrelevant.
Deep Kimchi
30-06-2006, 00:31
I wondered along these lines, too. I bet a lot of Russians, Arabs, Indians etc. would be quite astonished to find they all belong to the Asian race.

My complaint about the US standard nomenclature for "race" is that it assumes that there are only a handful of varieties.

I can never figure out which one I should put down.
Trostia
30-06-2006, 00:36
My complaint about the US standard nomenclature for "race" is that it assumes that there are only a handful of varieties.

I can never figure out which one I should put down.

My complaint is that people in general, focus too much on this idiotic concept. Of course there are the racial supremacists such as NN here, but then there's just everyone who is alltogether too-preoccupied with defining, comparing race.

Every news media article always seems to mention race, for example. They'll have polls about preferred internet service provider, that has nothing to do with race, but the results will be given "28% of Blacks preferred AOL, while 43% of Asians prefer blah blah blah."

It's unhealthy, misleading, ignorant, obfuscating, irrelevant, and doesn't accomplish a damn thing.
Assis
30-06-2006, 00:39
Nazis were pro immigrant ( Nazis are pro immigrant, by definition:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=489203) and violent, unlike me.
they were not pro immigrant towards jews, non-whites or gays, just like you are not towards muslims. listen, there is nothing wrong about supporting tougher immigration laws. what is wrong is talking about sending people that have already contributed to your country's economy back to where they came from, while ignoring some are already born there and have as much right to live there as you do. you can't allow people in when you need cheap labour and then kick the whole lot out when a minority becomes problematic.
Not all but most of them. It's an alien culture here. There are tonnes of muslim countries already that they can live in anyways.
I wouldnt have any problems with muslims as long as they arent more than 0.01% of the population...
would you like to withdraw this statement or are you going to argue that 0.01% isn't pretty much the same as saying all?
Appearences can be deceiving. Good muslims:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11255791&postcount=59
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11255740&postcount=56
common NN, be fair. since when are muslims the only deceivers in europe?
In the autumn of 2004 a local police officer, in Plymouth, made an astonishing claim: That a huge proportion of violence, drug and alcohol related crimes in recent years had a single cause: the activities of a paedophile who had abused hundreds of local boys.

Bill Goad, a millionaire businessman, got away with raping and sexually abusing boys, some as young as eight years old, for four decades.

A voracious and predatory paedophile, he boasted of assaulting 142 boys in one year. He threatened them, cajoled and bribed them to procure their own friends. In one case, one boy sold his little brother for sex.
source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/4225827.stm

if this white, non-muslim guy hadn't been caught and decided to move to Norway with his millions, he wouldn't even have to apply for a visa... he probably raped more children alone than all muslims have done together in your country...
Where are you from Assis?
why does this matter? why labels? rational arguments are rational arguments. my home is my planet (not being sarcastic NN, it's how i truly feel)... i was born in europe but i've lived in 3 european nations. all european countries are suffering from an influx of foreigners. if people don't improve inter-cultural relationships soon and stop this cycle of hatred, europe will inevitably degenerate to the point of someone making a serious mistake again.

why don't you try to get involved with moderate muslims and talk about your concerns? are you afraid you might like them and understand that your blanket recklessness is unfounded? there are good and peaceful muslims who will not try to impose their views on you. they may disagree but that is what democracy is all about. what has happened to you to feel so much hatred towards them, to the point you throw a blanket over all? don't you think it would be much better to work with the moderates, so that eventually the fundamentalists become outcasts, denounced and controlled by the moderates? instead of making muslim allies, you are just making muslim enemies.
Heikoku
30-06-2006, 03:26
Oh, but NN doesn't want allies. He wants to, evidence-free, rave on and on about how muslims are "inferior".

You know what? I think he's a muslim descendant whose father abandoned the mother or something just as sick... That or his girl left him for an Arab...
Heikoku
30-06-2006, 03:32
"Majority" doesn't translate to "homogenous," kiddo.

There are 56 ethnic groups in mainland China. In the US, 31.

And those minority ethnic groups in China - the ones you pretend do not exist - outnumber by far all Norwegians. Just a fun fact to make you feel appropriately small and irrelevant.

