NationStates Jolt Archive

In Neutral Switzerland, A Rising Radicalism
Islamic Extremists Newly Seen as Threat:

BERN, Switzerland -- For centuries, this Alpine nation has successfully relied on a strict policy of political neutrality to insulate it from the wars, invasions and revolutions that have raged outside its borders. These days, a new threat has emerged: one from within.

As they have elsewhere in Europe, Islamic radicals are making inroads in Switzerland. Last month, Swiss officials announced the arrests of a dozen suspects who allegedly conspired to shoot down an Israeli airliner flying from Geneva to Tel Aviv. In a related case, a North African man has been charged with organizing a plot from Swiss soil to blow up the Spanish supreme court in Madrid.
--------------------------------
As the global jihad movement becomes more decentralized and fragmented, however, Swiss security officials are warning that their country could become a target.
--------------------------------
In Sweden, another country with a long history of neutrality, prosecutors last month convened a top-secret closed trial of three terrorism suspects in the southern city of Malmo. Authorities have not identified the suspects or disclosed any evidence. But Swedish media have reported that the arrests were made at the request of British counterterrorism investigators.
--------------------------------
In Denmark, counterterrorism authorities say they remain on high alert after a Danish newspaper printed cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that spurred boycotts, death threats and violent protests in Islamic countries.
--------------------------------
And in the Netherlands, the Dutch government has classified the risk of a terrorist attack as "substantial," a threat level proportionally higher than in the United States, where homeland security officials judge the risk as "elevated." The Dutch government established its threat-ranking system in November 2004, when an Islamic radical killed the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh.
--------------------------------
Like Denmark, the Netherlands has contributed troops and other support to U.S.-led military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. But until the van Gogh killing, Dutch officials had played down the threat of terrorism at home.

LINK (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071901795.html)
***************************
Hmmm...So I picked this article out of one of DK's posts, and after reading it, I was amazed, impressed, and awed by it. Therefore, I felt the need to start a thread on it.
It is interesting, that countries like Sweden and Switzerland, famously, or notoriously nuetral countries, have became, what seems like, safe havens for terrorists.
It also interests me, that it seems countries like Denmark and Holland, have became increasingly aware of the threat Islam poses to Europe. They have became alert. After their soceitys suffered at the hands of Muslim extremists (and non extremists...those were normal [non terrorist muslims protesting and burning due to the Danish cartoons)Holland and Denmark have raised the level of threat-from-terrorism significantly. What also interests me, is that the Swizterland, long isolated from the geo-political conflicts of our world has been infected with the cess that is international terrorism. And finally, what also interests me, is that Sweden, after having its share of problems, fails to recognize that is has problems and hasnt acted anywhere near the level that Denmark, Holland and Switzerland have. Why is this? Is it because Holland, Denmark and Switzerland have relativly conservative governments? I dont know.

One thing is for sure, ladies and gentlemen, a change in policy is in our midst, and I intend to cover and support, every aspect of it.


. . . Discuss . . .:)

In Neutral Switzerland, A Rising Radicalism
Islamic Extremists Newly Seen as Threat:

BERN, Switzerland -- For centuries, this Alpine nation has successfully relied on a strict policy of political neutrality to insulate it from the wars, invasions and revolutions that have raged outside its borders. These days, a new threat has emerged: one from within.

As they have elsewhere in Europe, Islamic radicals are making inroads in Switzerland. Last month, Swiss officials announced the arrests of a dozen suspects who allegedly conspired to shoot down an Israeli airliner flying from Geneva to Tel Aviv. In a related case, a North African man has been charged with organizing a plot from Swiss soil to blow up the Spanish supreme court in Madrid.
--------------------------------
As the global jihad movement becomes more decentralized and fragmented, however, Swiss security officials are warning that their country could become a target.
--------------------------------
In Sweden, another country with a long history of neutrality, prosecutors last month convened a top-secret closed trial of three terrorism suspects in the southern city of Malmo. Authorities have not identified the suspects or disclosed any evidence. But Swedish media have reported that the arrests were made at the request of British counterterrorism investigators.
--------------------------------
In Denmark, counterterrorism authorities say they remain on high alert after a Danish newspaper printed cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that spurred boycotts, death threats and violent protests in Islamic countries.
--------------------------------
And in the Netherlands, the Dutch government has classified the risk of a terrorist attack as "substantial," a threat level proportionally higher than in the United States, where homeland security officials judge the risk as "elevated." The Dutch government established its threat-ranking system in November 2004, when an Islamic radical killed the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh.
--------------------------------
Like Denmark, the Netherlands has contributed troops and other support to U.S.-led military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. But until the van Gogh killing, Dutch officials had played down the threat of terrorism at home.

LINK (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/19/AR2006071901795.html)
***************************
Hmmm...So I picked this article out of one of DK's posts, and after reading it, I was amazed, impressed, and awed by it. Therefore, I felt the need to start a thread on it.
It is interesting, that countries like Sweden and Switzerland, famously, or notoriously nuetral countries, have became, what seems like, safe havens for terrorists.
It also interests me, that it seems countries like Denmark and Holland, have became increasingly aware of the threat Islam poses to Europe. They have became alert. After their soceitys suffered at the hands of Muslim extremists (and non extremists...those were normal [non terrorist muslims protesting and burning due to the Danish cartoons)Holland and Denmark have raised the level of threat-from-terrorism significantly. What also interests me, is that the Swizterland, long isolated from the geo-political conflicts of our world has been infected with the cess that is international terrorism. And finally, what also interests me, is that Sweden, after having its share of problems, fails to recognize that is has problems and hasnt acted anywhere near the level that Denmark, Holland and Switzerland have. Why is this? Is it because Holland, Denmark and Switzerland have relativly conservative governments? I dont know.

One thing is for sure, ladies and gentlemen, a change in policy is in our midst, and I intend to cover and support, every aspect of it.


. . . Discuss . . .:)

Buddy... you need to reexamine your logic there. You're taking the fact that terrorists were arrested in Switzerland as proof that it's a safe haven for terrorists?

You know, fear-mongering doesn't really work in Europe, as opposed to in the United States it can appear.

Many European states have lived with terrorism or the threat or terrorism for many many decades- regardless of where its from or who commits it.

People shrug, and get on living with their lives.

You know, fear-mongering doesn't really work in Europe, as opposed to in the United States it can appear.

Many European states have lived with terrorism or the threat or terrorism for many many decades.

People shrug, and get on living with their lives.


The europeans seem to understand that the real price of freedom is decreased security.

You cant have both impenetrable security and freedom, and the europeans have made the right choice.

Buddy... you need to reexamine your logic there. You're taking the fact that terrorists were arrested in Switzerland as proof that it's a safe haven for terrorists?

"In an intelligence report completed in May, the Swiss Federal Police reversed previous assessments that the domestic risk of terrorism was nearly nonexistent. The report concluded that Switzerland had become "a jihadi field of operation" and predicted that terrorist attacks were "an increasing possibility."

That could also mean that they use to Switzerland as a place to plan their attacks, and a base of operations, look:
"elsewhere in Europe, Islamic radicals are making inroads in Switzerland. Last month, Swiss officials announced the arrests of a dozen suspects who allegedly conspired to shoot down an Israeli airliner flying from Geneva to Tel Aviv. In a related case, a North African man has been charged with organizing a plot from Swiss soil to blow up the Spanish supreme court in Madrid."

One could certainly use these cases to argue a point.

You know, fear-mongering doesn't really work in Europe, as opposed to in the United States it can appear.

Many European states have lived with terrorism or the threat or terrorism for many many decades- regardless of where its from or who commits it.

People shrug, and get on living with their lives.
It seems "fear mongering" works in Switzerland, Denmark and The Netherlands.
Look at this:

"Like Denmark, the Netherlands has contributed troops and other support to U.S.-led military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. But until the van Gogh killing, Dutch officials had played down the threat of terrorism at home.

Since then, the number of Islamic radicals in the country has increased, as has the number of fundamentalist imams who are seeking to recruit new followers, said Tjibbe Joustra, the Dutch national coordinator for counterterrorism. He said international conflicts such as the war in Iraq are fueling the problem, although the Netherlands has also been polarized over its difficulties in assimilating Muslim immigrants."

Denmark and Holland are in the middle of something....something concerning failing multiculturalism, problems with assimilation, polarized views...and muslim fundemantalists.

It seems "fear mongering" works in Switzerland, Denmark and The Netherlands.
Look at this:

"Like Denmark, the Netherlands has contributed troops and other support to U.S.-led military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq. But until the van Gogh killing, Dutch officials had played down the threat of terrorism at home.

The Van Gogh killing had nothing to do with Hollands participation (however small) in the War. It was in response to a film he had made that offended a few extremists- one decided to kill him. That was that.


Denmark and Holland are in the middle of something....something concerning failing multiculturalism, problems with assimilation, polarized views...and muslim fundemantalists.

Holland and Denmarks minute problems do not equal a rash sentiment, or whipping up of fear across the 25 or so states of Europe. Failing multiculturalism ranks really low on Europeans agendas. Capitalise on it if you wish- but it is about as accurate as Europeans seizing on Fred Phelps as a sign the US is going down the toilet.

It is interesting, that countries like Sweden and Switzerland, famously, or notoriously nuetral countries, have became, what seems like, safe havens for terrorists.

http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/happy051.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org) http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/happy051.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org) http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/happy051.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org) http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/happy051.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

The Van Gogh killing had nothing to do with Hollands participation (however small) in the War. It was in response to a film he had made that offended a few extremists- one decided to kill him. That was that.



Holland and Denmarks minute problems do not equal a rash sentiment, or whipping up of fear across the 25 or so states of Europe. Failing multiculturalism ranks really low on Europeans agendas. Capitalise on it if you wish- but it is about as accurate as Europeans seizing on Fred Phelps as a sign the US is going down the toilet.

I didnt say that Van Gogh had anything to do with the war..I'm simply listing it as one of the problems Holland has faced due to Muslims.

I WILL capitalise on whats going on in those countries. I was just in Denmark and I talked to the people there and they said THERE IS a sitatuion rapidly growing...between Muslims and Danes....everyone had different viewpoints on the scenario, but none of them denied something was going on. Hell, look at the government they voted in for proof, same with Holland!

A "liberal"* American has written a book about these muslims...

*Liberal is in quotes because it is meant in American sense rather than the correct sense...


Having recently published an indictment of Christian fundamentalist intolerance in the U.S. (Stealing Jesus), New York native Bawer relocated to Europe with his Norwegian partner in 1998 and found an even more dangerous strain of religious and cultural bigotry ensnaring Western Europe. A swarming menace called radical Islam, he writes, rings Europe's cities in smoldering Muslim ghettos, provoking everything from so-called honor killings and political assassinations to the Madrid subway bombings and the massacre of school children in Beslan. Worse, the Taliban-like theocracy Bawer sees looming inside backward immigrant populations resistant to integration flourishes under the protective wing of Western Europe's America-bashing, multicultural, liberal establishment. The latter correspond to the appeasers of Nazi Germany, in Bawer's view, since he believes that radical Islamism is every bit the threat to Western civilization that Nazism was. He scoffs at talk of "understanding" or "dialogue," indeed, at any but the most muscular response hitching Europe ever tighter to the U.S. war on terror. His clash-of-civilizations outlook means real issues often get washed away by sweeping statements designed to tar Europe's Muslims with one irredeemably hostile, welfare-sponging brush, while trading in well-worn stereotypes about virtuous American "realists" and corrupt European "idealists." (Mar.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.


http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385514727/002-4162306-4984844?v=glance&n=283155

Edit: An interesting review:


Editorial Reviews:

Book Description

The struggle for the soul of Europe today is every bit as dire and consequential as it was in the 1930s. Then, in Weimar, Germany, the center did not hold, and the light of civilization nearly went out. Today, the continent has entered yet another “Weimar moment.” Will Europeans rise to the challenge posed by radical Islam, or will they cave in once again to the extremists?

As an American living in Europe since 1998, Bruce Bawer has seen this problem up close. Across the continent—in Amsterdam, Oslo, Copenhagen, Paris, Berlin, Madrid, and Stockholm—he encountered large, rapidly expanding Muslim enclaves in which women were oppressed and abused, homosexuals persecuted and killed, “infidels” threatened and vilified, Jews demonized and attacked, barbaric traditions (such as honor killing and forced marriage) widely practiced, and freedom of speech and religion firmly repudiated.

The European political and media establishment turned a blind eye to all this, selling out women, Jews, gays, and democratic principles generally—even criminalizing free speech—in order to pacify the radical Islamists and preserve the illusion of multicultural harmony. The few heroic figures who dared to criticize Muslim extremists and speak up for true liberal values were systematically slandered as fascist bigots. Witnessing the disgraceful reaction of Europe’s elites to 9/11, to the terrorist attacks on Madrid, Beslan, and London, and to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Bawer concluded that Europe was heading inexorably down a path to cultural suicide.

Europe's Muslim communities are powder kegs, brimming with an alienation born of the immigrants’ deep antagonism toward an infidel society that rejects them and compounded by misguided immigration policies that enforce their segregation and empower the extremists in their midst. The mounting crisis produced by these deeply perverse and irresponsible policies finally burst onto our television screens in October 2005, as Paris and other European cities erupted in flames.

WHILE EUROPE SLEPT is the story of one American’s experience in Europe before and after 9/11, and of his many arguments with Europeans about the dangers of militant Islam and America’s role in combating it. This brave and invaluable book—with its riveting combination of eye-opening reportage and blunt, incisive analysis—is essential reading for anyone concerned about the fate of Europe and what it portends for the United States.


http://www.scienceblog.com/store/4-22-0385514727-While_Europe_Slept_How_Radical_Islam_is_Destroying_the_West_from_Within.html

*snip*

He may have live in Europe but that author was diffenatly smoke some badass crack when he wrote that.

Every time you walk out of your home you run the risk of being killed by a maniac, the politics of your maniac is somewhat irrelevant, considering you will be dead anyway.

The vast majority of people (even Muslims) are sane and rational. After a full and reasoned debate, all sane rational people would chose Western Liberalism over Radical Islamism.

He may have live in Europe but that author was diffenatly smoke some badass crack when he wrote that.
:rolleyes: Why? Because he chooses to speak out against something that he feels is dooming Western Civilization as we know it?

Every time you walk out of your home you run the risk of being killed by a maniac, the politics of your maniac is somewhat irrelevant, considering you will be dead anyway.

The vast majority of people (even Muslims) are sane and rational. After a full and reasoned debate, all sane rational people would chose Western Liberalism over Radical Islamism.
This has absolutly nothing to do with the topic at hand.

There IS a conflict going on, whether you, or others like you, want to open your eyes to it, is your problem. This is your continent, not mine..America is safe, for the time being.

What major european cities burst into flames in October 2005? Last time I checked, there was some car burnings in Paris

What major european cities burst into flames in October 2005? Last time I checked, there was some car burnings in Paris
......?

Every time you walk out of your home you run the risk of being killed by a maniac, the politics of your maniac is somewhat irrelevant, considering you will be dead anyway.

The vast majority of people (even Muslims) are sane and rational. After a full and reasoned debate, all sane rational people would chose Western Liberalism over Radical Islamism.

Yeah the vast majority of Muslims would choose Western Liberalism. Look at all those majority muslim countries....:rolleyes:

What major european cities burst into flames in October 2005? Last time I checked, there was some car burnings in Paris

Straight outta Compton.

There IS a conflict going on, whether you, or others like you, want to open your eyes to it, is your problem. This is your continent, not mine..America is safe, for the time being.

Our eyes are wide open.

We've dealt with terrorism for decades, in all shapes, sizes and forms.

We choose to get on with our lives regardless.

Its our choice. Deal with it.

:rolleyes: Why? Because he chooses to speak out against something that he feels is dooming Western Civilization as we know it?

No, because the shite he's producing reads like it came from his ass. It'll do well though - Amerikaners seem fond of the "WE'RE ALL GUNNA DIE" doomsday scenario. This time its Europe the caliphate. I won't be stockpiling the drink anytime soon meself though.....

:rolleyes: Why? Because he chooses to speak out against something that he feels is dooming Western Civilization as we know it?

Mainly because his conclusions and even some of the inforamtion he seems to be presenting as fact semm to bad fairly daft.

Although, I will qualify this by saying I have only read some reviews and not the book itself.

Buddy... you need to reexamine your logic there. You're taking the fact that terrorists were arrested in Switzerland as proof that it's a safe haven for terrorists?
Oh, also..cant beleive I missed this one:

"Jacques Pitteloud, a former coordinator of the Swiss intelligence agencies, said that in the past Swiss officials were primarily concerned that outside radical networks might try to use the country as a logistical base to raise money or support operations elsewhere. Most terrorism suspects arrested or questioned after Sept. 11, 2001, were foreigners just passing through."

Straight from Jacques Pitteloud's mouth...former coordinator of Swiss Intelligence agencies.

Our eyes are wide open.

We've dealt with terrorism for decades, in all shapes, sizes and forms.

We choose to get on with our lives regardless.

Its our choice. Deal with it.

Your eyes are open...its just that yours arnt looking in the same direction as other Europeans. Look at this:

"Jacques Pitteloud, a former coordinator of the Swiss intelligence agencies, said that in the past Swiss officials were primarily concerned that outside radical networks might try to use the country as a logistical base to raise money or support operations elsewhere. Most terrorism suspects arrested or questioned after Sept. 11, 2001, were foreigners just passing through."

Also, how do you explain the rise of anti-immigrant governments in Denmark and Holland?

Mainly because his conclusions and even some of the inforamtion he seems to be presenting as fact semm to bad fairly daft.

Although, I will qualify this by saying I have only read some reviews and not the book itself.
No, because the shite he's producing reads like it came from his ass. It'll do well though - Amerikaners seem fond of the "WE'RE ALL GUNNA DIE" doomsday scenario. This time its Europe the caliphate. I won't be stockpiling the drink anytime soon meself though.....
Europeans are opening their eyes to the conflict growing in your midst...even if you are NOT. Look at all the cited statements and articles I have posted in this thread for proof.

Your eyes are open...its just that yours arnt looking in the same direction as other Europeans. Look at this:

"Jacques Pitteloud, a former coordinator of the Swiss intelligence agencies, said that in the past Swiss officials were primarily concerned that outside radical networks might try to use the country as a logistical base to raise money or support operations elsewhere. Most terrorism suspects arrested or questioned after Sept. 11, 2001, were foreigners just passing through."

