NationStates Jolt Archive

Interesting article from NY Times. You should read it considering the fact that there are currently 15 to 20 million Muslims in EU. This is expected to double by 2025. (http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html). It is unlikely but if Turkey enters EU, there might be 120 million muslims (80+40) by 2025. This, of course, highly contrasts with declining native populations. Anyways:


By DAN BILEFSKY and IAN FISHER
Published: October 11, 2006

Correction Appended

BRUSSELS, Oct. 10 — Europe appears to be crossing an invisible line regarding its Muslim minorities: more people in the political mainstream are arguing that Islam cannot be reconciled with European values.

“You saw what happened with the pope,” said Patrick Gonman, 43, the owner of Raga, a funky wine bar in downtown Antwerp, 25 miles from here. “He said Islam is an aggressive religion. And the next day they kill a nun somewhere and make his point.

“Rationality is gone.”

Mr. Gonman is hardly an extremist. In fact, he organized a protest last week in which 20 bars and restaurants closed on the night when a far-right party with an anti-Muslim message held a rally nearby.

His worry is shared by centrists across Europe angry at terror attacks in the name of religion on a continent that has largely abandoned it, and disturbed that any criticism of Islam or Muslim immigration provokes threats of violence.

For years those who raised their voices were mostly on the far right. Now those normally seen as moderates — ordinary people as well as politicians — are asking whether once unquestioned values of tolerance and multiculturalism should have limits.

Former Foreign Secretary Jack Straw of Britain, a prominent Labor politician, seemed to sum up the moment when he wrote last week that he felt uncomfortable addressing women whose faces were covered with a veil. The veil, he wrote, is a “visible statement of separation and difference.”

When Pope Benedict XVI made the speech last month that included a quotation calling aspects of Islam “evil and inhuman,” it seemed to unleash such feelings. Muslims berated him for stigmatizing their culture, while non-Muslims applauded him for bravely speaking a hard truth.

The line between open criticism of another group or religion and bigotry can be a thin one, and many Muslims worry that it is being crossed more and more.

Whatever the motivations, “the reality is that views on both sides are becoming more extreme,” said Imam Wahid Pedersen, a prominent Dane who is a convert to Islam. “It has become politically correct to attack Islam, and this is making it hard for moderates on both sides to remain reasonable.” Mr. Pedersen fears that onetime moderates are baiting Muslims, the very people they say should integrate into Europe.

The worries about extremism are real. The Belgian far-right party, Vlaams Belang, took 20.5 percent of the vote in city elections last Sunday, five percentage points higher than in 2000. In Antwerp, its base, though, its performance improved barely, suggesting to some experts that its power might be peaking.

In Austria this month, right-wing parties also polled well, on a campaign promise that had rarely been made openly: that Austria should start to deport its immigrants. Vlaams Belang, too, has suggested “repatriation” for immigrants who do not made greater efforts to integrate.

The idea is unthinkable to mainstream leaders, but many Muslims still fear that the day — or at least a debate on the topic — may be a terror attack away.

“I think the time will come,” said Amir Shafe, 34, a Pakistani who earns a good living selling clothes at a market in Antwerp. He deplores terrorism and said he himself did not sense hostility in Belgium. But he said, “We are now thinking of going back to our country, before that time comes.”

Many experts note that there is a deep and troubled history between Islam and Europe, with the Crusaders and the Ottoman Empire jostling each other for centuries and bloodily defining the boundaries of Christianity and Islam. A sense of guilt over Europe’s colonial past and then World War II, when intolerance exploded into mass murder, allowed a large migration to occur without any uncomfortable debates over the real differences between migrant and host.

Then the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, jolted Europe into new awareness and worry.

The subsequent bombings in Madrid and London, and the murder of the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh by a Dutch-born Moroccan stand as examples of the extreme. But many Europeans — even those who generally support immigration — have begun talking more bluntly about cultural differences, specifically about Muslims’ deep religious beliefs and social values, which are far more conservative than those of most Europeans on issues like women’s rights and homosexuality.