Norwegians? Ah, one of those small groups that are part of the ACTUAL group, the "European"?

Since Ny Nordland has a pathological inability to see how the shoe fits when it's on the other shoe, he won't get my joke, but you people with a brain can, so, liked it? :)
Ny Nordland
30-06-2006, 13:10
they were not pro immigrant towards jews, non-whites or gays, just like you are not towards muslims. listen, there is nothing wrong about supporting tougher immigration laws. what is wrong is talking about sending people that have already contributed to your country's economy back to where they came from, while ignoring some are already born there and have as much right to live there as you do. you can't allow people in when you need cheap labour and then kick the whole lot out when a minority becomes problematic.


They used jews as slaves, which is forced immigration.


would you like to withdraw this statement or are you going to argue that 0.01% isn't pretty much the same as saying all?

common NN, be fair. since when are muslims the only deceivers in europe?

source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/4225827.stm

if this white, non-muslim guy hadn't been caught and decided to move to Norway with his millions, he wouldn't even have to apply for a visa... he probably raped more children alone than all muslims have done together in your country...

why does this matter? why labels? rational arguments are rational arguments. my home is my planet (not being sarcastic NN, it's how i truly feel)... i was born in europe but i've lived in 3 european nations. all european countries are suffering from an influx of foreigners. if people don't improve inter-cultural relationships soon and stop this cycle of hatred, europe will inevitably degenerate to the point of someone making a serious mistake again.

why don't you try to get involved with moderate muslims and talk about your concerns? are you afraid you might like them and understand that your blanket recklessness is unfounded? there are good and peaceful muslims who will not try to impose their views on you. they may disagree but that is what democracy is all about. what has happened to you to feel so much hatred towards them, to the point you throw a blanket over all? don't you think it would be much better to work with the moderates, so that eventually the fundamentalists become outcasts, denounced and controlled by the moderates? instead of making muslim allies, you are just making muslim enemies.

"all european countries are suffering from an influx of foreigners."? For once we agree. The situation isnt that bad in Finland, Iceland, central or eastern europe though.
About getting to know muslims, it's irrevelant. We cant predict what the future might be like if muslims get a majority in Europe by getting to "know" 10 muslims. People are rarely what they seem and these anectodal experiences are useless. That's why I gave you the links. Not to say muslims are the only deceitful people but to say getting to know couple of them doesnt mean anything. All we can do is to look at the records of majority muslim countries, and they are light years away from being good.
Strathcarlie
30-06-2006, 13:49
This is funny...

I'd had a great one-night stand with a girl from Teheran last March, a friend of mine from Kayseri, Turkey is totally goth and calls herself "wiccan" , I teach Geography and English to a few Moroccan kids here in Nijmegen, and i've noticed that as long as you respect their ways, they'll respect yours. Last year, they brought me a whole bunch of goodies for Lughnasadh when they came back from their holiday in Morocco, and in return i brought some sweets for the kids at the end of Ramadan.

Of course, there are assholes everywhere, but by hating one group, you'll only creating more hatred. I personally don't care what religion people believe in as long as they keep it to themselves, and not shove it and their morality down people's throats.

People like Abou Yahyah, Ny Nordland, Dubya Bush and UBL are creating a problem that barely exists.
The Order of Crete
30-06-2006, 13:55
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html


http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html

So up to 30-40 million muslims by 2025. Plus:

EU has started accession negotiations with Turkey. The proccess will be complete within 10-15 years. Turkey has 70 million population now and growing rapidly. Plus there is Bosnia and then Albania who'll probably be EU members by 2025.
That makes EU muslim population by 2025 more than 125 million.

Doesnt all this remind you of Rome. Rome fell when it was invaded by inferior cultures. Same is happening to Europe now. I call Islamic culture inferior because of the way they treat women and homosexuals and other shitty stuff. Even in Turkey, which is regarded as an example Muslim country, 90% of women are subjected to violence by their husbands or boyfriends.

http://www.omct.org/pdf/vaw/publications/2003/eng_2003_09_turkey.pdf
(page 10)

What do you think? Diskuss....

Edit: Fall of Rome: Barbarians are the primary reason in many theories and they are important reason, if not primary, in many others...