Also, how do you explain the rise of anti-immigrant governments in Denmark and Holland?

Oh, those are not anti-immigrant, unfortunately. You'd see anti-immigrant if DF was ruling itself ;)

Europeans are opening their eyes to the conflict growing in your midst...even if you are NOT. Look at all the cited statements and articles I have posted in this thread for proof.

But I live in Europe....and so do the rest of them. "growing conflict" my arse. You want to feel looming conflict, go to a celtic v rangers derby.

If somebody wants to raise money to free the territories - give him tax free status, I say.

Yeah the vast majority of Muslims would choose Western Liberalism. Look at all those majority muslim countries....:rolleyes:

And the Muslims who support such regimes generally stay in those countries. Muslims moving to Europe will have two main reasons: either to escape the dictatorial controls and sectarian crackdowns in said countries, in which case liberal Europe would be a blessing rather than something to be destroyed, or as economic migrants who will almost certainly become too content with their increased wealth to even think about destroying the countries that took them in.

That said, there are things that we are doing wrong. All around the world, we see terrorism spring from a combination of deprivation and grievances against certain groups. Although fundamentalist religion of any kind is an excellent way to rally followers, they will not be swayed by a religious argument to kill all the infidels unless they hate said infidels enough already. In Europe, we do not need to worry about Islam as a religion, but we instead need to do everything in our power not to disenfranchise and alienate migrant groups. At the moment, the most visible group happens to be Muslims. As we saw in Paris, making these dire mistakes leads to tensions and eventually violence.

Europeans are opening their eyes to the conflict growing in your midst...even if you are NOT. Look at all the cited statements and articles I have posted in this thread for proof.

You've cited examples straight from the mouth of the intelligence community and guess what, it's their job to look for these things. Still doesn't change the fact that in the UK (the only country I can speak of for certain) there have been 0 prosecutions for terrorism since 11/9.

In Neutral Switzerland, A Rising Radicalism
Islamic Extremists Newly Seen as Threat:
I found this incredibly hilarious for some reason. I don't know why. I just did.

You've cited examples straight from the mouth of the intelligence community and guess what, it's their job to look for these things. Still doesn't change the fact that in the UK (the only country I can speak of for certain) there have been 0 prosecutions for terrorism since 11/9.

Though Bliars fear mongering has led to some very nervous muslims...and Brazillians -

Your eyes are open...its just that yours arnt looking in the same direction as other Europeans. Look at this:

"Jacques Pitteloud, a former coordinator of the Swiss intelligence agencies, said that in the past Swiss officials were primarily concerned that outside radical networks might try to use the country as a logistical base to raise money or support operations elsewhere. Most terrorism suspects arrested or questioned after Sept. 11, 2001, were foreigners just passing through."

Also, how do you explain the rise of anti-immigrant governments in Denmark and Holland?

So now you quoted the same guy twice.
Nobody's denying that there are Muslim fundamentalists in Europe. Nobody's denying that police and secret services need to look into the problem and try to prevent attacks.
What we are denying is the doomsday viewpoint your presenting here. These fundamentalists are no threat to society on the whole. They are a terroristic fringe group. Europe had the likes of them before, most countries had other terrorist groups in the past. It's nothing new, it's no bigger threat than those groups were, and they will be treated in much the same way. Watched by police and secret service and for the most part ignored by the population.

I found this incredibly hilarious for some reason. I don't know why. I just did.

You can see them dropping cofee cups and choclate - the women screaming while the husband rapidly fumbles for his Swiss Army knife with the Jihadi detector......

This has absolutly nothing to do with the topic at hand.

There IS a conflict going on, whether you, or others like you, want to open your eyes to it, is your problem. This is your continent, not mine..America is safe, for the time being.

I'm predicting the turns that this thread will take, and outlining my view nice and early.

Conflict is an unavoidable part of human society. Has it become more intense recently, and has Islam played a part in this? Categorically no. Despite what you may believe from sitting on the other side of an ocean watching Fox, Europe is not in the midst of a religious civil war. Nobody with any common sense fears walking around Muslim areas. The conflict present is the same-old conflict, between the ruling classes (the Murdochite press, fascist elements, alarmist governments) creating strife within their subjects.

Though Bliars fear mongering has led to some very nervous muslims...and Brazillians -

Blair need to realise that the country has been under the risk of terrorism since the 70's and most people old enough to remember it have a 'same shit, different religion' mentality. So I might get blown up on the way to work tomorrow, so what, I'm not gonna start getting all worried about it.

Edit: I do feel a bit sorry for that Brazilian fellow though.

And the Muslims who support such regimes generally stay in those countries. Muslims moving to Europe will have two main reasons: either to escape the dictatorial controls and sectarian crackdowns in said countries, in which case liberal Europe would be a blessing rather than something to be destroyed, or as economic migrants who will almost certainly become too content with their increased wealth to even think about destroying the countries that took them in.

That said, there are things that we are doing wrong. All around the world, we see terrorism spring from a combination of deprivation and grievances against certain groups. Although fundamentalist religion of any kind is an excellent way to rally followers, they will not be swayed by a religious argument to kill all the infidels unless they hate said infidels enough already. In Europe, we do not need to worry about Islam as a religion, but we instead need to do everything in our power not to disenfranchise and alienate migrant groups. At the moment, the most visible group happens to be Muslims. As we saw in Paris, making these dire mistakes leads to tensions and eventually violence.

Dont talk out of your ass. Most of them are coming here to find jobs. Where are you from?

Blair need to realise that the country has been under the risk of terrorism since the 70's and most people old enough to remember it have a 'same shit, different religion' mentality. So I might get blown up on the way to work tomorrow, so what, I'm not gonna start getting all worried about it.

Edit: I do feel a bit sorry for that Brazilian fellow though.

He knows full well, but I think it was an attempt to justify his poxy war. And its a fucking disgrace they didnt charge somebody over that - not the lads that shot him, but the ones who failed to make proper ID.

Your eyes are open...its just that yours arnt looking in the same direction as other Europeans. Look at this:

"Jacques Pitteloud, a former coordinator of the Swiss intelligence agencies, said that in the past Swiss officials were primarily concerned that outside radical networks might try to use the country as a logistical base to raise money or support operations elsewhere. Most terrorism suspects arrested or questioned after Sept. 11, 2001, were foreigners just passing through."

Also, how do you explain the rise of anti-immigrant governments in Denmark and Holland?

What are you on about? How long have you lived in Europe? I'm guessing very little or never been here. We in Europe hear the news of terrorists attacks and the majoruty hear about it, understand it and move on. Whats the point of worrying all the time? Instead of segregating groups they all work together properly. Religion doesn't really come into it. Many Americans (this is based n first hand experience) think muslims are from an Arab state and dark skinned. Not true Muslims are from all nations like any other religion. I know someone from Liverpool whos familyhas always lived in England and his a muslim. The person you walk down a street could be a muslim. Anyway the point is instead of relying on the news for everything get some first hand experience

Dont talk out of your ass. Most of them are coming here to find jobs. Where are you from?

England, as it happens. And since when did "coming here as economic migrants" not include coming here to find jobs? And yes, this is a bigger reason than escaping oppression. But there are doubtless far more moderates and liberals fleeing from the Middle East than extremists bent on global jihad coming here on a mission from Allah to destroy Europe.

He knows full well, but I think it was an attempt to justify his poxy war. And its a fucking disgrace they didnt charge somebody over that - not the lads that shot him, but the ones who failed to make proper ID.

Was a chain of errors and coincidences. Wrong ID, he chose to wear a big coat, was an illegal so he ran instead of stopping, he happen to live in the building under surveillance.

What are you on about? How long have you lived in Europe? I'm guessing very little or never been here. We in Europe hear the news of terrorists attacks and the majoruty hear about it, understand it and move on. Whats the point of worrying all the time? Instead of segregating groups they all work together properly. Religion doesn't really come into it. Many Americans (this is based n first hand experience) think muslims are from an Arab state and dark skinned. Not true Muslims are from all nations like any other religion. I know someone from Liverpool whos familyhas always lived in England and his a muslim. The person you walk down a street could be a muslim. Anyway the point is instead of relying on the news for everything get some first hand experience

Cat Stevens is a muslim and he's white :D

Dont talk out of your ass. Most of them are coming here to find jobs. Where are you from?
Are you Ny Nordland by any chance?

Are you Ny Nordland by any chance?

You must not have seen his sig. :)

Was a chain of errors and coincidences. Wrong ID, he chose to wear a big coat, was an illegal so he ran instead of stopping, he happen to live in the building under surveillance.

Actually he didnt run, nor did he have a big coat or bulky jacket, as was clear from the video footage. He never knew they were behind him. He didnt vault the barrier either. He got on the train, sat down, one cop went in and pinned his hands to his thighs and the armed ones shot him in the head. That was an attempt at a cover story by the cops.

Oh god... reading this pisses the hell outta me.

I live in london, and have lived there all my life. In that time, I've been the middle of an IRA bomb with my parents, my mother has been within 5 miles of an IRA explosion, and my dad workds on the london underground, and spent 7/7 on a station telling people not to shit themselves.

You know what?

All this fear mongering does nothing useful.... we've lived with it, I've lived with it, and it doesn't change jack shit. Governments, for all their big words, will not change jack shit.

The sooner blair and his cronies take their head out of their asses, and realise that the better.

It might make a few more muslims get attacked by skinheads, it might make people vote for the BNP some more, and heck, it might cause the recruitment of another few thousand special-branch policemen, but on the whole it is ineffective.

I suggest anyone reading this take stock of the cold hard facts, and dismiss the article.

Actually he didnt run, nor did he have a big coat or bulky jacket, as was clear from the video footage. He never knew they were behind him. He didnt vault the barrier either. He got on the train, sat down, one cop went in and pinned his hands to his thighs and the armed ones shot him in the head. That was an attempt at a cover story by the cops.

You got a link to the footage?

You've cited examples straight from the mouth of the intelligence community and guess what, it's their job to look for these things. Still doesn't change the fact that in the UK (the only country I can speak of for certain) there have been 0 prosecutions for terrorism since 11/9.
The article I cited listed numerous terrorist activities that have been uncovered...ranging from those in Sweden to those in Switzerland.

Are you Ny Nordland by any chance?

Have you by any chance disabled sigs?

You must not have seen his sig. :)

Ah quuestion answered. Thanks you get a cookie

[OFF TOPIC]Northford, what the FCS?[/OFF topic]

You got a link to the footage?

Nope, but you can see his clothing here.

//http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/uk/05/london_blasts/tube_shooting/html/shooting.stm

I was wrong about the sitting down and shot - he went towards the cops when the fella grabbed him.

Have you by any chance disabled sigs?

I did without realising..

The article I cited listed numerous terrorist activities that have been uncovered...ranging from those in Sweden to those in Switzerland.

"Ahh yes Achmed, they will never spot us here....."

Yeah the vast majority of Muslims would choose Western Liberalism. Look at all those majority muslim countries....:rolleyes:

Fallacy'd!

Three Words: Dominant Ideology Theory. This well-established theory states that societies survive by owning the largest share of socialising forces (i.e. the Media, the Legislature, the Church, popular culture, etc.), these sources use a gradual drip-drip effect to influence the ideologies of individuals.

In most majority Muslim countries the established ideology is theocratic and authoritarian. Thus socialising forces attempt to make theocracy and authoritarianism seem like good ideas, this is why the introduction of democracy is proved difficult, (not impossible, just difficult). Europe's dominant ideology however contains a well-established tradition of Liberty and Secularism, thus the socialising forces indoctrinate us all with these views.. INCLUDING immigrants. First generation immigrants can never be fully converted as they are already programmed. The second generation is more easily indoctrinated, but at least half of their indoctrination comes from their first-gen parents. The third generation then has half again of that immigrant value-system, untill eventually it becomes negligable.

The only really Islamist opposition comes from teenagers, teenagers who are of course biologically radical. When they settle down, their Islamist views will subside and be replaced by conservative realistic views. Whereas the older generation of traditionalists will quickly be reclaimed by the Earth that bore them so that within a couple of generations the Islamic 'Green Threat' will seem incomprehensible.

"Ahh yes Achmed, they will never spot us here....."
What? I dont understand...:confused:

So now you quoted the same guy twice.
Nobody's denying that there are Muslim fundamentalists in Europe. Nobody's denying that police and secret services need to look into the problem and try to prevent attacks.
What we are denying is the doomsday viewpoint your presenting here. These fundamentalists are no threat to society on the whole. They are a terroristic fringe group. Europe had the likes of them before, most countries had other terrorist groups in the past. It's nothing new, it's no bigger threat than those groups were, and they will be treated in much the same way. Watched by police and secret service and for the most part ignored by the population.

Dont talk out of your ass or should I say dont talk when your head is deep burried in sand. Fringe group huh? ROFL....:rolleyes:


MI5 believes, from polls, that around 400,000 people in the UK are "sympathetic to violent jihad around the world", said Frank Gardner.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/5142908.stm

How many muslims are there in UK, 1 million?

The article I cited listed numerous terrorist activities that have been uncovered...ranging from those in Sweden to those in Switzerland.

It cited 13 arrests and 1 prosecution. I'm not gonna build a bomb shelter and supplies just yet.

[OFF TOPIC]Northford, what the FCS?[/OFF topic]

Federal Commonwealth Society

Google it.

Dont talk out of your ass or should I say dont talk when your head is deep burried in sand. Fringe group huh? ROFL....:rolleyes:



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/5142908.stm

How many muslims are there in UK. 1 million?

Being sympathetic doesn't make them violent themselves. Plenty of USAmericans were sympathetic towards the IRA here and even financed it. That didn't make them terrorists themselves, did it?
And I'd be more than grateful if you could drop the offensive language.

After their soceitys suffered at the hands of Muslim extremists (and non extremists...those were normal [non terrorist muslims protesting and burning due to the Danish cartoons)Holland and Denmark have raised the level of threat-from-terrorism significantly.

Why is this? Is it because Holland, Denmark and Switzerland have relativly conservative governments? I dont know.
Except for blaming all Muslims and amateurly trying to advance your own political opinions your post is right.

Oh god... reading this pisses the hell outta me.

I live in london, and have lived there all my life. In that time, I've been the middle of an IRA bomb with my parents, my mother has been within 5 miles of an IRA explosion, and my dad workds on the london underground, and spent 7/7 on a station telling people not to shit themselves.

You know what?

All this fear mongering does nothing useful.... we've lived with it, I've lived with it, and it doesn't change jack shit. Governments, for all their big words, will not change jack shit.

Bingo, I was in Manchester in '98 [EDIT: Typo 96) when the IRA helpfully flattened the Arndale centre... Panicing gets people no where. Thinking clearly does.

Fallacy'd!

Three Words: Dominant Ideology Theory. This well-established theory states that societies survive by owning the largest share of socialising forces (i.e. the Media, the Legislature, the Church, popular culture, etc.), these sources use a gradual drip-drip effect to influence the ideologies of individuals.

In most majority Muslim countries the established ideology is theocratic and authoritarian. Thus socialising forces attempt to make theocracy and authoritarianism seem like good ideas, this is why the introduction of democracy is proved difficult, (not impossible, just difficult). Europe's dominant ideology however contains a well-established tradition of Liberty and Secularism, thus the socialising forces indoctrinate us all with these views.. INCLUDING immigrants. First generation immigrants can never be fully converted as they are already programmed. The second generation is more easily indoctrinated, but at least half of their indoctrination comes from their first-gen parents. The third generation then has half again of that immigrant value-system, untill eventually it becomes negligable.

The only really Islamist opposition comes from teenagers, teenagers who are of course biologically radical. When they settle down, their Islamist views will subside and be replaced by conservative realistic views. Whereas the older generation of traditionalists will quickly be reclaimed by the Earth that bore them so that within a couple of generations the Islamic 'Green Threat' will seem incomprehensible.

Another ass talker. Are we in an ass parade?? This man, some teenager, huh? :rolleyes:


MOHAMMAD SIDIQUE KHAN, 30, FROM DEWSBURY

Mohammad Sidique Khan had lived in the Beeston area of Leeds, then moved to Lees Holm in Dewsbury.

He was married to Hasina, and the couple had one young daughter.

The 30-year-old had been a teaching assistant at Hillside Primary School in Leeds since 2002.

Parents at the school told the BBC the teaching assistant had been highly regarded by children and parents.

"He was a good man, quiet," said one.

Khan was suspected ringleader

During its last Ofsted inspection in 2002, the school's learning assistants had been singled out for special praise in dealing with a transient pupil population from a socially deprived area.

Khan told the Times Educational Supplement at the time that "a lot of [the pupils] have said this is the best school they have been to".

Last November a BBC Radio 4 documentary found Khan spent most of his life as a westernised youth calling himself by the nickname "Sid" and did not talk about religion.

As a teenager, he shook off his Pakistani-Muslim identity, claim friends, and chose to present himself as an exclusively westernised young man going by the nickname "Sid".

A friend from school days, Rob Cardiss, said: "He used to hang around with white lads playing football.

"Some of the other Pakistani guys used to talk about Muslim suffering around the world but with Sidique you'd never really know what religion he was from."

BBC reporter Nasreen Suleaman talked to Khan's former friends, who said he later became radicalised when he joined a tight-knit group of young Muslim men from Dewsbury, Leeds and Huddersfield.

Khan was known to the MI5 but officers assigned to investigate him were diverted to another operation.

BBC News learned the security services had been so concerned about him they had planned to put him under a higher level of investigation. He was also known to the police for suspected petty fraud.

In November 2004, the teaching assistant travelled to the Pakistani city of Karachi along with fellow bomber Shehzad Tanweer.

It is not clear what the men did during the three months they spent there, but Pakistani records show the pair left on the same flight in early February.

On 7 July Mohammad Sidique Khan detonated enough explosives on a Circle Line train to kill seven people.

Documents belonging to him were found near the Edgware Road blast.

His family suggested in a statement that he had been "brainwashed".

In September 2005, a video featuring Khan was shown on the Arab TV network al-Jazeera, in which he was shown criticising British foreign policy and saying he was a soldier fighting a war.

But friends of Khan believed the message had been recorded some weeks or months before the bombings.