“A lot of people, progressive ones — we are not talking about nationalists or the extreme right — are saying, ‘Now we have this religion, it plays a role and it challenges our assumptions about what we learned in the 60’s and 70’s,’ ” said Joost Lagendik, a Dutch member of the European Parliament for the Green Left Party, who is active on Muslim issues.

(Page 2 of 2)

“So there is this fear,” he said, “that we are being transported back in a time machine where we have to explain to our immigrants that there is equality between men and women, and gays should be treated properly. Now there is the idea we have to do it again.”

Now Europeans are discussing the limits of tolerance, the right with increasing stridency and the left with trepidation.

Austrians in their recent election complained about public schools in Vienna being nearly full with Muslim students and blamed the successive governments that allowed it to happen.

Some Dutch Muslims have expressed support for insurgents in Iraq over Dutch peacekeepers there, on the theory that their prime loyalty is to a Muslim country under invasion.

So strong is the fear that Dutch values of tolerance are under siege that the government last winter introduced a primer on those values for prospective newcomers to Dutch life: a DVD briefly showing topless women and two men kissing. The film does not explicitly mention Muslims, but its target audience is as clear as its message: embrace our culture or leave.

Perhaps most wrenching has been the issue of free speech and expression, and the growing fear that any criticism of Islam could provoke violence.

In France last month, a high school teacher went into hiding after receiving death threats for writing an article calling the Prophet Muhammad “a merciless warlord, a looter, a mass murderer of Jews and a polygamist.” In Germany a Mozart opera with a scene of Muhammad’s severed head was canceled because of security fears.

With each incident, mainstream leaders are speaking more plainly. “Self-censorship does not help us against people who want to practice violence in the name of Islam,” Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany said in criticizing the opera’s cancellation. “It makes no sense to retreat.”

The backlash is revealing itself in other ways. Last month the British home secretary, John Reid, called on Muslim parents to keep a close watch on their children. “There’s no nice way of saying this,” he told a Muslim group in East London. “These fanatics are looking to groom and brainwash children, including your children, for suicide bombing, grooming them to kill themselves to murder others.”

Many Muslims say this new mood is suddenly imposing expectations that never existed before that Muslims be exactly like their European hosts.

Dyab Abou Jahjah, a Lebanese-born activist here in Belgium, said that for years Europeans had emphasized “citizenship and human rights,” the notion that Muslim immigrants had the responsibility to obey the law but could otherwise live with their traditions.

“Then someone comes and says it’s different than that,” said Mr. Jahjah, who opposes assimilation. “You have to dump your culture and religion. It’s a different deal now.”

Lianne Duinberke, 34, who works at a market in the racially mixed northern section of Antwerp, said: “Before I was very eager to tell people I was married to a Muslim. Now I hesitate.” She has been with her husband, a Tunisian, for 12 years, and they have three children.

Many Europeans, she said, have not been accepting of Muslims, especially since 9/11. On the other hand, she said, Muslims truly are different culturally: No amount of explanation about free speech could convince her husband that the publication of cartoons lampooning Muhammad in a Danish newspaper was in any way justified.

When asked if she was optimistic or pessimistic about the future of Muslim immigration in Europe , she found it hard to answer. She finally gave a defeated smile. “I am trying to be optimistic,” she said. “But if you see the global problems before the people, then you really can’t be.”

Dan Bilefsky reported from Brussels, and Ian Fisher from Rome. Contributing were Sarah Lyall and Alan Cowell from London, Mark Landler from Frankfurt, Peter Kiefer from Rome, Renwick McLean from Madrid and Maia de la Baume from Paris.

Correction: Oct. 17, 2006

A front-page article on Wednesday about the spreading anxiety among many Europeans over tensions with Muslim minorities referred incorrectly to the time periods of the Crusaders and the Ottoman Empire in a passage about the troubled history between Islam and Europe. The Crusaders undertook military expeditions from the 11th to the 13th centuries, and the Ottoman Empire lasted from the end of the 13th century until the end of World War I. The Crusaders and the Ottoman Empire were not “jostling each other for centuries.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/world/europe/11muslims.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&ref=world

Ironic that Europe use to talk that way about Jews...:D

there are currently 15 to 20 million Muslims in EU. This is expected to double by 2025. (http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html).