Source: Wiki Shouldn't you be at a "Knights of a Pure Militia" meeting right now 'stead of beating down us Muslims?:upyours:
Deep Kimchi
30-06-2006, 14:02
They used jews as slaves, which is forced immigration.

"all european countries are suffering from an influx of foreigners."? For once we agree. The situation isnt that bad in Finland, Iceland, central or eastern europe though.
About getting to know muslims, it's irrevelant. We cant predict what the future might be like if muslims get a majority in Europe by getting to "know" 10 muslims. People are rarely what they seem and these anectodal experiences are useless. That's why I gave you the links. Not to say muslims are the only deceitful people but to say getting to know couple of them doesnt mean anything. All we can do is to look at the records of majority muslim countries, and they are light years away from being good.

Hmm. Is Europe suffering from an influx of blond haired, blue eyed, Aryan Nazis? About getting to know Nazis - it's irrelevant. We cant predict what the future might be like if Nazis get a majority in Europe by getting to "know" 10 Nazis. People are rarely what they seem and these anectodal experiences are useless. That's why I gave you the links. Not to say Nazis are the only deceitful people but to say getting to know couple of them doesnt mean anything. All we can do is to look at the records of majority Nazi countries, and they are light years away from being good.

I mean, look at Nazi Germany.

Heck, blonds can't be trusted. Look at what a warmongering state Sweden has been through history.

Swedish Wars, Nation by Nation

Wars with Denmark
Years War Aggressor Victor
1521 - 1523 The Liberation War Denmark Sweden
1563 - 1570 The Nordic Seven Years' War Denmark Sweden
1611 - 1613 The Kalmar War Denmark Denmark
1643 - 1645 The War of Torstensson Sweden Sweden
1657 - 1658 The First Danish War of King Karl X Gustav Denmark Sweden
1658 - 1660 The Second Danish War of King Karl X Gustav Sweden Denmark
1675 - 1679 The War of King Karl XI Denmark Sweden
1700,
1709 - 1720 The Great Northern War Denmark Sweden
1788 - 1789 The Theatre War Denmark Sweden
1808 - 1809 The War with Denmark Denmark Sweden
1813 - 1814 The Napoleon War of King Karl XIV Johan Sweden Sweden
1814 The Norwegian Campaign Sweden Sweden

Sweden has fought 12 wars with Denmark during this period. Thereby, Denmark is the nation Sweden have been at war with most of the times. Denmark has been the aggressor in 8 of the wars. In 10 of the wars Sweden has been the victor.
Wars with Russia
Years War Aggressor Victor
1554 - 1557 The Great Russian War Sweden Ended in a draw
1570 - 1595 The 25 Years' War with Russia Russia Sweden
1610 - 1617 The Ingermanland War Sweden Sweden
1656 - 1661 The Russian War of King Karl X Gustav Russia Sweden
1700 - 1721 The Great Northern War Russia Russia
1741 - 1743 The War of the Hats Sweden Russia
1788 - 1790 The Russian war of King Gustav III Sweden Ended in a draw
1808 - 1809 The Finnish War Russia Russia

Sweden has been at wars with Russia 8 times. In 4 of the wars, Sweden has been the aggressor. Russia has won 3 of the wars.

Wars with Poland
Years Krig Aggressor Victor
1563 - 1568 The First Polish War Poland Sweden
1598 - 1599 The War with Sigismund Poland Sweden
1600 - 1629 The Second Polish War Sweden Sweden
1609 - 1610 The De la Gardie Campaign Sweden Poland
1655 - 1660 The Polish War of King Karl X Gustav Sweden Ended in a draw
1701 - 1705,
1709 - 1721 The Great Northern War Poland

Poland Sweden

Poland

Sweden has been at wars with Poland 6 times. In 3 of the wars, Sweden has been the aggressor. Poland has won 2 of the wars.
Wars Related to the 30-Years War - Wars with German States
Years War Aggressor Victor
1630 - 1648 The 30 Years' War Sweden Sweden
1654 The First War with Bremen Sweden Sweden
1666 The Second War with Bremen Sweden Bremen
1675 - 1679 The War of King Karl XI Sweden German states
1700 - 1706,
1709 - 1721 The Great Northern War Saxony