Experts in counter-terrorism told the BBC at the time of its release that the video did not prove the attacks were directly ordered by the al-Qaeda leadership.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4678837.stm

Being sympathetic doesn't make them violent themselves. Plenty of USAmericans were sympathetic towards the IRA here and even financed it. That didn't make them terrorists themselves, did it?
And I'd be more than grateful if you could drop the offensive language.

Umm, funding a terrorist organisation does make you a terrorist according to the definition currently being used by the US.

The fact that so much of the IRAs' funding came from New York is something I've always found interesting. As is the fact that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is currently hearing from the Irish-American lobby on why it shouldn't ratify the new extradition treaty with the UK as it might allow IRA terrorists and sympathisers in the US to be prosecuted. Can we say hypocrites anyone?

Bingo, I was in Manchester in '98 when the IRA helpfully flattened the Arndale centre... Panicing gets people no where. Thinking clearly does.

That was '96.

Umm, funding a terrorist organisation does make you a terrorist according to the definition currently being used by the US.

The fact that so much of the IRAs' funding came from New York is something I've always found interesting. As is the fact that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is currently hearing from the Irish-American lobby on why it shouldn't ratify the new extradition treaty with the Uk as it might allow IRA terrorists and sympathisers in the US to be prosecuted. Can we say hypocrites anyone.

Actually anybody who would be extradited would walk in short order due to the good friday agreement. The real reason its being delayed is they're worried that it could lead to proceedings for human rights violations against a few of its notaries, Kissinger being a big one that comes to mind.

It cited 13 arrests and 1 prosecution. I'm not gonna build a bomb shelter and supplies just yet.
"In Sweden, another country with a long history of neutrality, prosecutors last month convened a top-secret closed trial of three terrorism suspects in the southern city of Malmo. Authorities have not identified the suspects or disclosed any evidence. But Swedish media have reported that the arrests were made at the request of British counterterrorism investigators."
What about that^

Or this:

"We might be facing a new era in homegrown terrorism," said Pitteloud, now the director of the Center for International Security Policy, an arm of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. "We don't feel like we are a primary target, but in the end, Switzerland is a symbol of quite a lot of things that radical Islam hates." Officials worry about attacks on foreign embassies and institutions in the country.

"But "we have seen early signs now of anti-Swiss propaganda on the Internet," Pitteloud said. "We have our fair share of radical Islamists, there is no doubt, many of whom we don't know what to do about because many of them are refugees and we can't just kick them out."

Swiss lawmakers are considering a proposal that would allow police and the domestic intelligence service to tap the phones of suspected radicals or access their computers, even if there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. A similar measure was rejected last year in the Swiss parliament."

"Swiss intelligence is realizing that you can't just sit back and cross your arms and say, 'We're not a target because we're a small country,' " he said. "Switzerland is no longer able to exclude itself from the rest of the world in the face of a globalized threat."

Dont talk out of your ass or should I say dont talk when your head is deep burried in sand. Fringe group huh? ROFL....:rolleyes:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/5142908.stm

How many muslims are there in UK, 1 million?

The figure is about 1.6 million. But before I start digging my bunker and stocking up on tinned food, I'd like to know what defines sympathetic. If it means "hey, that sounds great, I should start killing infidels right now", then yes, that is a problem. On the other hand, it probably means "well, I don't support it, but they have their reasons" then it is no problem at all, and under that definition even I would be "sympathetic" to global jihad.

And besides, I dare you to show me where in that article it says that they only polled Muslims. The article says that "around 400,000 people in the UK are "sympathetic to violent jihad around the world"" (emphasis mine). And yes, while a lot of them probably will be Muslims, under the second definition of "sympathetic" this is hardly surprising with a population of 60 million.

You can take cover, but personally I'm going to continue to go about my business without irrational fear of the Islamic boogieman.


Bingo, I was in Manchester in '96 when the IRA helpfully flattened the Arndale centre...

Wow, me too!

That was '96.

Apologies for the typo...I just realised when I saw your post...

Being sympathetic doesn't make them violent themselves. Plenty of USAmericans were sympathetic towards the IRA here and even financed it. That didn't make them terrorists themselves, did it?
And I'd be more than grateful if you could drop the offensive language.

Another pointless exchange of words between us. I'm not even going to ask the proof of that (Something like 40% of Americans were sympathetic towards IRA?) Just one last thing. Think again what you've said. Are you comparing IRA with violent Jihad which is basically fundemental islam which is like stoning raped women, gays or thinking men are fully ok to beat women or like crashing a plane into a building?

And besides, I dare you to show me where in that article it says that they only polled Muslims. The article says that "around 400,000 people in the UK are "sympathetic to violent jihad around the world"" (emphasis mine). And yes, while a lot of them probably will be Muslims, under the second definition of "sympathetic" this is hardly surprising with a population of 60 million.
Yes, because I'm sure there are going to be so many non-muslims who are sympathetic to jihad....

Surely it's not an unreasonable assumption to assume they were pretty much all muslims? And 400,000 is a hell of a lot for the amount of muslims in this country. Though I'd be surprised if it was really that little muslims who genuinely hold such sympathies.

The figure is about 1.6 million. But before I start digging my bunker and stocking up on tinned food, I'd like to know what defines sympathetic. If it means "hey, that sounds great, I should start killing infidels right now", then yes, that is a problem. On the other hand, it probably means "well, I don't support it, but they have their reasons" then it is no problem at all, and under that definition even I would be "sympathetic" to global jihad.

And besides, I dare you to show me where in that article it says that they only polled Muslims. The article says that "around 400,000 people in the UK are "sympathetic to violent jihad around the world"" (emphasis mine). And yes, while a lot of them probably will be Muslims, under the second definition of "sympathetic" this is hardly surprising with a population of 60 million.

You can take cover, but personally I'm going to continue to go about my business without irrational fear of the Islamic boogieman.

Oh I guess it should be like 2% of muslims and 90% of jews in UK that are sympathetic towards violent jihad. :rolleyes: Since you are that irrational I'm not surprised at you making idiotic straw man like "You can take cover, but personally I'm going to continue to go about my business without irrational fear of the Islamic boogieman". Or was it supposed to be a joke?

Yes, because I'm sure there are going to be so many non-muslims who are sympathetic to jihad....

Surely it's not an unreasonable assumption to assume they were pretty much all muslims? And 400,000 is a hell of a lot for the amount of muslims in this country. Though I'd be surprised if it was really that little muslims who genuinely hold such sympathies.

Ah! Finally, a European who posts with his eyes open!

how do you explain the rise of anti-immigrant governments in Denmark and Holland?

It's a phenomenon in the whole EU; even the most progressist governments are strenghtening the control of the borders. But it is more an economic issue than due to a "conflict".


"In Sweden, another country with a long history of neutrality, prosecutors last month convened a top-secret closed trial of three terrorism suspects in the southern city of Malmo. Authorities have not identified the suspects or disclosed any evidence. But Swedish media have reported that the arrests were made at the request of British counterterrorism investigators."
What about that^

Or this:

"We might be facing a new era in homegrown terrorism," said Pitteloud, now the director of the Center for International Security Policy, an arm of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. "We don't feel like we are a primary target, but in the end, Switzerland is a symbol of quite a lot of things that radical Islam hates." Officials worry about attacks on foreign embassies and institutions in the country.

"But "we have seen early signs now of anti-Swiss propaganda on the Internet," Pitteloud said. "We have our fair share of radical Islamists, there is no doubt, many of whom we don't know what to do about because many of them are refugees and we can't just kick them out."

Swiss lawmakers are considering a proposal that would allow police and the domestic intelligence service to tap the phones of suspected radicals or access their computers, even if there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. A similar measure was rejected last year in the Swiss parliament."

The first point is that a new like that isn't new. Terrorists caught are nothing but something new; the difference is that the USA pay attention this time.

And, for the second time... Switzerland is a symbol of quite a lot of things that radical Islam hates says it all. It is absolutely out of point. Radical Islam appears because of a sort of neo/colonialist attitudes not related to that little mountainous country.After all, that spokesman says it all; they are not a target.

That quote is what he blames, anti-muslim propaganda on the Internet.

Another ass talker. Are we in an ass parade?? This man, some teenager, huh? :rolleyes:



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4678837.stm

Okay:

1) I hate you. Let's just get that out of the way so we know where we stand.

2) Did you actually bother to read what I told you? It amounts to as close to a fundamental fact of sociology as you can get. And it is empirically provable as you can tell that in Britain, for example, there are no major ideological differences between the groups descended from Romans, Saxons, Vikings, Normans, etc.

3) What!? Are you an idiot or something? One (or even four) individuals do not prove a sociological trend. I could point out many many more gay Muslims, transsexual Muslims, Communists of Muslim descent, and so on, people of these description outnumber cockworms like Siddique Khan one hundred to one.

Yes, because I'm sure there are going to be so many non-muslims who are sympathetic to jihad....

Surely it's not an unreasonable assumption to assume they were pretty much all muslims? And 400,000 is a hell of a lot for the amount of muslims in this country. Though I'd be surprised if it was really that little.

No, it isn't an unreasonable assumption at all. What is unreasonable is taking what I said out of context. Earlier in that post, I mentioned that the definition of "sympathetic" needs to be elaborated on. The second definition that I mentioned was not actively supporting it, but realising that the terrorists have valid reasons for disliking the western world, in which case anyone who has actually looked at the terrorist threat in a way less simplistic than "they are brown, therefore they must be vicious, unreasoning animals" will have come to that conclusion, Muslim or not.

Ah! Finally, a European who posts with his eyes open!

No, just one who posts with a view similar to your own.

Oh I guess it should be like 2% of muslims and 90% of jews in UK that are sympathetic towards violent jihad. :rolleyes: Since you are that irrational I'm not surprised at you making idiotic straw man like "You can take cover, but personally I'm going to continue to go about my business without irrational fear of the Islamic boogieman". Or was it supposed to be a joke?

Good God, another person who only read the last paragraph of my post. I don't doubt that most of the people who "sympathise with" violent jihad are Muslim. But right now, go back and read the other parts of my post instead of just the ones you can take offence at, and maybe you'll gain a valuable new insight into my reasoning. I'm not holding my breath, though.

And the "Islamic boogieman" is hardly my straw man. Having seen you in two incarnations now, it seems to be one that you've consistently set up throughout your time on NS. And no, it was no joke.

No, just one who posts with a view similar to your own.
The two are interchangable.;)

Good God, another person who only read the last paragraph of my post. I don't doubt that most of the people who "sympathise with" violent jihad are Muslim. But right now, go back and read the other parts of my post instead of just the ones you can take offence at, and maybe you'll gain a valuable new insight into my reasoning. I'm not holding my breath, though.

And the "Islamic boogieman" is hardly my straw man. Having seen you in three incarnations now, it seems to be one that you've consistently set up throughout your time on NS. And no, it was no joke.
What was his other incarnation.....besides Ny Nordland?

"In Sweden, another country with a long history of neutrality, prosecutors last month convened a top-secret closed trial of three terrorism suspects in the southern city of Malmo. Authorities have not identified the suspects or disclosed any evidence. But Swedish media have reported that the arrests were made at the request of British counterterrorism investigators."
What about that^

Sorry, I missed 3, make it 16 arrested with 1 prosecuted

"We might be facing a new era in homegrown terrorism," said Pitteloud, now the director of the Center for International Security Policy, an arm of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. "We don't feel like we are a primary target, but in the end, Switzerland is a symbol of quite a lot of things that radical Islam hates." Officials worry about attacks on foreign embassies and institutions in the country.

"But we have seen early signs now of anti-Swiss propaganda on the Internet," Pitteloud said. "We have our fair share of radical Islamists, there is no doubt, many of whom we don't know what to do about because many of them are refugees and we can't just kick them out."

Bolding mine.

Might be facing terrorism. Not here is some evidence or look who we just arrested. We might be facing terrorism.

Some one said they don't like the Swiss online? Hell, I slag off nations online all the time, does taht make me a threat?

Swiss lawmakers are considering a proposal that would allow police and the domestic intelligence service to tap the phones of suspected radicals or access their computers, even if there is no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. A similar measure was rejected last year in the Swiss parliament."

Law makers are considering a proposal thats already been rejected by the parliament? Yeah it really sounds like the Swiss government is worried.

The two are interchangable.;)

All depends on your point of view :p

What was his other incarnation.....besides Ny Nordland?

Ah, whoops. Typo. I'll go back and change it.

Apologies for the typo...I just realised when I saw your post...

Thats ok, I was there as well.

No, it isn't an unreasonable assumption at all. What is unreasonable is taking what I said out of context. Earlier in that post, I mentioned that the definition of "sympathetic" needs to be elaborated on. The second definition that I mentioned was not actively supporting it, but realising that the terrorists have valid reasons for disliking the western world, in which case anyone who has actually looked at the terrorist threat in a way less simplistic than "they are brown, therefore they must be vicious, unreasoning animals" will have come to that conclusion, Muslim or not.
I know you'll disagree with me, but I think that to have even the tiniest amount sympathy towards jihad makes somebody a complete animal. But I know you'll come out with the usual "They're all misunderstood really, we haven't been nice enough to them" stuff, telling us it's western foreign policy that's at fault. I would be a little more willing to accept that argument if a lot of these terrorists came from the countries we were invading. But look at the London bombings, all of these people were born in Britain. That shows you that terrorism has nothing to do with anything like western policy in the islamic world and everything to do with islam itself. Even 'mainstream' islam harps on about the ummah, putting muslims in foreign lands before their own countrymen. If that wasn't the case we'd see secular Britons commiting bombings in this country because of our foreign policy.

It's nothing to do with our foreign policy and everything to do with their religion and our tolerance for their pathetic excuse for a civilisation.

http://www.movimentosudista.org/images/europe-map-flag.gif
Yeah! We rule :D Screw terrorism.
We've had it and lived through it.

All depends on your point of view :p
*glances....*

Touche.

I know you'll disagree with me, but I think that to have even the tiniest amount sympathy towards jihad makes somebody a complete animal. But I know you'll come out with the usual "They're all misunderstood really, we haven't been nice enough to them" stuff, telling us it's western foreign policy that's at fault. I would be a little more willing to accept that argument if a lot of these terrorists came from the countries we were invading. But look at the London bombings, all of these people were born in Britain. That shows you that terrorism has nothing to do with anything like western policy in the islamic world and everything to do with islam itself. Even 'mainstream' islam harps on about the ummah, putting muslims in foreign lands before their own countrymen. If that wasn't the case we'd see secular Britons commiting bombings in this country because of our foreign policy.

It's nothing to do with our foreign policy and everything to do with their religion and our tolerance for their pathetic excuse for a civilisation.
I love you.

*kisses your feet*

http://www.movimentosudista.org/images/europe-map-flag.gif
Yeah! We rule :D Screw terrorism.
We've had it and lived through it.
This is different...this is a threat from inside...from people you are trying to include into your nations.

I know you'll disagree with me, but I think that to have even the tiniest amount sympathy towards jihad makes somebody a complete animal. But I know you'll come out with the usual "They're all misunderstood really, we haven't been nice enough to them" stuff, telling us it's western foreign policy that's at fault. I would be a little more willing to accept that argument if a lot of these terrorists came from the countries we were invading. But look at the London bombings, all of these people were born in Britain. That shows you that terrorism has nothing to do with anything like western policy in the islamic world and everything to do with islam itself. Even 'mainstream' islam harps on about the ummah, putting muslims in foreign lands before their own countrymen. If that wasn't the case we'd see secular Britons commiting bombings in this country because of our foreign policy.

It's nothing to do with our foreign policy and everything to do with their religion and our tolerance for their pathetic excuse for a civilisation.

Going further: It has nothing to see with Islam itself, but with the conditions that they live.

There are two kinds of yihadist Terrorism: The international, that starts as a reaction for neocolonialist behaviours, and the internal, due to the living conditions of the inhabitants.

By the way, saying that 1.200.000.000 people are terrorists sounds a little...

Thats ok, I was there as well.

Where abouts were you?

I was just heading back towards Piccadily caus the police were moving the cordon back to get people out of there.

Just heard a 'Whump' and then all the windows down towards the Arndale just shattered...tell you something, it was like watching some kind of wierd rain as the sun glinted off all the glass as it came down...

Oh well...at least Manchester has a nice new centre now...

This is different...this is a threat from inside...from people you are trying to include into your nations.

Oh, you mean that ETA, IRA, Black Star, Red Army Faction et al. were external groups?

Where abouts were you?

I was just heading back towards Piccadily caus the police were moving the cordon back to get people out of there.

Just heard a 'Whump' and then all the windows down towards the Arndale just shattered...tell you something, it was like watching some kind of wierd rain as the sun glinted off all the glass as it came down...

Oh well...at least Manchester has a nice new centre now...

Was with my mum heading down Market St. towards the old M&S when we were asked to turn around and leave the area.

It was a strange feeling just after it went off, so peaceful until you started to register the sirens and the screams of panic again.

I know you'll disagree with me, but I think that to have even the tiniest amount sympathy towards jihad makes somebody a complete animal... (et cetera)

If you have ever felt sympathy towards any act of killing (i.e. the English Civil War, the Bolshevik revolution, the Second World War, etc.) then it is hypocritical to criticise someone else for feeling the same. Once you accept that murder may occassionally be acceptable, it become a matter of personal politics when it is acceptable.

The europeans seem to understand that the real price of freedom is decreased security.

You cant have both impenetrable security and freedom, and the europeans have made the right choice.
We can accept casualties, in other words.

You don't get to have what we have without taking some losses. It's just the nature of the balance sheet. Maybe I will get blown up tomorrow, maybe someone else, but chances are it will be a car running a red light. I don't care. I do what I can, and the rest I am content to leave up to chance (and an infinitesimally small one at that). It is a far better deal than having a 100% guarantee of your government screwing with your mind, and still running the same risk anyway.

It's nothing to do with our foreign policy and everything to do with their religion and our tolerance for their pathetic excuse for a civilisation.


Rabble-rousing in the face of grievances real or imagined is nothing specifically to do with Islam. Throughout history people have done this in the name of various religions or ideologies, for example the Crusades, or Hitler's rise to power. Whether mainstream Islam "harps on about the ummah" or not, the fact remains that only a miniscule proportion of Muslims take it as an excuse to carry out terrorist attacks. If terrorism was a product of Islam itself, we would doubtless see far more terrorist attacks. Muslim extremists have carried out exactly two terrorist attacks on European countries, and while each was a tragedy it is hardly evidence of any significant proportiong of Muslims attempting to bring down the non-Islamic world.