OHNOES TEH MUSLIMS! :rolleyes:

Don't you ever get tired of whining about Muslims polluting your idea of a Pure White North?

Ironic that Europe use to talk that way about Jews...:D

Ah yeah...How we used to criticize their honour killings or veils.

OHNOES TEH MUSLIMS! :rolleyes:

Don't you ever get tired of whining about Muslims polluting your idea of a Pure White North?

You realize that Islam is a faith not a race, right? Converts are still white. Not to mention that a lot of Sicilians are darker then your average Arab.

Why is this a race issue? :confused:

Ah yeah...How we used to criticize their honour killings or veils.

No mostly just how they were taking over your banks and the goverment and needed to be burned and made into lampshades and soap , after of course you looted all their property and either turned them over to the Germans or the Germans did it for you.

Dreyfus afair....and the Zionist mavement...you should really look into that a bit..broaden your perspective about Europe and Jews.;)

No mostly just how they were taking over your banks and the goverment and needed to be burned and made into lampshades and soap , after of course you looted all their property and either turned them over to the Germans or the Germans did it for you.

Dreyfus afair....and the Zionist mavement...you should really look into that a bit..broaden your perspective about Europe and Jews.;)

Well...I wont bother with the differences, which are countless. Even if muslims were the "new-jews", I'm sure even the most racist people learned their lesson from 20th century. I.e: genocide doesnt work.

ex 1: Today's jews
ex 2: Armenians

You realize that Islam is a faith not a race, right?

I realize that. But NN here is a big fan of Angry White Female, and of pointing out how Black people are less intelligent than Whites. Look at the threads he's started if you don't believe me.

And even if he wasn't, why is it assumed it's OK to discriminate against populations (to the point of labelling them inferior and advocating forced deportation) on religion, but not race? I don't get it, I mean if I posted the kinds of shit NN has said about Muslims, but about Jews, I'd get called a racist, my threads shut down and probably see a forumban.

It's politically correct, you see, to hate and fear Muslims.

Like it was once politically correct to hate and fear Jews.

Why is this a race issue? :confused:

It's not... But MeansToAnEnd is being to rival Ny Nordland as head troll, and he is getting worried about his crown.

Which is why you see this fairly uninspired piece of trolling infront of you.

Ah yeah...How we used to criticize their honour killings or veils.

well using the same idea the Jews steal our money and corrupt our women look at this evidence:http://www.stormfront.org/whitehistory/hwr64iv_files/nazi_propaganda.jpg

with that said Nazi propaganda: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f8/Liberators-Kultur-Terror-Anti-Americanism-1944-Nazi-Propaganda-Poster.jpg/200px-Liberators-Kultur-Terror-Anti-Americanism-1944-Nazi-Propaganda-Poster.jpg

I realize that. But NN here is a big fan of Angry White Female, and of pointing out how Black people are less intelligent than Whites. Look at the threads he's started if you don't believe me.

And even if he wasn't, why is it assumed it's OK to discriminate against populations (to the point of labelling them inferior and advocating forced deportation) on religion, but not race? I don't get it, I mean if I posted the kinds of shit NN has said about Muslims, but about Jews, I'd get called a racist, my threads shut down and probably see a forumban.

It's politically correct, you see, to hate and fear Muslims.

Like it was once politically correct to hate and fear Jews.

No one is born a muslim. It's a matter of choice. This is why it is fair game; like christianity. It has nothing to do with being politically correct to fear and hate muslims. Quite the opposite in fact.

Well...I wont bother with the differences, which are countless. Even if muslims were the "new-jews", I'm sure even the most racist people learned their lesson from 20th century. I.e: genocide doesnt work.

ex 1: Today's jews
ex 2: Armenians


I will..... because I hope you are right...... agree with you.;)

But doesn't it seem we always need an " other " group to blame shit on ?

Even if we have curbed our genocide habits a bit...how long ago was Bosnia etc . And the " etnic cleansing " ?

While I agree that muslims shouldn't all be stereotyped as a bunch of violent extremists, some of them who live in western cultures sure could use a little attitude adjustments. If you have a major problem with the values of western cultures, perhaps you shouldn't move to one.