Saxony Sweden

Saxony
1715 - 1719 The Great Northern War Hanover Hanover
1715 - 1720 The Great Northern War Prussia Prussia
1757 - 1762 The Pommern War Sweden Prussia


Wars Connected to the Napoleon Wars
Years War Aggressor Victor
1805 - 1810 The Napoleon War of King Gustav IV Adolf Sweden France
1810 - 1812 The War with England Sweden Ended in a draw
1813 - 1814 The Napoleon War of King Karl XIV Johan Sweden Sweden


Other Wars
Years War Aggressor Victor
1534 - 1536 The Swedish participation in the "Controversy of the Count", a war with Lübeck and Danish rabells Sweden Sweden
1563 - 1570 The Nordic Seven Years' War Lübeck Sweden
1655 The War in New Sweden Netherlands Netherlands

In total, Sweden has been involved in 31 wars between 1521 and 1814. Sweden has been the victor in 18 of those wars, lost 9 and 4 has ended in a draw.
Deep Kimchi
30-06-2006, 14:55
Fass, I trust you don't have any of that hot Swedish violence in you.
Assis
30-06-2006, 15:17
"all european countries are suffering from an influx of foreigners."? For once we agree. The situation isnt that bad in Finland, Iceland, central or eastern europe though.

About getting to know muslims, it's irrevelant. We cant predict what the future might be like if muslims get a majority in Europe by getting to "know" 10 muslims. People are rarely what they seem and these anectodal experiences are useless. That's why I gave you the links. Not to say muslims are the only deceitful people but to say getting to know couple of them doesnt mean anything. All we can do is to look at the records of majority muslim countries, and they are light years away from being good.
i love how you just threw a lot of my arguments into one quote, instead of answering them individually, picked one sentence and ignored the rest...

there is obviously little point trying to have a rational debate with you. stick to your hatred and let it poison you and your country even further. stick to your own self-made hell... i can guarantee you that one day it will come back to haunt you, your children or your grand-children with the same or more force you are defending should be used towards others. hate fuels hate; you are the one who is dooming your own country. you're not a patriot; you're a snake that is biting its own tail.
Gravlen
30-06-2006, 15:25
Damn it! I lost my post after I had written it!! And it was a long one :(

Here's the short version:
Gravlen, you are one of the few reasonable people here. I expect more of you. Isnt practicing Islamic law opressive for women? And I included oppression in my definition. All you had to do was to write women in your web browsers search section and voilla...1 violation, among many, that proves they are part of the inferior islamic culture:
- practicing Islamic law not opressive for women by definition.
- Varies from state to state in Malaysia.
- Discrimination mostly concerning family law.
- Non-muslims not subject to islamic laws.
The government undertook a number of initiatives to promote equality for women and the full and equal participation of women in education and the work force. In February, for the first time, a woman was appointed chief judge of Malaya, the country's third‑highest judicial position. In the scientific and medical fields, women made up more than half of all university graduates and comprised more than 50 percent of university students. According to the national union of bank employees, 65 percent of members were women, but only 1 out of 8 principal banking officials was a woman. Women comprised approximately 10 percent of board members at publicly traded companies during each year from 2000 to 2004, and they accounted for 13.5 percent of senior corporate executives at the end of 2004, compared with 12.3 percent in 2003.

Malaysia has ratified UN Women’s Convention.

Malaysian culture is not "inferior".

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61615.htm

This is the link I gave you. It's the report of 2005.
I know. Perspective, look at the summaries.
2002: The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, serious problems remained.
2003: The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, serious problems remained.
2004: The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas.
2005: The country's human rights performance improved during the year; nevertheless, problems remained.

Improving conditions.

Compare
Italy 2005:The government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; although there were problems in some areas, the law and judiciary provide effective means of addressing individual instances of abuse.


Sorry, this is a bit chaotic, but I'm out of time. Damn Jolt! :mad:
Ny Nordland
30-06-2006, 22:54
i love how you just threw a lot of my arguments into one quote, instead of answering them individually, picked one sentence and ignored the rest...

there is obviously little point trying to have a rational debate with you. stick to your hatred and let it poison you and your country even further. stick to your own self-made hell... i can guarantee you that one day it will come back to haunt you, your children or your grand-children with the same or more force you are defending should be used towards others. hate fuels hate; you are the one who is dooming your own country. you're not a patriot; you're a snake that is biting its own tail.