In that case, where would the grievance come from? I know that you'll disagree with me, but my answer is that a large part of it comes from our foreign policy. Not just our part in the invasion of Iraq, although that is a factor. Our support of Israel cannot have gone unnoticed in the Middle East, and given the enormous tensions with Israel it is likely that some of that would have rubbed off on us.

And even though the Tube bombers were British, they would still have been affected by our foreign policy. Our failure to fully integrate Islamic immigrants has made sure that they will still feel solidarity with their old countries. In fact, Mohammad Sidique Khan, one of the tube bombers, mentioned in his testament that "Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetrate atrocities
against my people all over the world".

And despite your apparent belief that I want lenience for terrorists, I don't. I too believe that they should be hunted down and brought to justice. I just also believe that we should look carefully at their motives as well as their actions. I know that you didn't explicitly state this, it just looked from the post as if this is what you were saying. If I have read this into your post and jumped to the wrong conclusion, I apologise.

Was with my mum heading down Market St. towards the old M&S when we were asked to turn around and leave the area.

It was a strange feeling just after it went off, so peaceful until you started to register the sirens and the screams of panic again.

Yeah, the seconds of silence before the glass hit are something i'll never forget.

Yeah, the seconds of silence before the glass hit are something i'll never forget.

It was strange when you watch the video of the explosion released last month in slow motion. You can actually see the shockwave travelling through the buildings. I didn't remember it like that. Show what 10 years does to your memories.

There IS a conflict going on, whether you, or others like you, want to open your eyes to it, is your problem. This is your continent, not mine..America is safe, for the time being.
There's a problem that our security services will deal with. Not a conflict.

In that case, where would the grievance come from? I know that you'll disagree with me, but my answer is that a large part of it comes from our foreign policy. Not just our part in the invasion of Iraq, although that is a factor. Our support of Israel cannot have gone unnoticed in the Middle East, and given the enormous tensions with Israel it is likely that some of that would have rubbed off on us.
If we start addressing their grievances, it shows us up as weak. If, for example, we reduced our support for Israel in reaction to a muslim terrorist campaign aimed against us, we would be showing them that they've won. Instead, if the terrorists bomb us for supporting Israel we should react exactly how they don't want us to. Such as selling a load of cut price arms to Israel.

And even though the Tube bombers were British, they would still have been affected by our foreign policy. Our failure to fully integrate Islamic immigrants has made sure that they will still feel solidarity with their old countries. In fact, Mohammad Sidique Khan, one of the tube bombers, mentioned in his testament that "Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetrate atrocities
against my people all over the world".
Like I said, addressing these people's grievances is surrender. We should never make them think that their tactics are getting them anywhere. Particularly when we could get a very good result by ridding our country of islam entirely.

ridding our country of islam entirely

And so taking away one of the biggest freedoms in the country of freedom of worship...Wait that just sounds like an Islamist Militant run state:eek:

It was strange when you watch the video of the explosion released last month in slow motion. You can actually see the shockwave travelling through the buildings. I didn't remember it like that. Show what 10 years does to your memories.

Yeah, it was wierd...the plume of smoke never registered with me until after the glass fell...

But you're right, its nothing like i remembered it...still, i was only a kid at the time so...

...Is it just me, or did anyone flash on the original Star Trek episode, 'The Enemy Within' when they saw the thread title?

http://memory-alpha.org/en/images/0/01/TOS_S1D2-2.jpg

And of course, we all remember how Jim Kirk solved that one, right kids?

If we start addressing their grievances, it shows us up as weak. If, for example, we reduced our support for Israel in reaction to a muslim terrorist campaign aimed against us, we would be showing them that they've won. Instead, if the terrorists bomb us for supporting Israel we should react exactly how they don't want us to. Such as selling a load of cut price arms to Israel.

Addressing legitimate grievances isn't surrender. Bending over backwards so as not to address illegitimate grievances is. And tempting as it is to get into an argument over Israel with you, I'd rather not go off topic. ;)

And it would be difficult to do anything in response to a Muslim terrorist campaign, seeing as we have been bombed only once by a small group apparently acting indepently.


Like I said, addressing these people's grievances is surrender. We should never make them think that theirtactics are getting us anywhere. Particularly when we could get a very good result by ridding our country of islam entirely.

Ridding our country of Islam would be a good result? Two questions:

1. Why?
2. How?

Not to mention that cutting 1.6 million people out of the population would be quite a blow to the economy, especially in communities with a high Muslim population.

If we start addressing their grievances, it shows us up as weak. If, for example, we reduced our support for Israel in reaction to a muslim terrorist campaign aimed against us, we would be showing them that they've won. Instead, if the terrorists bomb us for supporting Israel we should react exactly how they don't want us to. Such as selling a load of cut price arms to Israel.

Addressing grievances was how we stopped the conflict with the IRA in Britain. We got around the table and talked it out, we made concessions and they made concessions and now people don't die anymore. People not dying is a good thing :)

Like I said, addressing these people's grievances is surrender. We should never make them think that their tactics are getting them anywhere. Particularly when we could get a very good result by ridding our country of islam entirely.

A good statesman will balance to need to appear strong with the good of the populous. Your thinking is too black and white and you're opinions on ridding the counrty of muslims frankly racist.

Ah! Finally, a European who posts with his eyes open!
Islamic extremism is a problem, but the thing I can't get over is why you keep pinning it on all Muslims.

If the price to be able to insult my politicians is a large increase of being blown up by a freak muslim extremist, I GLADLY PAY.

There are terrorist networks in Europe, lot's of them. We do our best to dismantle them in the light of the Rule of Law, but hell i don't mind one or two slipping by if that means as a people we can maintain freedom of speech, tolerance, and our good food.

In wars, people die. If you want to win, you must pay a price.

And if there is indeed a war on terror, than Europe stands tall and says "we have no fear, you won't change our ways, you won't silence us". And in the end, we will win.

Yeah, it was wierd...the plume of smoke never registered with me until after the glass fell...

But you're right, its nothing like i remembered it...still, i was only a kid at the time so...

It's always a good story to tell though

*adopts fake hollywood marine in 'nam accent* 'I've seen it man, I was there' :D

It's always a good story to tell though

*adopts fake hollywood marine in 'nam accent* 'I've seen it man, I was there' :D

Lol, that brought the image of principle Skinner to me :p

If the price to be able to insult my politicians is a large increase of being blown up by a freak muslim extremist, I GLADLY PAY.

There are terrorist networks in Europe, lot's of them. We do our best to dismantle them in the light of the Rule of Law, but hell i don't mind one or two slipping by if that means as a people we can maintain freedom of speech, tolerance, and our good food.

In wars, people die. If you want to win, you must pay a price.

And if there is indeed a war on terror, than Europe stands tall and says "we have no fear, you won't change our ways, you won't silence us". And in the end, we will win.

*stands up and applauds

One thing is for sure, ladies and gentlemen, a change in policy is in our midst, and I intend to cover and support, every aspect of it.

. . . Discuss . . .:)
Just remember (while you think you are going forward) these wise words:

As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap

*Laughs heartily at OP*

I found, by the way, an excellent little article about the K-P, Ny Nordland, perhaps even AI, type of people. You know, the ones who preach that Europe is about to end, falling to its low birthrate and foreign cultures.

It's in German, unfortunately, and even though I consider my language skills reasonable, I don't think I'm good enough to properly translate it. Sorry.
http://www.zeit.de/2006/25/Untergang_xml
...Zumal seiner Landsleute, deren »Lust am Untergang« er in seinen brillanten Glossen beschrieb: »Der Alltag der Demokratie mit seinen tristen Problemen« sei »langweilig«, konstatierte er damals, »aber die bevorstehenden Katastrophen sind hochinteressant«. Zweifellos hätte er die große Klage über den Zeugungs- und Gebärstreik unserer Landsleute, der die Deutschen, gestern noch (angeblich) ein »Volk ohne Raum«, in ichsüchtige Einsiedler eines »Raums ohne Volk« zu verwandeln droht, wie es Erich Kästner, auch er ein ahnungsvoller Spötter, in den späten zwanziger Jahren vorausgereimt hat: »Komm, lass uns den Geburtenrückgang pflegen / Und lösch die Lampe aus, des Landtags wegen / Damit er es nicht sieht …« Nicht jeder Kinderreichtum, hatte der beischlafende Herr frivol in die Kissen geseufzt, sei auch ein Kindersegen. Kästner, der Zersetzer...

Also a good book for our local racist crowd to read (if they then are up to it)...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3d/Decline_of_the_West_1922.jpg/250px-Decline_of_the_West_1922.jpg

It is indeed Weimar all over again. Just not the way some people think it is...

If the price to be able to insult my politicians is a large increase of being blown up by a freak muslim extremist, I GLADLY PAY.

There are terrorist networks in Europe, lot's of them. We do our best to dismantle them in the light of the Rule of Law, but hell i don't mind one or two slipping by if that means as a people we can maintain freedom of speech, tolerance, and our good food.

In wars, people die. If you want to win, you must pay a price.

And if there is indeed a war on terror, than Europe stands tall and says "we have no fear, you won't change our ways, you won't silence us". And in the end, we will win.

*Joins applause*

*Joins applause*
*Is too cool to applaud, but nods approvingly*

This is hilarious!

Even though the majority of European posters (bar three I can count) encompassing a vast diversity of European states and cultures all disagree with the OP and The Atlantian Islands, we appear to be incorrect and indeed, have "our eyes closed".

How idiotic is it that the person who seems to know more than us about our internal politics, our strife, our more pressing day-to-day problems and what most concerns us.... lives in Florida. :rolleyes:

Just remember (while you think you are going forward) these wise words:

As Ye Sow, So Shall Ye Reap
I am not sowing anything.

It is European countries...Denmark, Holland and Switzerland that I am talking about...and it is Europeans in those countries....in those governments...and voting for those anti-immigrant parties...that I am talking about.

This has nothing to do with me. This about whats going on----------->over there.

*Laughs heartily at OP*

I found, by the way, an excellent little article about the K-P, Ny Nordland, perhaps even AI, type of people. You know, the ones who preach that Europe is about to end, falling to its low birthrate and foreign cultures.

It's in German, unfortunately, and even though I consider my language skills reasonable, I don't think I'm good enough to properly translate it. Sorry.
http://www.zeit.de/2006/25/Untergang_xml


Also a good book for our local racist crowd to read (if they then are up to it)...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3d/Decline_of_the_West_1922.jpg/250px-Decline_of_the_West_1922.jpg

It is indeed Weimar all over again. Just not the way some people think it is...

I dont share the same views as K-P (I'm not actually sure what his views are) and Ny Nordland (he wants something for Norway that I dont want for America).

*replys to Neu Leonstein while reading the wiki article on The Decline of the West*

Despite 7/7 and all the other "We have foiled a terrorsit attack but won't share any details with you" announcements I am actually more concerned over the anti-terror legislation that has been passed 'for my safety' by the British government.

The rapid erosion of personal freedoms and rights in the name of security scares the hell out of me a lot more than the thought of more terrorist bombings or even a 9/11 in the UK.
I would vote to see much of the anti-terror legislation revoked were I actually given a democratic vote on it.

http://news.sbs.com.au/dateline/index.php?page=archive&daysum=2006-07-19

At the bottom of this site you can see a report about the detention system in Holland, particularly Rita Verdonk and her fight against brown people. Don't bother with the transcript, it's pointless to summarise a more than 10 minute report with a bit of text.

Watch the thing by clicking on "Play".

I am not sowing anything.

It is European countries...Denmark, Holland and Switzerland that I am talking about...and it is Europeans in those countries....in those governments...and voting for those anti-immigrant parties...that I am talking about.

This has nothing to do with me. This about whats going on----------->over there.

So the actions of those 3 European countries refelct the rst of Europe? I could say the same thing for Canda representing the whole of Noth America, doesn't make it true. If you don't accpet other people because of their religion race etc then it will only cause resentment and also (insert Yoda speech here). That resntment gets fueled each time they are discriminated until they snap and their we go a bomb explodes. Say yes to Intergration

This is hilarious!

Even though the majority of European posters (bar three I can count) encompassing a vast diversity of European states and cultures all disagree with the OP and The Atlantian Islands, we appear to be incorrect and indeed, have "our eyes closed".

How idiotic is it that the person who seems to know more than us about our internal politics, our strife, our more pressing day-to-day problems and what most concerns us.... lives in Florida. :rolleyes:

I could care less about what European posters say...its what European VOTERS say that interests me....and right now, in countries that have been greatly affected by Islam, anti-immigrant/muslim parties are greatly on the rise...which can be seen in places like France, Netherlands, and Denmark.

Anyway, you'd be suprised what us Floridians know, we're not as dumb as we look.:p

So the actions of those 3 European countries refelct the rst of Europe? I could say the same thing for Canda representing the whole of Noth America, doesn't make it true. If you don't accpet other people because of their religion race etc then it will only cause resentment and also (insert Yoda speech here). That resntment gets fueled each time they are discriminated until they snap and their we go a bomb explodes. Say yes to Intergration

I say...yes to a melting pot...the way the immigrant soceity was supposed to be, and no to the multicultural salad bowl..the way immigrant soceities have been perverted.

Despite 7/7 and all the other "We have foiled a terrorsit attack but won't share any details with you" announcements I am actually more concerned over the anti-terror legislation that has been passed 'for my safety' by the British government.

The rapid erosion of personal freedoms and rights in the name of security scares the hell out of me a lot more than the thought of more terrorist bombings or even a 9/11 in the UK.
I would vote to see much of the anti-terror legislation revoked were I actually given a democratic vote on it.

Quoted for truth.

And as you can see from my post earlier, I have actually been involved with a terrorist attack and so have a fairly good idea of their nature and I would still accept another rather than have my liberties eroded.

I think it is sad that a citizen of America 'Land of the Free and Home of the Brave' would advocate restrictions of rights for security.

It is European countries...Denmark, Holland and Switzerland that I am talking about...and it is Europeans in those countries....in those governments...and voting for those anti-immigrant parties...that I am talking about.


There has always been support for anti-immigrant governments. Phrases such as 'They're taking all OUR jobs and all OUR women and all OUR social benefit and all the cells in OUR prisons' spring instantly to mind. To link a few shifts in government towards parties that include anti-immigration policies as part of their election platform as proof that Europe is slowly waking up to the 'foreign terrorist threat' is, basically, ludicrous.

Several governments have been elected with 'Anti-americanism' as a key election campaign plank. Does this mean that there is a rapidly growing conflict between America and Europe looming and that those of us who don't see the US - Europe war coming are blind?

You might have something if it is on an individual council level with people standing on single-ticket platforms but, seriously, nothing you have posted is anything more than the most intangible, circumstantial evidence to support your inital post.

*Laughs heartily at OP*

I found, by the way, an excellent little article about the K-P, Ny Nordland, perhaps even AI, type of people. You know, the ones who preach that Europe is about to end, falling to its low birthrate and foreign cultures.

It's in German, unfortunately, and even though I consider my language skills reasonable, I don't think I'm good enough to properly translate it. Sorry.

Also a good book for our local racist crowd to read (if they then are up to it)...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West

It is indeed Weimar all over again. Just not the way some people think it is...
Very interesting, especially the "Phases of rise and decline".

There has always been support for anti-immigrant governments. Phrases such as 'They're taking all OUR jobs and all OUR women and all OUR social benefit and all the cells in OUR prisons' spring instantly to mind.

"No Blacks
No Dogs
No Irish"

is one that springs to mind also.

Nothing new. Same thing, new name. We've dealt with it before- we'll do so again.

Keep the fear-mongering across the 'pond' thank you very much :)

Very interesting, especially the "Phases of rise and decline".
One can't say that Spengler was a Nazi. Perhaps one can't say that K-P and NN are Nazis either.

But what they all have in common is that they perpetuate a myth of impending doom (NN probably moreso than K-P, who probably has less of a structured plan for his posts here).

And in Weimar it was this myth of impending doom, of Western culture under threat of extinction and all those things, that allowed the ultimate defenders of Western culture to rise to power.

So when NN in one of the early posts in this thread puts forward the idea that this is Weimar all over again (ie some foreign, horrible threat threatening Western civilisation), then I find that just a little bit ironic. Because that post got it wrong - the foreign enemy Weimar and the world had to defend itself then was Judaism, was racial impurity and the ultimate fall of the West, not Hitler. The Nazis were the West, they weren't some foreign, seperate movement. They were the logical conclusion of a specific train of thought within Western culture and philosophy, a train of thought that has been gaining support once more in recent years.

One can't say that Spengler was a Nazi. Perhaps one can't say that K-P and NN are Nazis either.

But what they all have in common is that they perpetuate a myth of impending doom (NN probably moreso than K-P, who probably has less of a structured plan for his posts here).

And in Weimar it was this myth of impending doom, of Western culture under threat of extinction and all those things, that allowed the ultimate defenders of Western culture to rise to power.

So when NN in one of the early posts in this thread puts forward the idea that this is Weimar all over again (ie some foreign, horrible threat threatening Western civilisation), then I find that just a little bit ironic. Because that post got it wrong - the foreign enemy Weimar and the world had to defend itself then was Judaism, was racial impurity and the ultimate fall of the West, not Hitler. The Nazis were the West, they weren't some foreign, seperate movement. They were the logical conclusion of a specific train of thought within Western culture and philosophy, a train of thought that has been gaining support once more in recent years.
I dont really know what to say except . . . Wow.

Once more we're at the Gates of Vienna...or maybe not :) Europe does need to get its head out of the ground though and start dealing with the issues facing it, one of which terrorism is...even if not that troublesome.

Quoted for truth.

And as you can see from my post earlier, I have actually been involved with a terrorist attack and so have a fairly good idea of their nature and I would still accept another rather than have my liberties eroded.

I think it is sad that a citizen of America 'Land of the Free and Home of the Brave' would advocate restrictions of rights for security.

The same citizenry who probably thought "V for Vendetta" had an ending sadder than "Old Yeller" no less.

Once more we're at the Gates of Vienna...or maybe not :) Europe does need to get its head out of the ground though and start dealing with the issues facing it, one of which terrorism is...even if not that troublesome.