I will..... because I hope you are right...... agree with you.;)

But doesn't it seem we always need an " other " group to blame shit on ?

Even if we have curbed our genocide habits a bit...how long ago was Bonia etc . And the " etnic cleansing " ?

Where are you from?

It's not... But MeansToAnEnd is being to rival Ny Nordland as head troll, and he is getting worried about his crown.

Which is why you see this fairly uninspired piece of trolling infront of you.

Puhlease.. MeansToAnEnd completely eclipsed Ny Nordland in his last post. This does not compare.

So, Ny, did a Muslim steal your girlfriend or step on your foot?

No, seriously. Hitler had the "he was a madcap" excuse, what's yours?

No one is born a muslim. It's a matter of choice. This is why it is fair game; like christianity. It has nothing to do with being politically correct to fear and hate muslims. Quite the opposite in fact.

And people are born Jews? I see, so if I follow a religion that says being a member of that religion means you're descended from so-and-so Biblical mythological figure, that means I *actually am?*

Now how does that work with Jewish converts? Shifting geneologies?

Where are you from?

The ulta racist United States of America !
( I think we are hating on Mexican immigrants this week ).

We hate Jews
Catholics
Muslims.....

Hell it will take way too long .. WE HATE EVERYONE and we are ,,,get this ..EVERYONE..

Its like the ultimate in Irony .

Where are you from?

Answer this so he can judge your "worth" and your "quality".

The ulta racist United States of America !
( I think we are hating on Mexican immigrants this week ).

We hate Jews
Catholics
Muslims

Hell it will take way too long .. EVERYONE and we are ,,,get this ..EVERYONE..

Its like the ultimate in Irony .

Then you cant be told what muslim-immigrants-in-europe is, you have to experience it yourself. ;)

The ulta racist United States of America !
( I think we are hating on Mexican immigrants this week ).

We hate Jews
Catholics
Muslims

Hell it will take way too long .. EVERYONE and we are ,,,get this ..EVERYONE..

Its like the ultimate in Irony .

I'm offended.

You obviously hate the French more than the Jews, Catholics and Muslims put together.

Then you cant be told what muslim-immigrants-in-europe is, you have to experience it yourself. ;)

So, would you kindly explain why is it that the majority of Europe is NOT acting like Hitler-wannabes?

I'm offended.

You obviously hate the French more than the Jews, Catholics and Muslims put together.


Mon Duea ! but we Love/ hate zee French ...so much that they have their own catagory !

( hey they changed the name back to " French " fries ! )

(hey they changed the name back to " French " fries ! )

Yes... associating the World's Second Most Culinarily Advanced Nation (the first is Italy) with chips of deep-fried fatty potato will really make them your friends. :p

Then you cant be told what muslim-immigrants-in-europe is, you have to experience it yourself. ;)

Ah, NN. If only you could dismiss all arguments based on the location, religion or ethnic background of your opponents. Maybe next Reich, ja?

So, would you kindly explain why is it that the majority of Europe is NOT acting like Hitler-wannabes?

I am waaaaaaitiiiing...

And people are born Jews? I see, so if I follow a religion that says being a member of that religion means you're descended from so-and-so Biblical mythological figure, that means I *actually am?*

Now how does that work with Jewish converts? Shifting geneologies?

You can't compare the current anti-muslim sentiment in, say, the pennine towns with racism. Otherwise Hindus would be getting in the neck. It's a backlash against the ideology, not the geneology. It's clearly different.

As for your politically correct theory, had the government done it's job in the first place, the UK would not now have a functioning, albeit small, Nazi party.

Then you cant be told what muslim-immigrants-in-europe is, you have to experience it yourself. ;)

I'm from Europe!

But then again, I support equal rights and liberty for Muslims... and I haven't noticed any adverse effects coming from the Immigration of Islam (expect for there being more drunken, vaguely facist ramblings from lonely Scandinavians), so I can't help you.

*Yawns*

Another racist thread from Ny Nordland. What else is new?