First of all, I dont hate muslims. I just tend to not like them. I find them more likeable when they are in their own countries though. I also dont like cabbage neither but it doesnt fuel any hatred in my dish. You are being black & white, overly simplistic ("if you critize them you hate them and hate will destroy you all")
Second of all, my own made hell? That'd be true IF I had created the situation in Göteborg, among many many many other things...
Ny Nordland
30-06-2006, 23:08
Damn it! I lost my post after I had written it!! And it was a long one :(

Here's the short version:

- practicing Islamic law not opressive for women by definition.


All you had to do was to write "islamic law, women" in google and voilla...Back to good old wiki:


The role of women under Sharia

Main article: women in Islam

Islam does not prohibit women from working, but emphasizes the importance of housekeeping and caring for the families of both parents. In theory, Islamic law allows husbands to divorce their wives at will, by clearly saying talaq ("I divorce you") three times in public. In practice divorce is more involved than this and state proceedings vary. In 2003, for example, a Malaysian court ruled that, under Sharia law, a man may divorce his wife via text messaging as long as the message was clear and unequivocal. [6] Such a divorce, known as the "triple talaq" is not allowed in most Muslim states. The divorced wife always keeps her dowry from when she was married, and is given child support until the age of weaning, at which point the child may be returned to its father if it is deemed to be best.

In addition, women are generally not allowed to be clergy or religious scholars. Many interpretations of Islamic law hold that women may not have prominent jobs, and thus are forbidden from working in the government. This has been a mainstream view in many Muslim nations in the last century, despite the example of Muhammad's wife Aisha, who both took part in politics and was a major authority on hadith.

A Muslim may not marry or remain married to an unbeliever of either sex (2:221, 60:10). A Muslim man may marry a woman of the People of the Book (5:5); traditionally, however, Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia

So islamic law lets a man to divorce a women when he says "I divorce you". You find this not opressive? You find it simply quick?


- Varies from state to state in Malaysia.
- Discrimination mostly concerning family law.
- Non-muslims not subject to islamic laws.

Malaysia has ratified UN Women’s Convention.

Malaysian culture is not "inferior".


Ok. Would you rather have me say something PCish like "they got lots of room for improvement" instead of what I really think?



Malaysia women 'suffer apartheid'
By Jonathan Kent
BBC News, Kuala Lumpur

The daughter of Malaysia's former prime minister has launched a scathing attack on the roles and status of Muslim women in the country.

Marina Mahathir, a prominent campaigner for women's rights, compared the lot of women to that of black South Africans under apartheid.

She described Muslim women as second-class citizens who were held back by discrimination.

The comments were written for her regular newspaper column.

The column, which was due to be published in Tuesday's Star newspaper, did not appear.

'Bound and gagged'

Few comparisons could be more hurtful.

Malaysia led by Mahathir Mohamad was in the forefront of the international campaign to end white minority rule in South Africa.

But his daughter Marina has described Muslim women in Malaysia as subject to a form of apartheid - second-class citizens held back by discriminatory rules that do not apply to non-Muslim women.

Her outburst appears to have been prompted by recent changes to Malaysia's Islamic family law that makes it easier for Muslim men to take multiple wives, to divorce them and to take a share of their property.

The women's ministry encouraged female lawmakers to vote for the measures, saying they could be amended later.

That prompted widespread criticism and has led Miss Marina to suggest the ministry be split in two - one to help non-Muslim women fight discrimination, the other to keep Muslim women, in her words, bound and gagged.

However, compared to many other countries both in South East Asia and the wider Muslim world, Malaysian women - Muslims included - play a prominent role both in business and public life.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4784784.stm

And this is from 2006. Notice the bolded areas. You were saying Malaysia is improving???????


I know. Perspective, look at the summaries.
2002: The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, serious problems remained.
2003: The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, serious problems remained.
2004: The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; however, there were problems in some areas.
2005: The country's human rights performance improved during the year; nevertheless, problems remained.