Europe has been dealing with terrorism (in its modern incarnation) for nigh on a hundred years.

Its still around.

So when NN in one of the early posts in this thread puts forward the idea that this is Weimar all over again (ie some foreign, horrible threat threatening Western civilisation), then I find that just a little bit ironic. Because that post got it wrong - the foreign enemy Weimar and the world had to defend itself then was Judaism, was racial impurity and the ultimate fall of the West, not Hitler. The Nazis were the West, they weren't some foreign, seperate movement. They were the logical conclusion of a specific train of thought within Western culture and philosophy, a train of thought that has been gaining support once more in recent years.
Not quite. The Nazis were not the West at the time. Britain was. It represented the opposite movement, ie liberalism. Most traditional (and new) German philosophers of the time, such as Lensch and Plenge, had established the moral foundations of Nazism. They reprimanded Britain and its traditions with great acidity. It was the enemy to them. They saw it as the vanguard of capitalism and of corruption, and their pet hatred, individualism. Lord Acton, John Stuart Mill, Tocqueville these were the enemies of Hegel, of Carl Schmitt, of most German intellectuals.

Europe has been dealing with terrorism (in its modern incarnation) for nigh on a hundred years.

Its still around.
Yes, it has. What I am saying is that it has more pressing issues to deal with.

I am not sowing anything.

It is European countries...Denmark, Holland and Switzerland that I am talking about...and it is Europeans in those countries....in those governments...and voting for those anti-immigrant parties...that I am talking about.

This has nothing to do with me. This about whats going on----------->over there.
This has plenty to do with you. You are splashing your hatred for Muslims all over the world via the internet, along with a shitload of disinformation that you hope will ultimately hurt the Muslims.

I can only imagine what some young Muslim thinks as he reads your hateful words. Hate feeds hate. The result has always been ugly, and I imagine that it always will be ugly.

Although you profess to be Jewish, when I asked you if you were willing to die for the "Motherland", you said no. Your reasoning is that you are an American first. Interesting that you are willing for others to die for your cause.

Naw, this has nothing to do with you.... :rolleyes:

This has plenty to do with you. You are splashing your hatred for Muslims all over the world via the internet, along with a shitload of disinformation that you hope will ultimately hurt the Muslims.

I can only imagine what some young Muslim thinks as he reads your hateful words. Hate feeds hate. The result has always been ugly, and I imagine that it always will be ugly.

Although you profess to be Jewish, when I asked you if you were willing to die for the "Motherland", you said no. Your reasoning is that you are an American first. Interesting that you are willing for others to die for your cause.

Naw, this has nothing to do with you.... :rolleyes:
Dont mis-quote me. You asked if I would die for my motherland Israel...I said no because I am not an Israeli and Israel is not my motherland. That IS a very reasonable answer.

I said I would not fight for a country, other than my own, America..because thats where my loyalty lies.

*Laughs heartily at OP*

I found, by the way, an excellent little article about the K-P, Ny Nordland, perhaps even AI, type of people. You know, the ones who preach that Europe is about to end, falling to its low birthrate and foreign cultures.

It's in German, unfortunately, and even though I consider my language skills reasonable, I don't think I'm good enough to properly translate it. Sorry.
http://www.zeit.de/2006/25/Untergang_xml


Also a good book for our local racist crowd to read (if they then are up to it)...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3d/Decline_of_the_West_1922.jpg/250px-Decline_of_the_West_1922.jpg

It is indeed Weimar all over again. Just not the way some people think it is...

So that man predicted the end of West in early 20th century but West is still here hence all such predictions are incorrect? Is that what you mean?
Perhaps you might have a point if birth rates and immigration levels in present day were also affecting 1910s. But they were not. Many other variables were also different.
And any discussion with you about the future of West and Europe is pointless since we disagree about what is "West".
Oh btw, that german quote was beyond my skills of german....

One can't say that Spengler was a Nazi. Perhaps one can't say that K-P and NN are Nazis either.

But what they all have in common is that they perpetuate a myth of impending doom (NN probably moreso than K-P, who probably has less of a structured plan for his posts here).

And in Weimar it was this myth of impending doom, of Western culture under threat of extinction and all those things, that allowed the ultimate defenders of Western culture to rise to power.

So when NN in one of the early posts in this thread puts forward the idea that this is Weimar all over again (ie some foreign, horrible threat threatening Western civilisation), then I find that just a little bit ironic. Because that post got it wrong - the foreign enemy Weimar and the world had to defend itself then was Judaism, was racial impurity and the ultimate fall of the West, not Hitler. The Nazis were the West, they weren't some foreign, seperate movement. They were the logical conclusion of a specific train of thought within Western culture and philosophy, a train of thought that has been gaining support once more in recent years.

Very true, and I find this much more alarming than Islamic terrorism.

Very true, and I find this much more alarming than Islamic terrorism.
Do you find the decline of liberty vis-a-vis security that much more alarming too then?

Do you find the decline of liberty vis-a-vis security that much more alarming too then?

Yes...

Particularly so when liberty is given up for only an illusion of security.

Yes...

Particularly so when liberty is given up for only an illusion of security.
Good, then at least we are partially on the same page.

Oh, the Atlantian Islands is really goose-stepping today.

Oh, the Atlantian Islands is really goose-stepping today.
:rolleyes: Oh that is just sOoOoOo over-played and lame.:p

:rolleyes: Oh that is just sOoOoOo over-played and lame.:p
As are your arguments throughout this travesty of a thread.

Pander your hate to your like-minded buddies.

As are your arguments throughout this travesty of a thread.

Pander your hate to your like-minded buddies.

My arguements came from an article ABOUT Europeans...and political parties that European vote for....not my fault if Switzerland is cracking down on terrorism because of the idea that Switzerland may be used as a base of operation. Its also not my fault if more and more people vote in conservative/anti-immigrant governments in in Denmark and Holland.

Ok. Time to see the attitude in Europe:


According to most polls, over 60 percent of European citizens think that “there are now enough foreigners” within the Union.


http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=7657

I dont know where they got that figure but I think yale is a trustable source. It was probably an average of polls like this:


Only the bnp is making a big push based on immigration concerns: according to one recent poll, 59% of Britons support the bnp position that all further immigration should be halted, though when it was explicitly identified as a bnp stance that number dropped to 48%


http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901060508-1189187,00.html


Conducted between 1997 and 2003 and involving 25,000 people living in EU's 25 member states, the study shows a growing resistance among Europeans toward integrating immigrants. Although the majority of EU citizens are happy to live in a multiethnic society, nearly half of the population opposes granting legal immigrants full civil rights. One in five would prefer no immigrants at all.

Of Europeans living in the 15 initial EU countries, 60 percent want limits to the rise of multicultural societies. The percentage drops to 42 percent in the 10 new EU states. However, 52 percent of respondents across Europe see "a collective ethnic threat from immigration," believing that immigrants threaten jobs and the country's culture, bring crime and generally make a country a worse place to live.


http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=7aa7d7e591f5746d4373ec296f938a2a

*snip*

And I would bet a pound to a penny that if you asked those people for their reasons they would be mainly economic and not terror related.

snip
Why are you saying this like its a new trend?

Racism, anti-immigrant feelings, distrust/dislike of foreigners.... Nothing new.

Been around for hundreds of years.

Again, I refer you to the famous adage "No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish"

And I would bet a pound to a penny that if you asked those people for their reasons they would be mainly economic and not terror related.
Yet few economic arguments would support such a position, unless they were referring to Europe's overheating welfare states.

Yet few economic arguments would support such a position, unless they were referring to Europe's overheating welfare states.

You act as if you expect the general populus to be well informed. If you asked for the reasoning behind their position in the UK I would bet the top 3 reasons are, they take our jobs, they're running the NHS into the ground, they sponge off the state.

And I would bet a pound to a penny that if you asked those people for their reasons they would be mainly economic and not terror related.

Economy isnt everything...


However, 52 percent of respondents across Europe see "a collective ethnic threat from immigration,

You act as if you expect the general populus to be well informed. If you asked for the reasoning behind their position in the UK I would bet the top 3 reasons are, they take our jobs, they're running the NHS into the ground, they sponge off the state.
They wouldn't be entirely wrong...the burden on the welfare state is increasingly becoming heavier due both to immigration and expanding government. The only way Europe could handle more immigrants is a leaner economy.

Economy isnt everything...
Correct.

Economy isnt everything...

Sorry I didn't bother reading the sources, what is the end of the sentence you quoted?

Yet few economic arguments would support such a position, unless they were referring to Europe's overheating welfare states.

Indeed, economic arguments against immigration in the US are even less supported (since the US has somewhat less of a nanny state syndrome), but that doesn't mean they aren't made.

To people who oppose immigration, they will generally use any excuse, but I believe the main reason is good old primate xenophobia.

You act as if you expect the general populus to be well informed. If you asked for the reasoning behind their position in the UK I would bet the top 3 reasons are, they take our jobs, they're running the NHS into the ground, they sponge off the state.

Ah yes, the notion that ignorant/poor people having the "bad" views...


The study also found that xenophobia was directly linked to the GDP of each country -- those with stronger per capita incomes showed a lower level of intolerance. In addition, the survey found that 80 percent of EU's educated urbanites were tolerant toward immigrants. Among people who were illiterate and living in the countryside, however, less than 20 percent were tolerant.


For ex; Anti-immigrant Frp is the #1 party in Norway and Norway has the 2nd highest GDP per capita in Europe (and in the world) after Luxembourg. Education system is also one of the best, if not the best. So either we are an exception or maybe the issue is one of "being used to" rather than being educated? You know, urbanites are used to immigrants that they cant remember the good times....

Indeed, economic arguments against immigration in the US are even less supported (since the US has somewhat less of a nanny state syndrome), but that doesn't mean they aren't made.

To people who oppose immigration, they will generally use any excuse, but I believe the main reason is good old primate xenophobia.
In my opinion they are mis-diagnosing the problem. Europe suffers from maturing, if not ailing, welfare states. These need reform urgently.

In my opinion they are mis-diagnosing the problem. Europe suffers from maturing, if not ailing, welfare states. These need reform urgently.

Now we're on the same page.

Though of course when I think of "reform" in this case I generally think of "elimination." Free the market! :)

Ah yes, the notion that ignorant/poor people having the "bad" views...

I never said bad, I said ill informed. Remember kids, there are no stupid view points, only stupid people.

The newspaper with by far the highest circulation in the UK is the Sun and it's a rag, yet it moulds the view of a huge portion of the population.

So either we are an exception or maybe the issue is one of "being used to" rather than being educated? You know, urbanites are being used to immigrants that they cant remember the good times....

Or maybe they are exposed more so they see that immigrants aren't the evil monsters you seem to want to portray them as.

I never said bad, I said ill informed. Remember kids, there are no stupid view points, only stupid people.

The newspaper with by far the highest circulation in the UK is the Sun and it's a rag, yet it moulds the view of a huge portion of the population.



Or maybe they are exposed more so they see that immigrants aren't the evil monsters you seem to want to portray them as.

I portray them as evil monsters?

Now we're on the same page.

Though of course when I think of "reform" in this case I generally think of "elimination." Free the market! :)
That would come as a shock to Europe. I am for changing it along the lines of Hayek's propositions and with a dose of Swiss federalism...immigration would rest more in the hands of individual citizens then, perhaps even becoming a cost they must bear, yet it would divest them of any prejudicial reasons for opposing immigration...the risk of economic loss would be clearer if they chose to be against it.

I portray them as evil monsters?

I've been following your threads since you started posting as Ny Nordland and am well aware of your views on immigration.

I dont really know what to say except . . . Wow.
"Wow" as in "What an awesome argument, I'm totally convinced!", or "wow" as in "You have got that so unbelievably wrong that I can't even be bothered to refute it."?

Not quite. The Nazis were not the West at the time...
But the Nazis saw themselves as representatives and protectors of the West. Yes, the condemned liberalism and the sort of anglo-american world view, but they condemned it not as something completely foreign to them...but as a sort of weak-kneed, cowardly, head-in-the-sand sort of solution to the problems allegedly facing European civilisation.

So that man predicted the end of West in early 20th century but West is still here hence all such predictions are incorrect? Is that what you mean?
No, what I mean is that we've gone through this whole thing before, at the end of which stood some self-proclaimed saviour and protector of the West against the foreign hordes.

This is different...this is a threat from inside...from people you are trying to include into your nations.
Don't try and tell me these guys weren't from the inside!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/80/Baaderlogo.jpg

Just because terrorism has now reached yet another continent it doesn't mean that the European states haven't had to deal with terrorism, be it from the inside or outside. Quite the contrary I'd say. And we don't want to talk about IRA funding, now do we? So there. Europe will prevail, like we always do. :p

...Is it just me, or did anyone flash on the original Star Trek episode, 'The Enemy Within' when they saw the thread title?
And of course, we all remember how Jim Kirk solved that one, right kids?
Hehe, true. Lot's of convincing talk - and a transporter which we... still... don't have. Damn! The solution was so near already. :mad:

Anyway, our public tv stations broadcast 20-year-old news shows - and the amazing thing is: The topics, news, and headlines pretty much stay the same. Like nothing has changed in the last 20 years. :(

"Wow" as in "What an awesome argument, I'm totally convinced!", or "wow" as in "You have got that so unbelievably wrong that I can't even be bothered to refute it."?
Like, the first but I dont really know how to reply to and break down what you said.

Don't try and tell me these guys weren't from the inside!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/80/Baaderlogo.jpg

Just because terrorism has now reached yet another continent it doesn't mean that the European states haven't had to deal with terrorism, be it from the inside or outside. Quite the contrary I'd say. And we don't want to talk about IRA funding, now do we? So there. Europe will prevail, like we always do. :p


Hehe, true. Lot's of convincing talk - and a transporter which we... still... don't have. Damn! The solution was so near already. :mad:

Anyway, our public tv stations broadcast 20-year-old news shows - and the amazing thing is: The topics, news, and headlines pretty much stay the same. Like nothing has changed in the last 20 years. :(
To me the difference is that European states are now trying to embrace the people who are terrorists and/or destroying their societies.

For ex; Anti-immigrant Frp is the #1 party in Norway and Norway has the 2nd highest GDP per capita in Europe (and in the world) after Luxembourg. Education system is also one of the best, if not the best. So either we are an exception or maybe the issue is one of "being used to" rather than being educated? You know, urbanites are used to immigrants that they cant remember the good times....

That's actually a very interesting point there. It's much the same in Germany, you'll find the lowest level of tolerance and the biggest fears regarding foreigners in rural areas, not in urban areas. You will also find more people regarding immigration as a threat in East Germany and less in West Germany.
Now, if you compare the number of immigrants and non-natives in those areas, you'll find that there are almost none living in rural areas, the overwhelming majority is in fact living in urban areas. Also, the numbers of immigrants in East Germany is but a tiny fraction of the number in West Germany.

The conclusion seems to be that the people who are most frightened and have the most objections are the ones who have had little to no contact with the object of their fear, ever.
Strange workings of the human psyche...

To me the difference is that European states are now trying to embrace the people who are terrorists and/or destroying their societies.

Wrong. Muslim communties are not exactly "embraced" in Europe, in fact they are barely tolerated in many cases. Sad, but fact.
So to claim that Europe is welcoming Muslim terrorists with open arms is not only uninformed, it's a rather poor attempt of swaying emotions.

Do you honestly think the IRA didn't have sympathisers? Do you think the ETA is not "embraced" by certain parts of the population? Do you think the actions of the RAF were not cheered by a number of people?

Wrong. Muslim communties are not exactly "embraced" in Europe, in fact they are barely tolerated in many cases. Sad, but fact.
So to claim that Europe is welcoming Muslim terrorists with open arms is not only uninformed, it's a rather poor attempt of swaying emotions.

Do you honestly think the IRA didn't have sympathisers? Do you think the ETA is not "embraced" by certain parts of the population? Do you think the actions of the RAF were not cheered by a number of people?


I rather think we know who sympathises with muslim terrorists, or IRA terrorists, or RAF terrorists.

And I think it is time we play hardball with those line up at the wrong side of the field.

The old west German Berufsverbot was a good step, but we need to take this further.

I rather think we know who sympathises with muslim terrorists, or IRA terrorists, or RAF terrorists.

And I think it is time we play hardball with those line up at the wrong side of the field.

The old west German Berufsverbot was a good step, but we need to take this further.

You're suggesting that isolating them and giving them more spare time would actually solve anything???

You're suggesting that isolating them and giving them more spare time would actually solve anything???


Isolating as in cutting them off from ANY possible form of communication + consigning them to some good old fashioned french Corvee?

Sounds good to me.

You may wish to rehabilitate RAF supporters - but I think we're being already tolerant enough when we allow them to stay alive.

I said 'tolerant enough'. I did not say 'too much tolerant'.

Am I the only one who finds BogMarsh's posts incoherent? Please re-state your points.

To me the difference is that European states are now trying to embrace the people who are terrorists and/or destroying their societies.
No we aren't. Simple as that.

The conclusion seems to be that the people who are most frightened and have the most objections are the ones who have had little to no contact with the object of their fear, ever.
Strange workings of the human psyche...
Fear of the unknown, the oldest of all institutions.

Isolating as in cutting them off from ANY possible form of communication + consigning them to some good old fashioned french Corvee?

Sounds good to me.

You may wish to rehabilitate RAF supporters - but I think we're being already tolerant enough when we allow them to stay alive.

I said 'tolerant enough'. I did not say 'too much tolerant'.

YODA : Eveything. Fear is the path to the dark side... fear leads to anger... anger leads to hate.. hate leads to suffering.

So cutting them off so they hate the west even more leading to suffering in the future. Yep really would work:rolleyes:

Hmmm...So I picked this article out of one of DK's posts, and after reading it, I was amazed, impressed, and awed by it. Therefore, I felt the need to start a thread on it.
It is interesting, that countries like Sweden and Switzerland, famously, or notoriously nuetral countries, have became, what seems like, safe havens for terrorists.
It also interests me, that it seems countries like Denmark and Holland, have became increasingly aware of the threat Islam poses to Europe. They have became alert. After their soceitys suffered at the hands of Muslim extremists (and non extremists...those were normal [non terrorist muslims protesting and burning due to the Danish cartoons)Holland and Denmark have raised the level of threat-from-terrorism significantly. What also interests me, is that the Swizterland, long isolated from the geo-political conflicts of our world has been infected with the cess that is international terrorism. And finally, what also interests me, is that Sweden, after having its share of problems, fails to recognize that is has problems and hasnt acted anywhere near the level that Denmark, Holland and Switzerland have. Why is this? Is it because Holland, Denmark and Switzerland have relativly conservative governments? I dont know.