*Yawns*

Another racist thread from Ny Nordland. What else is new?

Bears shit in the wood.

You can't compare the current anti-muslim sentiment in, say, the pennine towns with racism. Otherwise Hindus would be getting in the neck. It's a backlash against the ideology, not the geneology. It's clearly different.

I can and do. When an entire people are discriminated against based on the actions of a few, it's bigotry not significantly different to racism. It's the people here that are getting the "backlash," not some abstract ideology.

As an Irishman living in a heavily immigrant (mostly Muslim) part of Paris, I can tell you American posters on this thread that the conflict about Islam in Europe is far more than "racism". It is a cultural issue touching on issues like democracy, polygamy/forced marriage, terrorism etc. From a social and economic point of view Europe has a lot to lose from a huge increase in the number of often-hostile Muslims in our countries. Maybe this is something our friends across the pond should consider before denouncing our worries as "racist" or tarring us all with the Hitler-brush because that fits into the myopic American view of evil Old Europe.

I'm from Europe!

But then again, I support equal rights and liberty for Muslims... and I haven't noticed any adverse effects coming from the Immigration of Islam (expect for there being more drunken, vaguely facist ramblings from lonely Scandinavians), so I can't help you.

Wow, an European that does NOT agree with Ny's Hitlerian views of the world?? :o

Now counter this evidence, Ny Nordland, or admit you LOST THE ARGUMENT.

I can and do. When an entire people are discriminated against based on the actions of a few, it's bigotry not significantly different to racism. It's the people here that are getting the "backlash," not some abstract ideology.

I know you can. But you are wrong. People can renounce islam any time they want, and they will stop suffering the backlash. Those who tacitly support extremism however can only expect it.

Then you cant be told what muslim-immigrants-in-europe is, you have to experience it yourself. ;)

You know why it's called an ad hominem FALLACY? You didn't address his point at all. You simply made your common fallacious claim that anyone who disagrees with you is unqualified to speak.

As an Irishman living in a heavily immigrant (mostly Muslim) part of Paris, I can tell you American posters on this thread that the conflict about Islam in Europe is far more than "racism". It is a cultural issue touching on issues like democracy, polygamy/forced marriage, terrorism etc. From a social and economic point of view Europe has a lot to lose from a huge increase in the number of often-hostile Muslims in our countries. Maybe this is something our friends across the pond should consider before denouncing our worries as "racist" or tarring us all with the Hitler-brush because that fits into the myopic American view of evil Old Europe.

How strange that many Europeans disagree with you and Ny, is it not?

Now will you quit going "you-don't-know-how-it-is-here" and actually making points? America had racist laws, so did South Africa. Brazil had less such problems a bit. Most of the world had the same kind of issues.

I know you can. But you are wrong. People can renounce islam any time they want, and they will stop suffering the backlash. Those who tacitly support extremism however can only expect it.

So as long as they are willing to give up their civil rights they won't have to suffer at the hands of bigots? Good to know. And, of course, the backlash against Muslims has never extended to people who 'look like Muslims', has it? Maybe if those people would just stop looking so brown-skinned they wouldn't have to suffer for being discriminated against and having their civil rights violated.

Way to blame the victim, champ.

I know you can. But you are wrong. People can renounce islam any time they want, and they will stop suffering the backlash. Those who tacitly support extremism however can only expect it.

And people that are muslims, non-extremists and don't speak about the terrorists simply because THEY ARE NOT OBLIGATED TO?

Or you think that all Muslims should spend their days denouncing terrorism when it's a fact that all Germans, for instance, do NOT spend their days going "Hitler was a very bad man"?

The Germans are not obligated to repeat ad nauseam "Hitler was evil" to show that they do not support Hitler, and the Muslims are not obligated to repeat "Bin Laden is evil" ad nauseam to show that they do not support Bin Laden.

How strange that many Europeans disagree with you and Ny, is it not?

Now will you quit going "you-don't-know-how-it-is-here" and actually making points? America had racist laws, so did South Africa. Brazil had less such problems a bit. Most of the world had the same kind of issues.