Improving conditions.

Compare
Italy 2005:The government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; although there were problems in some areas, the law and judiciary provide effective means of addressing individual instances of abuse.


Sorry, this is a bit chaotic, but I'm out of time. Damn Jolt! :mad:

Yes, nowhere is perfect. Neither is Italy. But as I said, West is light years ahead than muslim world when it comes to human/women rights....
Trostia
30-06-2006, 23:09
First of all, I dont hate muslims. I just tend to not like them.

Wow, you're actually coming close to being honest! I'm proud of you.

Now if only you admitted that you hated and feared them. You might as well, it's evident to pretty much everyone except you.

I find them more likeable when they are in their own countries though. I also dont like cabbage neither but it doesnt fuel any hatred in my dish.

Of course, you've never said cabbage is "inferior" or expressed concern that cabbage is trying to rape your women, take over your country or commit "genocide" against "whites."

I think your "tendency not to like" Muslims goes a bit deeper than dietary preference. ;)
Jocabia
30-06-2006, 23:42
Nazis were pro immigrant ( Nazis are pro immigrant, by definition:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=489203) and violent, unlike me.

Hahaha. Come on. You must be kidding. What does the German populace of today have to do with Nazis. However, when you use as an argument, a letter that contains this "a tribe of 1000 thick-lipped, knappy-headed Africans, there would be a link to the BBC discussion forum and many links to pro-ugaboogaahh foundations", well... let's just say you have more in common with racists and nazis than Germans do simply by be descendents of them.

Before we move on, let's quote a couple of other things from a source you argued for, "Non-White immigration into White nations coupled with pro-racemixing propaganda from the Jewvision", "guilt mongering Jews and Marxists an opportunity to import tens of millions of third worlders to breed us out". Yep, why are people persecuting you with no evidence? You poor, poor child. If only they'd react to what you say and not, well... hmmm... I guess people are reacting to what you say.

Not all but most of them. It's an alien culture here. There are tonnes of muslim countries already that they can live in anyways.

Ha. Or they could live anywhere they like, because being Muslim doesn't make you inferior.

Appearences can be deceiving. Good muslims:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11255791&postcount=59
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11255740&postcount=56

Gotta love a poster that quotes his own debunked claims.


Where are you from Assis?
I love that this is such an important question to someone who is constantly arguing they are not a xenophobe.
Jocabia
30-06-2006, 23:50
Yes, nowhere is perfect. Neither is Italy. But as I said, West is light years ahead than muslim world when it comes to human/women rights....

Lightyears? Hmmm... rights are measured in distance? Meanwhile, if we measure it in time, it would be more like 0 to 100 years depending on which rights. That's plenty of time for them to get their act together (assuming we buy your argument) before white people go extinct (assuming our brains pop out and we forget that's not actually remotely likely).
Ny Nordland
30-06-2006, 23:55
Hahaha. Come on. You must be kidding. What does the German populace of today have to do with Nazis.


When have I said anything that suggested Germans today have anything in common with Nazis?


However, when you use as an argument, a letter that contains this "a tribe of 1000 thick-lipped, knappy-headed Africans, there would be a link to the BBC discussion forum and many links to pro-ugaboogaahh foundations", well... let's just say you have more in common with racists and nazis than Germans do simply by be descendents of them.

Before we move on, let's quote a couple of other things from a source you argued for, "Non-White immigration into White nations coupled with pro-racemixing propaganda from the Jewvision", "guilt mongering Jews and Marxists an opportunity to import tens of millions of third worlders to breed us out". Yep, why are people persecuting you with no evidence? You poor, poor child. If only they'd react to what you say and not, well... hmmm... I guess people are reacting to what you say.


I quoted an article which said those. I said, in my OP, I didnt agree with all those. Just like your stupid mod post, this one is showing your clear bias or amnesia.



Ha. Or they could live anywhere they like, because being Muslim doesn't make you inferior.



Gotta love a poster that quotes his own debunked claims.


Debunked? What are you on? Those are links fromm BBC, telling the profiles of criminals responsible for London bombings. :rolleyes:



I love that this is such an important question to someone who is constantly arguing they are not a xenophobe.

You may believe as you please