One thing is for sure, ladies and gentlemen, a change in policy is in our midst, and I intend to cover and support, every aspect of it.


. . . Discuss . . .:)

You're right: You don't know. Switzerland may have a conservative government, but Denmark and Holland are as liberal as it gets.

As for your Bush-ish fearmongering. Nobody falls for that (unless, of course, those mentally-equivalent-to-cabbage yanks who like to get their info from Fox "news" fair&balanced).
Go munch on a hamburger or something.

YODA : Eveything. Fear is the path to the dark side... fear leads to anger... anger leads to hate.. hate leads to suffering.

So cutting them off so they hate the west even more leading to suffering in the future. Yep really would work:rolleyes:
There's always something very worrying when someone quotes a fictional character as fact.

It's not real, I'm afraid, and you will never be a Jedi.

Isolating as in cutting them off from ANY possible form of communication + consigning them to some good old fashioned french Corvee?

Sounds good to me.

You may wish to rehabilitate RAF supporters - but I think we're being already tolerant enough when we allow them to stay alive.

I said 'tolerant enough'. I did not say 'too much tolerant'.

Most former RAF supporters are perfectly integrated and productive members of German society. There are an odd few who aren't, but they generally don't pose a threat either. Most of the active terrorists are either in prison or dead today.

There should be no tolerance towards terrorists, but there should be open chanels for communication to people who agree with them for whatever reason. Isolating them will only make them more dangerous.

There's always something very worrying when someone quotes a fictional character as fact.

It's not real, I'm afraid, and you will never be a Jedi.

I won't?:(

Anyway the point of that quote that it applies to real life.

There's always something very worrying when someone quotes a fictional character as fact.

It's not real, I'm afraid, and you will never be a Jedi.

The only sad thing about this is when the poster doesn't realise he is in fact quoting the Buddah, although through the words of Yoda ;)

It's a very real statement, you need to confront your fears before you confront the world. But you're right, neither of us will ever be a Jedi.

The only sad thing about this is when the poster doesn't realise he is in fact quoting the Buddah, although through the words of Yoda ;)
I would have thought that someone with an anti-religion quote in their sig would see no problem with the reference to a fictional character, even if it is a different one.

I would have thought that someone with an anti-religion quote in their sig would see no problem with the reference to a fictional character, even if it is a different one.

*shrugs
I don't. I'm just careful about quoting the correct person. And I would think that someone who calls himself Philosophy would understand that most religions have some philosophical aspect to them apart from their spiritual claims ;)

*shrugs
I don't. I'm just careful about quoting the correct person. And I would think that someone who calls himself Philosophy would understand that most religions have some philosophical aspect to them apart from their spiritual claims ;)
Look again at my name. ;)

Very topical:
Canada's multiculturalism a threat or grace? (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/EB0B32A9-C740-43FF-9BDB-054E6F38F5DA.htm)
...But the sharpest criticism came from Americans who see Canada’s policy of multiculturalism and acceptance of diversity as the root of the problem.

This outlook was summed up in an article printed in the LA Times recently under the headline: "The price of 'nice' for Canada." The sub-heading read: "Our northern neighbour thinks that being all multicultural and sucking up to the United Nations will keep the terrorists away. Think again."

The basic premise was that Canada’s policy of respecting diversity in our society encourages "Islamic radicalism", and that Canada is deluded if it thinks that being “nice” will appease terrorists and Islamists...

[...]

...At least the tactical lies about weapons of mass destruction, once proven false, could be quickly disowned and buried by an American administration when they ceased to serve any useful purpose.

My fear is that the crucial issues have now been manipulated to such an extent that people may actually begin to believe that the values on which ostensibly liberal democratic societies are constructed – the acceptance of diversity and openness to alternative conceptions of citizenship and community – are the real catalyst for extremism.

The risks of allowing this mentality to flourish are too obvious to ignore.

Especially at this critical time, Canada needs to stand up for the values that set it apart from America. Multiculturalism and the acceptance of diversity is not the problem. But unless Canadians defend their social policies by living them out every day, in direct defiance of people who blame multiculturalism for the current problems, there may soon be nothing left to champion.

http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/happy051.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org) http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/happy051.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org) http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/happy051.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org) http://www.freesmileys.org/emo/happy051.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)
Don't you have some Tungsten to sell to Germany?:p

A little off topic but..

I'm proud of you Europeans, of all Nations, walks of lives, religions and ideologies :)

You are showing you live without fear, you are free men :)

:fluffle:

Wesa the best!

A little off topic but..

I'm proud of you Europeans, of all Nations, walks of lives, religions and ideologies :)

You are showing you live without fear, you are free men :)

:fluffle:

Wesa the best!

Free men and women :p ;)

Oh, and kids. I guess.

Very topical:
Canada's multiculturalism a threat or grace? (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/EB0B32A9-C740-43FF-9BDB-054E6F38F5DA.htm)

If anyone is interested in multiculturalism in Canada (I'm sure the Canadians themselves would have an opinion) or the academic side, people should look at Will Kymlicka in particular.

Very topical:
Canada's multiculturalism a threat or grace? (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/EB0B32A9-C740-43FF-9BDB-054E6F38F5DA.htm)
Answer = a grace!!

I totally agree with this statement from the article:

Especially at this critical time, Canada needs to stand up for the values that set it apart from America. Multiculturalism and the acceptance of diversity is not the problem. But unless Canadians defend their social policies by living them out every day, in direct defiance of people who blame multiculturalism for the current problems, there may soon be nothing left to champion.

Most former RAF supporters are perfectly integrated and productive members of German society. There are an odd few who aren't, but they generally don't pose a threat either. Most of the active terrorists are either in prison or dead today.

There should be no tolerance towards terrorists, but there should be open chanels for communication to people who agree with them for whatever reason. Isolating them will only make them more dangerous.


Listen, how dangerous can anyone who is COMPLETELY sectioned off and held COMPLETELY excommunicado still form a threat?

To save ourselves a tangent discussion: I work quite a lot with ex-offenders wh are rehabilitating ( supposedly or real ), and in my humble experience, even the best of rehab-programs have failure-rates of over 50%. ( 80% failure is pretty much the batting average - and we see the 50% with people who are looking for reform from their own hearts in rather selective therapies. )

I don't CARE wether former RAF supporters become part of society.
I want them OUT of society, out for good, and no second chances.

( I'll save the Second Chances for ex-druggies etc. )

Listen, how dangerous can anyone be who is COMPLETELY sectioned off and held COMPLETELY excommunicado still form a threat?

Out of curiosity, where would such dangerous people be kept then?

Out of curiosity, where would such dangerous people be kept then?


Saint Luke, or Bridewell, or Dartmoor.

Saint Luke, or Bridewell, or Dartmoor.

Damn, and I was thinking north Yorkshire ;)

Damn, and I was thinking north Yorkshire ;)


I'm sure I mentioned at least one place IN the North Riding.

Meanwhile, to quote the 'honourable' Dick Cheny: Go fuck yourself.

I'm sure I mentioned at least one place IN the North Riding.

Meanwhile, to quote the 'honourable' Dick Cheny: Go fuck yourself.

Wow, feeling a little touchy today are we?

Wow, feeling a little touchy today are we?


That is putting it midly.
If I'd my druthers, sarcasm would be a criminal offense.
It's one of the side effects of Britain, I suppose.
Yesterday I saw a man getting 4 months for what was essential aggravated cussing.
And I must say I agree with his Worship.

That is putting it midly.
If I'd my druthers, sarcasm would be a criminal offense.
It's one of the side effects of Britain, I suppose.
Yesterday I saw a man getting 4 months for what was essential aggravated cussing.
And I must say I agree with his Worship.

If you banned sarcasm, I'd have to emigrate...its virtually my only method of humour...

That said, i'm planning to emigrate anyhow, so just wait until I've gone will you ;)

You're right: You don't know. Switzerland may have a conservative government, but Denmark and Holland are as liberal as it gets.

As for your Bush-ish fearmongering. Nobody falls for that (unless, of course, those mentally-equivalent-to-cabbage yanks who like to get their info from Fox "news" fair&balanced).
Go munch on a hamburger or something.
Actually you're wrong...and dont talk to me about my news sources if you cant even get your European governments right.

Christen-Democratisch Appèl is the largest party in Holland right now, and it is right wing. It is joined in coalition by the Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie which is also right wing.

As for Denmark, Venstre, a right wing party is the largest party, but, however, the anti-immigrant right wing party whos idealogy Wiki describes as "Populist-nationalism, Populist-conservatism", Dansk Folkeparti, is in third place.

So your calls of me not knowing what I'm talking about are wrong. Go munch on some Kraut or something.:rolleyes:

Listen, how dangerous can anyone who is COMPLETELY sectioned off and held COMPLETELY excommunicado still form a threat?

To save ourselves a tangent discussion: I work quite a lot with ex-offenders wh are rehabilitating ( supposedly or real ), and in my humble experience, even the best of rehab-programs have failure-rates of over 50%. ( 80% failure is pretty much the batting average - and we see the 50% with people who are looking for reform from their own hearts in rather selective therapies. )

I don't CARE wether former RAF supporters become part of society.
I want them OUT of society, out for good, and no second chances.

( I'll save the Second Chances for ex-druggies etc. )

I'm not talking about rehabs. I'm talking about ordinary people who had sympathies with the RAF, and possibly offered some form of support at some point or another.
I'm not talking about the terrorists themselves. Those are either locked up or dead right now.

If you banned sarcasm, I'd have to emigrate...its virtually my only method of humour...

That said, i'm planning to emigrate anyhow, so just wait until I've gone will you ;)


*thinks hard*

*fidgets*

Deal.

I'm not talking about rehabs. I'm talking about ordinary people who had sympathies with the RAF, and possibly offered some form of support at some point or another.
I'm not talking about the terrorists themselves. Those are either locked up or dead right now.


*shrug* I don't consider anyone who has the slightest sympathy for overthrowing the democratic process ( i.e. the Diktat of the Majority ( Wilheminian-style german on purpose) ) by force to be decent folks.

'Ordinary' doesn't cut it as a license to partake within a Free and Democratic Society.
'Decent' does.

A Hippy who uses polite language, doesn't cuss, and steps up for old ladies on the bus, counts as 'decent'.
No matter how gay he might be, no matter how odd his apparellel.

Supporting 'Armed Struggle' within your own society, no matter how immaculate your dress, no matter how faithful a churchgoer you are, does NOT count as 'decent'.

First, let me just say rofl at the OP, and then allow me to direct him to the history of Christianity in Europe. You see Islands, all religion is opposed to all that is ethical and reasonable in this world, not just Islam.

First, let me just say rofl at the OP, and then allow me to direct him to the history of Christianity in Europe. You see Islands, all religion is opposed to all that is ethical and reasonable in this world, not just Islam.


YEEHAW! Following my little run in with the mods last week, I'm sure that actually counts as flaming.

*shrug* I don't consider anyone who has the slightest sympathy for overthrowing the democratic process ( i.e. the Diktat of the Majority ( Wilheminian-style german on purpose) ) by force to be decent folks.

'Ordinary' doesn't cut it as a license to partake within a Free and Democratic Society.
'Decent' does.

A Hippy who uses polite language, doesn't cuss, and steps up for old ladies on the bus, counts as 'decent'.
No matter how gay he might be, no matter how odd his apparellel.

Supporting 'Armed Struggle' within your own society, no matter how immaculate your dress, no matter how faithful a churchgoer you are, does NOT count as 'decent'.

I never talked about decent people, either.
People have a right to their opinion, even if it disagrees with the current form of government. Otherwise, you'd probably have to lock up the Bayerische Koenigspartei, a bunch of old nostalgics who lobby for the reinstitution of the Bavarian royal family. Strictly speaking, it's a similar goal, a complete change of government.
But their goals aren't the problem, the methods by which they hope to achieve those goals are. If those bearded grandpas from Bavaria flew a plane into the Brandenburg gate, I would treat them as criminals. If my grandfather condoned their actions because Bavaria has to be free again at last, I wouldn't regard him as a criminal. If he gave money to an organisation that possibly might help fund those Bavarian freedom fighters, I still wouldn't regard him as criminal.

It's much the same with Muslim fundamentalists. The terrorists are criminals, people who agree with their actions aren't.

And neither ordinariness nor decency are criteria for partaking in a free and democratic process. That's simply a question of age, nothing more.

First, let me just say rofl at the OP, and then allow me to direct him to the history of Christianity in Europe. You see Islands, all religion is opposed to all that is ethical and reasonable in this world, not just Islam.
I am familiar with European History..(I just passed the AP test in that class), and I know that what happend in history with Christianity doesnt matter right now, Europe is secular. Islam is on the rise, Christianity AINT.

Thats why I'm focussing on Islam.

If those bearded grandpas from Bavaria flew a plane into the Brandenburg gate, I would treat them as criminals. If my grandfather condoned their actions because Bavaria has to be free again at last, I wouldn't regard him as a criminal. If he gave money to an organisation that possibly might help fund those Bavarian freedom fighters, I still wouldn't regard him as criminal.If I was a German, I would.

I never talked about decent people, either.
People have a right to their opinion, even if it disagrees with the current form of government. Otherwise, you'd probably have to lock up the Bayerische Koenigspartei, a bunch of old nostalgics who lobby for the reinstitution of the Bavarian royal family. Strictly speaking, it's a similar goal, a complete change of government.
But their goals aren't the problem, the methods by which they hope to achieve those goals are. If those bearded grandpas from Bavaria flew a plane into the Brandenburg gate, I would treat them as criminals. If my grandfather condoned their actions because Bavaria has to be free again at last, I wouldn't regard him as a criminal. If he gave money to an organisation that possibly might help fund those Bavarian freedom fighters, I still wouldn't regard him as criminal.

It's much the same with Muslim fundamentalists. The terrorists are criminals, people who agree with their actions aren't.

And neither ordinariness nor decency are criteria for partaking in a free and democratic process. That's simply a question of age, nothing more.

To paraphrase yourself, it's the method.

The crime is not to give a dollar to the RAF, the crime is to support any other standard than the Democratic Process.
The democratic version of Lese Majeste, the Democratic Process being the Majeste within Democracy.


Your point is ( I think ) that you can't (mis)treat people for the thoughts in their heads.
I must politely disagree: I think we can, and we should.

If I was a German, I would.

Well, I am German and I wouldn't. He has a right to his opinion. And as long as there are no proven links between said organisation and any criminal activity, why would I regard him as a criminal for giving them money?

Innocent until proven guilty.

To paraphrase yourself, it's the method.

The crime is not to give a dollar to the RAF, the crime is to support any other standard than the Democratic Process.
The democratic version of Lese Majeste, the Democratic Process being the Majeste within Democracy.


Your point is ( I think ) that you can't (mis)treat people for the thoughts in their heads.
I must politely disagree: I think we can, and we should.

Well, that's your opinion. But in that case, you can hardly continue using the words "free" and "democratic".

To me the difference is that European states are now trying to embrace the people who are terrorists and/or destroying their societies.
We are? Huh. First time ever that I heard that uttered!

I don't think we're embracing those who want to destroy our society. That would hardly make any sense, nor are we that stupid.

If you're hinting towards the integration debate - well, I say it's a lot better to try to include as many of those living in one place into society than shunning those the majority tends to disagree with. That would be the isolationist approach someone has favored [Berufsverbot etc.] - don't think that would improve matters; au contraire!

We are? Huh. First time ever that I heard that uttered!

I don't think we're embracing those who want to destroy our society. That would hardly make any sense, nor are we that stupid.

If you're hinting towards the integration debate - well, I say it's a lot better to try to include as many of those living in one place into society than shunning those the majority tends to disagree with. That would be the isolationist approach someone has favored [Berufsverbot etc.] - don't think that would improve matters; au contraire!
Well then we are going to disagree, because I have a problem with todays multicultural soceities. Bluntly put, I think they have failed.

We need to revert to how our soceities used to be, Melting Pots...not 'salad bowls'.

This is for America and Europe both.

Well, that's your opinion. But in that case, you can hardly continue using the words "free" and "democratic".


3 words:
Free - Democratic - Society.

I think you're missing the 3rd one.
There's folks we cant have within society.

3 words:
Free - Democratic - Society.

I think you're missing the 3rd one.
There's folks we cant have within society.

I think you are refering to criminals, people who are temporarily or permanently removed from society for physically harming others.

I think you are refering to criminals, people who are temporarily or permanently removed from society for physically harming others.


I must say I've always missed the point about physical.
You can utterly destroy a person just as much by spiritual or psychological means.

Limiting the idea of crime to physical is a form of reductionism I cannot endorse.

I must say I've always missed the point about physical.
You can utterly destroy a person just as much by spiritual or psychological means.

Limiting the idea of crime to physical is a form of reductionism I cannot endorse.

Innocent until proven guilty. It's possible to prove that physical harm was done and even by whom. Spiritual or psychological is almost impossible to prove.

We are? Huh. First time ever that I heard that uttered!

I don't think we're embracing those who want to destroy our society. That would hardly make any sense, nor are we that stupid.

If you're hinting towards the integration debate - well, I say it's a lot better to try to include as many of those living in one place into society than shunning those the majority tends to disagree with. That would be the isolationist approach someone has favored [Berufsverbot etc.] - don't think that would improve matters; au contraire!

If you don't have a flag on your t-shirt and your heart isn't racing from fear after every news program you watch, then you're not patriotic enough for the Americans. To them you've given in to the "terrorists" (whoever those people are).

Innocent until proven guilty. It's possible to prove that physical harm was done and even by whom. Spiritual or psychological is almost impossible to prove.

Yeah, well, tell that to the chap who got 4 months for verbal abuse yesterday.

If you don't have a flag on your t-shirt and your heart isn't racing from fear after every news program you watch, then you're not patriotic enough for the Americans. To them you've given in to the "terrorists" (whoever those people are).

Oh, we can do better 'n that.