Amazing. I'm answering to a irrelevant Brazillian. Few examples:


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


Many adults in the Netherlands hold strong views on the way Muslims adapt to the European continent, according to a poll by Motivaction released by GPD. 63 per cent of respondents believe think Islam is incompatible with modern European life.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/12143

Then you cant be told what muslim-immigrants-in-europe is, you have to experience it yourself. ;)
With 1.9% being muslim on the entire population of Norway, I doubt you have much more hands-on experience.

Interesting article from NY Times. You should read it considering the fact that there are currently 15 to 20 million Muslims in EU. This is expected to double by 2025. (http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050701faessay84409/robert-s-leiken/europe-s-angry-muslims.html). It is unlikely but if Turkey enters EU, there might be 120 million muslims (80+40) by 2025. This, of course, highly contrasts with declining native populations. Anyways:


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/11/world/europe/11muslims.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&ref=world

I fail to see the problem with this......is there something wrong with Muslims?

Amazing. I'm answering to a irrelevant Brazillian. Few examples:



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


http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/12143

What does this prove? That europeans aren't quite the champions of civil rights they claim to be? Or maybe that just the people who are anti-civil rights are anti-civil rights? You do realize that if we took a poll in the US you would get similar results. Oh, wait, but people from the US don't understand your predicament, right? Sorry, I didn't mean to undermine your ad hominem arguments.

Carry on, little buddy.

I fail to see the problem with this......is there something wrong with Muslims?

Most of them have funny ideas about equality of women and gays. Not to mention much higher than avarage crime rates, birth rates, considerable support for radical muslims. And again, not to mention arranged marriages, honour killings, violence against women, etc...This is what people mean by cultural differences.

Wow, an European that does NOT agree with Ny's Hitlerian views of the world?? :o

Now counter this evidence, Ny Nordland, or admit you LOST THE ARGUMENT.

Ridiculous. Those who oppose increasing Islamification of Europe are the precise opposite of "Hitlerian", seeing as how they do not want Islamic mores to destroy freedom of expression. Muslims make demands and we bend over backwards to please them (eg Jyllands Posten affair and the condemnation from various gov'ts), and the result is increased authoritarianism in the name of appeasing an aggressive minority - bye bye crappy little Muhammad cartoons, you offended Muslim sensibilities too much. That cannot be compared to Nazi treatment of Jews, because the Jews were not trying to twist European laws to their interests unlike the Islamic extremists (unless you believe the theories of far-right pedagogues).

And yes, I am over here and I do know what it's like because I see it everyday. Many Muslims are perfectly Europeanised, but a significant section aren't. Get used to it.

How strange that many Europeans disagree with you and Ny, is it not?

Now will you quit going "you-don't-know-how-it-is-here" and actually making points? America had racist laws, so did South Africa. Brazil had less such problems a bit. Most of the world had the same kind of issues.

Notice that that is the Users first post, and written in the NN style...

*Pating Ny on the shoulder* That's just sad, mate

No mostly just how they were taking over your banks and the goverment and needed to be burned and made into lampshades and soap , after of course you looted all their property and either turned them over to the Germans or the Germans did it for you.

Dreyfus afair....and the Zionist mavement...you should really look into that a bit..broaden your perspective about Europe and Jews.;)

The Nazi's never made Jews into soap or lampshades you fool and also not all European states were subjugated by them, i.e. Britain, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, so therefore did not hand over their Jews to them.

Maybe less would have dies as a result of the Holocaust if the US had allowed them Asylum.........

I would advise a little more historical knowledge before making such stupid comments. If you did you would also discover that the Zionists had close ties to the Nazis.

With 1.9% being muslim on the entire population of Norway, I doubt you have much more hands-on experience.

Thank god Norway isnt as bad as France. However, I've been to Malmö, got enough hands-on experience there.

Most of them have funny ideas about equality of women and gays. Not to mention much higher than avarage crime rates, birth rates, considerable support for radical muslims. And again, not to mention arranged marriages, honour killings, violence against women, etc...This is what people mean by cultural differences.

You sir, are a racist. Everything of which you stated is no more true than it is for white people, black people, hispanics, etc.

I know you can. But you are wrong. People can renounce islam any time they want, and they will stop suffering the backlash.