If you get connected to a polygraph, and your body doesn't go into happymode when listening to 'God Bless the USA' http://users.1st.net/teddi/index30.htm then I guess we got another winner of a free vacation in glorious Gitmo on Cuba, dude ;)

*laughs at the contemptible WangWee*

I'm proud to be an American
where at least I know I'm free,
And I won't forget the men who died
who gave that right to me,
And I gladly stand up next to you
and defend her still today,
'Cause there ain't no doubt I love this land
God Bless the U.S.A.

Long live the polygraph - we CAN measure your emotions.

If you don't have a flag on your t-shirt and your heart isn't racing from fear after every news program you watch, then you're not patriotic enough for the Americans. To them you've given in to the "terrorists" (whoever those people are).


And yer damn right! We hate them damn Commies!! They're gay n' they're democrats n' I hate em and Bush is a great man and I love Fox news! Say... Where'd that bucket of chicken go...

Yeah, well, tell that to the chap who got 4 months for verbal abuse yesterday.

I didn't say it was impossible to prove, but very hard to prove. That's why you don't see it in court as often as cases of physical harm.

I didn't say it was impossible to prove, but very hard to prove. That's why you don't see it in court as often as cases of physical harm.

2 witnesses. Easy as ABC these days.

Well then we are going to disagree, because I have a problem with todays multicultural soceities. Bluntly put, I think they have failed.

We need to revert to how our soceities used to be, Melting Pots...not 'salad bowls'.

This is for America and Europe both.
There's never been a melting pot.
How have the failed? I think it's wonderful. Adds variety.

2 witnesses. Easy as ABC these days.

Sorry to ask this... but what point are you trying to make right now?

Sorry to ask this... but what point are you trying to make right now?


For physical harm to be proven, you tend to need a doc.

For PsyHarm, any 2 guys on the street will do..

If you don't have a flag on your t-shirt and your heart isn't racing from fear after every news program you watch, then you're not patriotic enough for the Americans. To them you've given in to the "terrorists" (whoever those people are).
Ah, you again...conviently missed my response eh?

Thats ok, here it is again.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11435111&postcount=193

There's never been a melting pot.
How have the failed? I think it's wonderful. Adds variety.
America was a melting pot...until very recently.

Variety is good in art, in cooking, in eating habits, but not in soceity.

America was a melting pot...until very recently.

Variety is good in art, in cooking, in eating habits, but not in soceity.

Variety is fine, but like in music, you need orchestration, and careful use of dissonants.

Actually you're wrong...and dont talk to me about my news sources if you cant even get your European governments right.

Christen-Democratisch Appèl is the largest party in Holland right now, and it is right wing. It is joined in coalition by the Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie which is also right wing.

As for Denmark, Venstre, a right wing party is the largest party, but, however, the anti-immigrant right wing party whos idealogy Wiki describes as "Populist-nationalism, Populist-conservatism", Dansk Folkeparti, is in third place.

So your calls of me not knowing what I'm talking about are wrong. Go munch on some Kraut or something.:rolleyes:

Venstre are "right wing" by danish standards which means it's still "communist-terrorist" by USA standards. And they've got functioning healthcare, high taxes...etc etc etc.
As for Holland, they've legalized pot, prostitution and squatting while having social services, healthcare and all the other stuff you guys don't have. They're still light years to the left of you guys.
You see, it's not all about political parties. It's about the system.

You still know nothing. Off you go and shoot at highway signs or something :rolleyes:

Venstre are "right wing" by danish standards which means it's still "communist-terrorist" by USA standards. And they've got functioning healthcare, high taxes...etc etc etc.
As for Holland, they've legalized pot, prostitution and squatting while having social services, healthcare and all the other stuff you guys don't have. They're still light years to the left of you guys.
You see, it's not all about political parties. It's about the system.

You still know nothing. Off you go and shoot at highway signs or something :rolleyes:
Oh God..still with your toolish trolling. Ok, then. Let me further prove you wrong.

advocates an extensive reform of the Danish welfare state, along classical liberal lines, i.e. lower taxes, less government interference in corporate and individual matters, etc.

Also, the Venstre party "currently governs in coalition with the Conservative People's Party, with support from the Danish People's Party."
Look at that.^
Also I see you didnt comment on the rising support of the Danish Peoples Party, in third place, which supporst the current government.
"The DPP have been surrounded by controversy ever since the party was originally founded. However, starting with a modest amount of votes, the party has grown at every single election since then."
Hmm..also this the coalition is trying to "achieve consensus on issues such as extensive reforms on matters of labor market, taxation, and the welfare system." Hmm...isnt that what you were talking about in your post? Their great high taxes and great welfare system that the right wing government is trying to REFORM?

Now, lets move on to Holland:

The CDA (Christian Democratic Appeal)...are the largest party in Holland.
The Dutch partys idealogy:
The party is fiscally conservative: the state deficit should be repaid in one generation, to cope with the effects of the aging population.
The party is socially conservative: the toleration of some drugs should come to an end, furthermore the practices of prostitution, abortion and euthanasia should be limited.
The party is a staunch proponent of European integration. The party however is not in favour of the accession of Turkey.
The party wants to make schools and hospitals more responsible for their own policy, instead of regulating everything by the government.

I think all of that counters your post. Have fun refuting this one.

Go dance to techno or something.:rolleyes:

snip

*Goes to get Popcorn*

America was a melting pot...until very recently.
What? Most immigrants continued the practices of the old country. It was their children and their children's children that became America, and it continues to be that way today. Nothing has changed.

Oh, we can do better 'n that.

If you get connected to a polygraph, and your body doesn't go into happymode when listening to 'God Bless the USA' http://users.1st.net/teddi/index30.htm then I guess we got another winner of a free vacation in glorious Gitmo on Cuba, dude ;)

*laughs at the contemptible WangWee*

Long live the polygraph - we CAN measure your emotions.

"I don't get all choked up about yellow ribbons and American flags. I see them as symbols, and I leave them to the symbol-minded." -- George Carlin

Your point is ( I think ) that you can't (mis)treat people for the thoughts in their heads.
I must politely disagree: I think we can, and we should.
Vote Boggie, for an Orwellian society!

Yeah, well, tell that to the chap who got 4 months for verbal abuse yesterday.
4 months is as bad as it gets for spiritual and psychological "destruction"?

2 witnesses. Easy as ABC these days.
Whereas physical harm can be proven with no witnesses.

And there are no witnesses to the unexpressed thoughts in peoples' heads.

Oh God..still with your toolish trolling. Ok, then. Let me further prove you wrong.



Also, the Venstre party "currently governs in coalition with the Conservative People's Party, with support from the Danish People's Party."
Look at that.^
Also I see you didnt comment on the rising support of the Danish Peoples Party, in third place, which supporst the current government.
"The DPP have been surrounded by controversy ever since the party was originally founded. However, starting with a modest amount of votes, the party has grown at every single election since then."
Hmm..also this the coalition is trying to "achieve consensus on issues such as extensive reforms on matters of labor market, taxation, and the welfare system." Hmm...isnt that what you were talking about in your post? Their great high taxes and great welfare system that the right wing government is trying to REFORM?

Now, lets move on to Holland:

The CDA (Christian Democratic Appeal)...are the largest party in Holland.
The Dutch partys idealogy:
The party is fiscally conservative: the state deficit should be repaid in one generation, to cope with the effects of the aging population.
The party is socially conservative: the toleration of some drugs should come to an end, furthermore the practices of prostitution, abortion and euthanasia should be limited.
The party is a staunch proponent of European integration. The party however is not in favour of the accession of Turkey.
The party wants to make schools and hospitals more responsible for their own policy, instead of regulating everything by the government.

I think all of that counters your post. Have fun refuting this one.

Go dance to techno or something.:rolleyes:

Sorry, I didn't know knowledge was "toolish trolling"...But I guess that's the way it goes in an anti-intellectualist society.

Well... I know what I'm talking about, I've lived in denmark, know the place and I'm a fluent speaker of danish (and I can read a bit of Dutch). But that doesn't prove anything...So I'll just let "Venstre" do the talking.
Have a look at the official Venstre site and see what they want:

http://www.venstre.dk/index.php?id=290

Use babelfish or something, i can't be bothered.
It's rightwing to any scandinavian all right, but to Americans this would be borderline communist treason (paying people for having children? Free daycare? Pensions? Conservation of nature? Supporting science? Working with immigrants? Support for students?). And not a single mention of "god". Though, they do mention not making taxes any higher and possibly even lowering them.
(Also, "Venstre" in danish, means "left" ;) )
And besides, they don't have as much support as you make them sound.

The Dansk Folkeparti, or the Danish People Party:
http://www.danskfolkeparti.dk/sw/frontend/show.asp?parent=4260&menu_parent=22669&layout=0

What's that? An anti-globalization rant on their official site? Scaninavian co-operation?

Pro-royal family? Conservation of nature? Government pension? etc etc etc.

Yes, they're anti-immigrant and pretty isolationist, but nowhere near what the USA calls "conservative".

Also notice that there are no "counter-terrorism" programs, military issues and such mentioned at all, except the DPP mentions that it's pro-NATO.

As for the Dutch:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1985456.stm

Check out the agendas. And remember that the word "conservative" does not mean the same thing in europe as it does in the USA. Legalizing prostitution, a paedophile political party and soft-drugs? Yeah, like that's going to happen in America any time soon :rolleyes:
Note that the CDA has been a big player in Dutch politics since the beginning of time. Support for them is nothing new. Why are they "conservative" by American standards all of a sudden?

The point I am making is that anything "conservative" in europe, apart from the nazi skinheads, would be labeled "communist" in the USA. There are some major differences in language and culture. Conservative in Europe is terrorist communist hippie in the USA. Get it?
Have you ever even been to either Denmark or the Nederlands?
Go shoot up a highschool or something.

Sorry, I didn't know knowledge was "toolish trolling"...But I guess that's the way it goes in an anti-intellectualist society.

Well... I know what I'm talking about, I've lived in denmark, know the place and I'm a fluent speaker of danish (and I can read a bit of Dutch). But that doesn't prove anything...So I'll just let "Venstre" do the talking.
Have a look at the official Venstre site and see what they want:

It's rightwing to any scandinavian all right, but to Americans this would be borderline communist treason (paying people for having children? Free daycare? Pensions? Conservation of nature? Supporting science? Working with immigrants? Support for students?). And not a single mention of "god". Though, they do mention not making taxes any higher and possibly even lowering them.
(Also, "Venstre" in danish, means "left" ;) )
And besides, they don't have as much support as you make them sound.

The Dansk Folkeparti, or the Danish People Party:
http://www.danskfolkeparti.dk/sw/frontend/show.asp?parent=4260&menu_parent=22669&layout=0

What's that? An anti-globalization rant on their official site? Scaninavian co-operation?

Pro-royal family? Conservation of nature? Government pension? etc etc etc.

Yes, they're anti-immigrant and pretty isolationist, but nowhere near what the USA calls "conservative".

Also notice that there are no "counter-terrorism" programs, military issues and such mentioned at all, except the DPP mentions that it's pro-NATO.

As for the Dutch:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1985456.stm

Check out the agendas. And remember that the word "conservative" does not mean the same thing in europe as it does in the USA. Legalizing prostitution, a paedophile political party and soft-drugs? Yeah, like that's going to happen in America any time soon :rolleyes:
Note that the CDA has been a big player in Dutch politics since the beginning of time. Support for them is nothing new. Why are they "conservative" by American standards all of a sudden?

The point I am making is that anything "conservative" in europe, apart from the nazi skinheads, would be labeled "communist" in the USA. There are some major differences in language and culture. Conservative in Europe is terrorist communist hippie in the USA. Get it?
Have you ever even been to either Denmark or the Nederlands?
Go shoot up a highschool or something.

Before I break down your post of incorrect statement and trollish anti-American insults...let me say this, I HAVE been to Denmark, very recently...maybe its changed a bit since you have lived there. Actually no, it HAS changed a bit since you've been there. It has gotten increasingly conservative and anti-immigrant.
It's rightwing to any scandinavian all right, but to Americans this would be borderline communist treason (paying people for having children? Free daycare? Pensions? Conservation of nature? Supporting science? Working with immigrants? Support for students?). And not a single mention of "god". Though, they do mention not making taxes any higher and possibly even lowering them.
Uh, no it wouldnt. Maybe they are paying for people to have kids because the birth rate in most of Europe is very low, and the birth rate of immigrants is very high? That has nothing to do with Liberal or Conservative, but with wanting to keep the status quo in Europe...and not have non-Europeans outnumber Europeans. Supporting Science? Wtf..Americans support science too, dont be a fool. NASA?! Space Station!? The moon?! As for working with immigrants they are trying to push assimilation into Danish soceity...that is a conservative idea in America...We want assimilation, the left wants us to just left minorities live in their own little Havanas, ect. Support for students...every political party says they support students.:rolleyes:. As for the lack of God....you can be right wing without being that religious, dont be ignorant. They talk about wanting to reform everything about the Scandinavian left, your welfare states, your taxes...ect. That is conservative.
(Also, "Venstre" in danish, means "left" ;) )
And besides, they don't have as much support as you make them sound. Venstre in Danish is Liberal...its the liberal party...European liberal is the American libertarian...except this group is slightly socially conservative. They are not left.
The Dansk Folkeparti, or the Danish People Party:
http://www.danskfolkeparti.dk/sw/frontend/show.asp?parent=4260&menu_parent=22669&layout=0

What's that? An anti-globalization rant on their official site? Scaninavian co-operation?

Pro-royal family? Conservation of nature? Government pension? etc etc etc.

Yes, they're anti-immigrant and pretty isolationist, but nowhere near what the USA calls "conservative".

Also notice that there are no "counter-terrorism" programs, military issues and such mentioned at all, except the DPP mentions that it's pro-NATO.
Conservative isnt pro-internationalism...its usually nationalist...so your first statement makes no sense.
Pro-Royal Family is Conservative. Conservative of nature is eco-friendly. Governments pension ....we have pension here too....that doesnt mean anything. Ect ect ect....that doesnt mean anything, provide more examples this post hasnt provided anything to counter my post.
DF is WAY more anti-immgrant and isolationist than America, your wrong.
As for the Dutch:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1985456.stm

Check out the agendas. And remember that the word "conservative" does not mean the same thing in europe as it does in the USA. Legalizing prostitution, a paedophile political party and soft-drugs? Yeah, like that's going to happen in America any time soon :rolleyes:
Note that the CDA has been a big player in Dutch politics since the beginning of time. Support for them is nothing new. Why are they "conservative" by American standards all of a sudden?
I did check out the agendas...thats what I posted last time. Your not replying to that. Like I said before, the CDA..the party with the most votes, wants to criminalize prostitution and soft drugs...and the paedophile party isnt a major party, nobody cares about it.
They are Conservative because they are a religious party that is economically conservative and socially right of center.
The point I am making is that anything "conservative" in europe, apart from the nazi skinheads, would be labeled "communist" in the USA. There are some major differences in language and culture. Conservative in Europe is terrorist communist hippie in the USA. Get it?
Have you ever even been to either Denmark or the Nederlands?
Go shoot up a highschool or something.
The point I have been making, is that your wrong and I have posted against it but you havnt countered my claims on an individual basis..which leads me to beleive that you're wrong. Nothing Conservative in Europe is communist to Americans...its just right of center..and not really right wing or far right. Conservative in Europe isnt terrorist communist hippie in America..what rock do you live under? I have been to Europe and Danmark, have you been to America? And go shoot up a school? Wtf is up with you, dude? So you're not only wrong on just about every issue you've countered on, your retarded and uninformed about America.:rolleyes:

Before I break down your post of incorrect statement and trollish anti-American insults...let me say this, I HAVE been to Denmark, very recently...maybe its changed a bit since you have lived there. Actually no, it HAS changed a bit since you've been there. It has gotten increasingly conservative and anti-immigrant.

Since last month? I don't think so.

Uh, no it wouldnt. Maybe they are paying for people to have kids because the birth rate in most of Europe is very low, and the birth rate of immigrants is very high? That has nothing to do with Liberal or Conservative, but with wanting to keep the status quo in Europe...and not have non-Europeans outnumber Europeans.

No, it's something a rightwing government could never do...You see, it's paid for by taxes.
http://www.barnets-abc.dk/%F8konomi/b%F8rnepenge.htm

Supporting Science? Wtf..Americans support science too, dont be a fool. NASA?! Space Station!? The moon?!

And lately, ID "theory" in schools, ban on stem-cell research, some seriously fucked up views on global warming, whaling, pollution and such.

As for working with immigrants they are trying to push assimilation into Danish soceity...that is a conservative idea in America...We want assimilation, the left wants us to just left minorities live in their own little Havanas, ect.

I thought the main idea was to keep them out?

Support for students...every political party says they support students.:rolleyes:.

Yes, but in denmark, students get money from the government to live on while they study. Again, paid for by tax money. And this with the "conservative" government in charge?

As for the lack of God....you can be right wing without being that religious, dont be ignorant. They talk about wanting to reform everything about the Scandinavian left, your welfare states, your taxes...ect. That is conservative.

In America, you can't. Can you find a single person in the American government who doesn't claim to be religious? Has your present government NEVER made decisions based on their religious beliefs?

Venstre in Danish is Liberal...its the liberal party...European liberal is the American libertarian...except this group is slightly socially conservative. They are not left.

Venstre, in the danish language, literally, means "left". If you say "venstre" to a dane, he or she will look to the left.

Conservative isnt pro-internationalism...its usually nationalist...so your first statement makes no sense.

Ah, and not "free market" ? Not "Mcdonalds"? I didn't know Conservative was anti- all that.

Pro-Royal Family is Conservative. Conservative of nature is eco-friendly. Governments pension ....we have pension here too....that doesnt mean anything. Ect ect ect....that doesnt mean anything, provide more examples this post hasnt provided anything to counter my post.

Pro-royal family is not necessarily conservative.

Eco-friendly is hardly a word you can use to describe American conservatives. I don't think I need to make a point here.

Pensions work differently in Scandinavia than they do in the USA. It's mandatory. You can pay more, but not less.

DF is WAY more anti-immgrant and isolationist than America, your wrong.

No it isn't. You're wrong. Does Denmark have troops on its borders?


I did check out the agendas...thats what I posted last time. Your not replying to that. Like I said before, the CDA..the party with the most votes, wants to criminalize prostitution and soft drugs...and the paedophile party isnt a major party, nobody cares about it.
They are Conservative because they are a religious party that is economically conservative and socially right of center.

One of the many things you don't seem to understand is that it is a part of a coalition government. You see, it's not a two-party system. It's the single biggest party in the coalition, but it does not have the majority of the votes.
That's why the soft drugs and prostitution haven't been banned.
That's how things work when you've got choices.

The point I have been making, is that your wrong and I have posted against it but you havnt countered my claims on an individual basis..which leads me to beleive that you're wrong. Nothing Conservative in Europe is communist to Americans...its just right of center..and not really right wing or far right. Conservative in Europe isnt terrorist communist hippie in America..what rock do you live under?

I live in Iceland. Our "conservative" party is in charge. We pay superhigh taxes (both income and corporate), have free healthcare, get dental-care refunds, functioning social security, mandatory pension, "prison in life" means 16 years, we have gun-control, low crime-rates, poverty is almost non-existant, there are no private schools, most of our government was anti-war, we pay extremely low fees for university and get support from the government while at school... The list goes on. Our system is nearly identical to the Danish one as it is based on it. If this sounds rightwing compared to America I'm the first male in the world to give birth to siamese twins.

I have been to Europe and Danmark, have you been to America? And go shoot up a school? Wtf is up with you, dude? So you're not only wrong on just about every issue you've countered on, your retarded and uninformed about America.:rolleyes:

I've been all over europe and lived in three countries for a long time. What's your point?
And no, I haven't been to America and I doubt I ever will. I'm pretty sure I know more about the USA than you do about europe. After all, how can't I? I've even met quite a few Americans: They were some of your glorious soldiers from your cold-war base in my country (which we'll be rid of at the end of the summer thank heavens). And you know what? Every American I ever met asked me the same question: "Where can I buy drugs?".

I'm suprised that this doom-crying nonsense has gotten 16 pages...

I'm suprised that this doom-crying nonsense has gotten 16 pages...

It's all down to an American thinking he knows better than a load of Europeans about the state of play in Europe. His arrogance is astounding.

It's all down to an American thinking he knows better than a load of Europeans about the state of play in Europe. His arrogance is astounding.

Hopefully it will fade with age, much like Acne.

Hopefully it will fade with age, much like Acne.

One would hope.

It's all down to an American thinking he knows better than a load of Europeans about the state of play in Europe. His arrogance is astounding.

Pretty much, yes.

All right. Wang Wee, you are clearly in the wrong here. You are using American standards to judge a European party...? That is an error.

As for Atlantian Isle's "arrogance," I say you do a nice job by countering it with your ill-founded stubborness. So very typical of many of you young Nords...so don't try taking the moral high ground.

Since last month? I don't think so.
Progressively.


No, it's something a rightwing government could never do...You see, it's paid for by taxes.
http://www.barnets-abc.dk/%F8konomi/b%F8rnepenge.htm
Right-wing governments frequently increase public spending on certain ends. Such as the military. Only minarchist ones specifically oppose most public spending, but even then they might promote pro-natal policies.


Yes, but in denmark, students get money from the government to live on while they study. Again, paid for by tax money. And this with the "conservative" government in charge?
No party would remove this immediately. Even in the US there is extensive government provision for higher education.


In America, you can't. Can you find a single person in the American government who doesn't claim to be religious? Has your present government NEVER made decisions based on their religious beliefs?
Utterly incorrect. The Libertarian Party and many capitalist Republicans are right-wing without necessarily being religious. They support social liberty as well as economic. Much like our liberal parties.

Ah, and not "free market" ? Not "Mcdonalds"? I didn't know Conservative was anti- all that.
Some Conservatives are traditionalists or protectionists, or both. It is sheer idiocy to think they all adhere to the same beliefs.


Pro-royal family is not necessarily conservative.
By definition, it is. You conserve the status quo. No true left-wing individual would support them.

Eco-friendly is hardly a word you can use to describe American conservatives. I don't think I need to make a point here.
Yet you can describe some Euro-conservatives as such.

Pensions work differently in Scandinavia than they do in the USA. It's mandatory. You can pay more, but not less.
My, how unfortunate...


One of the many things you don't seem to understand is that it is a part of a coalition government. You see, it's not a two-party system. It's the single biggest party in the coalition, but it does not have the majority of the votes.
That's why the soft drugs and prostitution haven't been banned.
That's how things work when you've got choices.
That doesn't mean it isn't conservative. It simply means the minority wields considerable power.


I live in Iceland. Our "conservative" party is in charge. We pay superhigh taxes (both income and corporate), have free healthcare, get dental-care refunds, functioning social security, mandatory pension, "prison in life" means 16 years, we have gun-control, low crime-rates, poverty is almost non-existant, there are no private schools, most of our government was anti-war, we pay extremely low fees for university and get support from the government while at school... The list goes on. Our system is nearly identical to the Danish one as it is based on it. If this sounds rightwing compared to America I'm the first male in the world to give birth to siamese twins.
It is, lamentably, a social democracy, much like Britain. That does not preclude conservative opinions from prevailing within. I wonder how long you will be able to finance such an extravagant welfare system...in fact, this is exactly why conservatism is on the rise in Europe. Nice touch with the sarcastic statement, if not utterly amateurish.


I've been all over europe and lived in three countries for a long time. What's your point?
And no, I haven't been to America and I doubt I ever will. I'm pretty sure I know more about the USA than you do about europe. After all, how can't I? I've even met quite a few Americans: They were some of your glorious soldiers from your cold-war base in my country (which we'll be rid of at the end of the summer thank heavens). And you know what? Every American I ever met asked me the same question: "Where can I buy drugs?".
I am sure, however, your knowledge on America pales by comparison to mine.

It's all down to an American thinking he knows better than a load of Europeans about the state of play in Europe. His arrogance is astounding.
Yet, paradoxically, European ignorance and the concomitant arrogance with regard to knowledge of US affairs is far greater...

Yet, paradoxically, European ignorance and the concomitant arrogance with regard to knowledge of US affairs is far greater...
I have yet to see a European poster treat a USian in the same manner as AI has treated many here.

And it is not a 'knowledge of US affairs'. VERY few show that attitude when dealing with internal American politics.

It is a knowledge of US actions internationally that inevitabley affect their own countries- even if they are thousands of miles away.

I have yet to see a European poster treat a USian in the same manner as AI has treated many here.

And it is not a 'knowledge of US affairs'. VERY few show that attitude when dealing with internal American politics.

It is a knowledge of US actions internationally that inevitabley affect their own countries- even if they are thousands of miles away.
Please, the stereotypes lavishly unleashed upon TAI by our little Icelandic friend here do not strike you as presumptuous arrogance?

Oh, and I live in Europe. I have heard the ignorant commentary spouted about regarding the US's internal and external politics. Very few Europeans have a precise knowledge of how the US works, as opposed to a very vague, muddled one.

Please, the stereotypes lavishly unleashed upon TAI by our little Icelandic friend here do not strike you as arrogance?
To be honest, I wasn't paying attention to either when the individual posts began to take up half of the thread window.


Oh, and I live in Europe. I have heard the ignorant commentary spouted about regarding the US's internal and external politics. Very few Europeans have a precise knowledge of how the US works, as opposed to a very vague, muddled one.

I know you do. I have yet to see a European poster on here, tell the Americans why they should or should not keep the Kansas Congressmen in power for another term, or why the tobacco farmers are anintengral part of the voting bloc blah blah blah.

When confronted, the response is not: "I know better than you because I read a book".

No one likes being told how to live their life by someone who lives far, far, far away. And that goes for both sides. I don't tell him how to live his life in Florida, I don't expect to be told how I should be living my life here because he doesn't agree with it.

I know you do. I have yet to see a European poster on here, tell the Americans why they should or should not keep the Kansas Congressmen in power for another term, or why the tobacco farmers are anintengral part of the voting bloc blah blah blah.

When confronted, the response is not: "I know better than you because I read a book".

No one likes being told how to live their life by someone who lives far, far, far away. And that goes for both sides. I don't tell him how to live his life in Florida, I don't expect to be told how I should be living my life here because he doesn't agree with it.
Not on here, no. Although I am sure there have been posters (like Europa Alpha) who do believe that they know better how to run the US than the Americans themselves...they simply go unnoticed usually. You must be pretty fortunate if you have not run into some of the extreme lefties in real life, who have very strong opinions on what the US should be like. European interventionism is not as ubiquitous as its American counterpart, but it nonetheless lurks around.

Not on here, no. Although I am sure there have been posters (like Europa Alpha) who do believe that they know better how to run the US than the Americans themselves...they simply go unnoticed usually. You must be pretty fortunate if you have not run into some of the extreme lefties in real life, who have very strong opinions on what the US should be like. European interventionism is not as ubiquitous as its American counterpart, but it nonetheless lurks around.
Oh, in REAL LIFE? Yes, sadly yes. I have come across those types of people.

Sadly their knowledge of the minute workings of the domestic American political machine stems from watching a programme on the 2000 Presidential election and hanging 'chads' in Florida.

I call those people:

Stupid. ;)

Oh, in REAL LIFE? Yes, sadly yes. I have come across those types of people.

Sadly their knowledge of the minute workings of the domestic American political machine stems from watching a programme on the 2000 Presidential election and hanging 'chads' in Florida.

I call those people:

Stupid. ;)
I'll concur. Usually these same individuals think that Michael Moore's word on the US is Gospel.

Although in AI's defence, he is pretty clued up on European affairs, something I can especially discern from our chats. His positions may be extreme at times, but rarely borne of ignorance.

Since last month? I don't think so.
Open your eyes:

"The cooperation with the Conservative-Liberal coalition government resulted in the implementation of some of their key demands, such as strong anti-immigration policies resulting in what has been described as Europe's strictest immigration laws. The new government enacted rules that forbade Danish citizens bringing a foreign spouse into the country unless both partners were aged 24 or over, passed a solvency test showing the Dane had not claimed social security for 12 months and had to lodge a bond of 55,241 kroner (about 9300 USD). [2] These new rules had the effect that while about 8,151 family reunification permits were granted in 2002, the number had fallen to 3,525 by 2005. [3] Some social benefits for refugees were also cut by 30% to 40% during their first seven years in the country."

Here is my favorite:

"The changes to Denmarks immigration laws, have drawn some criticism from the Swedish government, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the Council of Europe's human rights commissioner. In a response to the criticism from the Swedish government Pia Kjaersgaard said: "If they want to turn Stockholm, Gothenburg or Malmoe into a Scandinavian Beirut, with clan wars, honour killings and gang rapes, let them do it. We can always put a barrier on the Oeresund Bridge." [4]"

Denmark IS changing, whether you want to admit it or not.
No, it's something a rightwing government could never do...You see, it's paid for by taxes.
http://www.barnets-abc.dk/%F8konomi/b%F8rnepenge.htm

Right Wing governments HAVE taxes...NEWSFLASH! They just feel they need to be lower and placed on only the most important thing. Stoping non-Europeans from replacing Europeans IS a very important thing to Danes.

And lately, ID "theory" in schools, ban on stem-cell research, some seriously fucked up views on global warming, whaling, pollution and such.
I have been to school in three totally different states, in a religious and non-religious schools..and I have learned evolution. We havnt banned stem-cell research, and America does not have ONE view on global warming. Whaling? Isnt that illegal except for Eskimos? pollution? Look at Germany..in the heart of Europe before you look at us across the sea. "And such" doesnt count.

I thought the main idea was to keep them out?
Yes, but dont be stupid. You cant keep out people who are already in...you need to integrate those into your soceity AND THEN limit immigrant so no more come in. DUH!:rolleyes:

Yes, but in denmark, students get money from the government to live on while they study. Again, paid for by tax money. And this with the "conservative" government in charge?
Thats because Europe values education more than America does right now, regardless of politics.

In America, you can't. Can you find a single person in the American government who doesn't claim to be religious? Has your present government NEVER made decisions based on their religious beliefs?
Uh..yeah, there are tons of people in our government who are not religious...again, what rock do you live under??!! Yes our government has made decisions not based on beleif tons of times...in fact, most things the government does has nothing to do with religion...like the economy, or immigration, or taxes, or war, or diplomatic relations with North Korea..ect.

Venstre, in the danish language, literally, means "left". If you say "venstre" to a dane, he or she will look to the left.
Yes but in the sense of politics it means liberal...which is NOT the same thing as left in Europe, where this party is, only in America.

Ah, and not "free market" ? Not "Mcdonalds"? I didn't know Conservative was anti- all that.
Republcians and Democrats are both free-market in America. and I have no idea what McDonalds has to do with anything...:confused: Its a private company, nothing to do with our government.

Pro-royal family is not necessarily conservative.

Eco-friendly is hardly a word you can use to describe American conservatives. I don't think I need to make a point here.

Pensions work differently in Scandinavia than they do in the USA. It's mandatory. You can pay more, but not less.

Monarchist in any way is a Conservative tendancy.

As for eco-friendly, true..but as we are hardly describing American conservatives and we ARE describing Euro conservatives...its ok.

Whatever, I dont know enough about pensions to argue that with you, but I doubt you know about American pensions seeing as you've never been to the land your arguing about...and atleast I HAVE been to Scandinavia.

No it isn't. You're wrong. Does Denmark have troops on its borders?
Does America have troops on its borders? I'm almost positive we dont. And if I'm wrong and we do...it only recently happend but I dont think it happend.


One of the many things you don't seem to understand is that it is a part of a coalition government. You see, it's not a two-party system. It's the single biggest party in the coalition, but it does not have the majority of the votes.
That's why the soft drugs and prostitution haven't been banned.
That's how things work when you've got choices.
And one of the main things you dont understand is that the party listed the banning of those things in its stances...and recieved the majority of the votes. Which means the people liked their stances. Dont you see that?

I live in Iceland. Our "conservative" party is in charge. We pay superhigh taxes (both income and corporate), have free healthcare, get dental-care refunds, functioning social security, mandatory pension, "prison in life" means 16 years, we have gun-control, low crime-rates, poverty is almost non-existant, there are no private schools, most of our government was anti-war, we pay extremely low fees for university and get support from the government while at school... The list goes on. Our system is nearly identical to the Danish one as it is based on it. If this sounds rightwing compared to America I'm the first male in the world to give birth to siamese twins.
Yes, but your right wing government didnt institute those things, your left wing political parties did...so all of the above means nothing to your arguement.


I've been all over europe and lived in three countries for a long time. What's your point?
And no, I haven't been to America and I doubt I ever will. I'm pretty sure I know more about the USA than you do about europe. After all, how can't I? I've even met quite a few Americans: They were some of your glorious soldiers from your cold-war base in my country (which we'll be rid of at the end of the summer thank heavens). And you know what? Every American I ever met asked me the same question: "Where can I buy drugs?".
I'm pretty sure you dont know more about America than I do Europe..and atleast I've been to Europe, twice...you havnt even stepped foot on American soil yet you claim to know so much about us. I've met quite a few Europeans...so what? And by the way, while we are closing the base, we are still leaving some military in Keflavik.;) "On March 15th, 2006, the United States Department of State announced the closing of the NATO base breaching the treaty it has had with the republic of 64 years. [2] "Effective October 2006, the NATO base will be reduced to little more than a few 'submarine talkers', with U.S. forces withdrawing their four F-15s, their helicopter squadron and the vast majority (but not all;) )of their personnel.":) Looks like ya didnt get rid of us yet. And as for the drug thing? I can make the same stereotypes about Europeans all wanting to rave to techno, do ecstacy, be metrosexual, and act like pussys...but I wont, I'll be the bigger man and admit thats its not a true stereotype.:rolleyes:

Oh, in REAL LIFE? Yes, sadly yes. I have come across those types of people.

Sadly their knowledge of the minute workings of the domestic American political machine stems from watching a programme on the 2000 Presidential election and hanging 'chads' in Florida.
I call those people:

Stupid. ;)
That was stupid! Every one of those old Floridians involved in that should have to burn in the fires of hell. You have no idea, that hasnt lived itself down yet. I would like to punch everyone of those stupid Floridians who left a "hanging chad" in the face. ....pppftt...and they say Florida education is improving.:rolleyes:

To be honest, I wasn't paying attention to either when the individual posts began to take up half of the thread window.



I know you do. I have yet to see a European poster on here, tell the Americans why they should or should not keep the Kansas Congressmen in power for another term, or why the tobacco farmers are anintengral part of the voting bloc blah blah blah.

When confronted, the response is not: "I know better than you because I read a book".

No one likes being told how to live their life by someone who lives far, far, far away. And that goes for both sides. I don't tell him how to live his life in Florida, I don't expect to be told how I should be living my life here because he doesn't agree with it.
Honestly, maybe if you DID read those posts that too up half the page between WangWee and I, you would see that I am informed about European politics and I did base all my arguements on facts, votes, and political party agenda listed by the parties. I know I post alot of opinion in this forum, but what you are talking about here, what I posted and have been posting back and forth with my Icelandic buddy here is not opinion, it is fact.

It's all down to an American thinking he knows better than a load of Europeans about the state of play in Europe. His arrogance is astounding.

Hopefully it will fade with age, much like Acne.
Lucky for me, I dont have acne, and arrogance is often confused with Confidence.

Progressively.



Right-wing governments frequently increase public spending on certain ends. Such as the military. Only minarchist ones specifically oppose most public spending, but even then they might promote pro-natal policies.



No party would remove this immediately. Even in the US there is extensive government provision for higher education.


Utterly incorrect. The Libertarian Party and many capitalist Republicans are right-wing without necessarily being religious. They support social liberty as well as economic. Much like our liberal parties.

Some Conservatives are traditionalists or protectionists, or both. It is sheer idiocy to think they all adhere to the same beliefs.



By definition, it is. You conserve the status quo. No true left-wing individual would support them.

Yet you can describe some Euro-conservatives as such.


My, how unfortunate...



That doesn't mean it isn't conservative. It simply means the minority wields considerable power.


It is, lamentably, a social democracy, much like Britain. That does not preclude conservative opinions from prevailing within. I wonder how long you will be able to finance such an extravagant welfare system...in fact, this is exactly why conservatism is on the rise in Europe. Nice touch with the sarcastic statement, if not utterly amateurish.



I am sure, however, your knowledge on America pales by comparison to mine.
*claps*....Thanks for your support.
I am sure, however, your knowledge on America pales by comparison to mine.It does.:) You are not blinded by your opinions, he is.