Ha. And people could renounce Judaism any time they wanted too. Funny thing is though, people have this odd tendency not to change their religion based on fear of "backlash."

Those who tacitly support extremism however can only expect it.

And of course, 1 billion Muslims "tacitly support extremism." Because they're Muslims. I mean it's a good thing you're not being a bigot or anything, or you'd only prove my point.

http://limewoody.wordpress.com/files/2006/03/aw_jeez_not_this_shit_again2.jpg

Most of them have funny ideas about equality of women and gays. Not to mention much higher than avarage crime rates, birth rates, considerable support for radical muslims. And again, not to mention arranged marriages, honour killings, violence against women, etc...This is what people mean by cultural differences.

"I fail to see the problem with this, is there something wrong with Norwegians?"
"Most of them have funny ideas about equality of people with different skin colors and religious freedom. Not to mention the higher than average bigotry and considerable support for radical racists. And again, not to mention, beating people for being different, mistreating them, suggesting they not have equal rights. This is what people mean by cultural differences."

Notice that that is the Users first post, and written in the NN style...

*Pating Ny on the shoulder* That's just sad, mate

Wow...Go ask for ip check. Your paranoia is scary...

Why is this a race issue? :confused:
I have no idea.
It is unlikely but if Turkey enters EU, there might be 120 million muslims (80+40) by 2025. This, of course, highly contrasts with declining native populations.

You fear muslim immigrants, not native muslim, don't you? You should be more precise.

"I fail to see the problem with this, is there something wrong with Norwegians?"
"Most of them have funny ideas about equality of people with different skin colors and religious freedom. Not to mention the higher than average bigotry and considerable support for radical racists. And again, not to mention, beating people for being different, mistreating them, suggesting they not have equal rights. This is what people mean by cultural differences."

Ah, I see now. Thank you for clearing that up.

So, would you kindly explain why is it that the majority of Europe is NOT acting like Hitler-wannabes?

Because the US are already doing it for us.

Next stop Iran...........

Amazing. I'm answering to a irrelevant Brazillian.

Amazing. A shameless ad hominem.

Amazing. A shameless ad hominem.

He is a racist and a troll. Hes also probably MeansToAnEnd, but using Norway as his supposed home country instead of the US now.

Amazing. A shameless ad hominem.

Oh, come on, why pretend to be shocked. A fallacy and a NN post are practically indistinguishable. He knows. We know it. That's why he gets so angry at us all the time.

Amazing. I'm answering to a irrelevant Brazillian. Few examples:



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


http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/12143

Considering I'm beating the fuck out of you in an argument as we speak, it would go to show, by your own reasoning, that my race (a mix of slovakian, Italian and African) is better than yours, then?

If so many Europeans agree with you, Ny, why is it that most of the many Europeans here condemn you?

http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=22083&sec=33&con=47

Oh lookie. I can also provide poll research to back up my claims. Nice, is it not?

well i used to be all "european liberal" as in let everyone in and let all cultures do their own thing. maybe that was ok because no one ever got hurt and no cultures within europe ever wanted to destroy the other. but seriously, i am starting to think that i just want everything the way it was before all this terrorism-iraq-immigration panic crap. And if that means assimilation, then i can live with it. i dont think muslims should stop being muslim, but if christianity can compromise to fit in with Europe, so can islam.

also, the apple store is an affront to islam:(

He is a racist and a troll. Hes also probably MeansToAnEnd, but using Norway as his supposed home country instead of the US now.

He is NOT MTAE. No way. Neither of them are DEATed and both would be if he was. I wish people would stop saying that. It actually gives MTAE more credit than he deserves. You have to admit NN is still here after all this time. MTAE is going to flame out within the month. And you can quote me on that.

Wow...Go ask for ip check. Your paranoia is scary...

You mean kinda like when you thought Jocabia was a Jew? And you thought that I was Deep Kimchi (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11152056&postcount=1)? I guess you weren't paranoid then?

Stop being such a shameless fucking hypocrite.

He is a racist and a troll. Hes also probably MeansToAnEnd, but using Norway as his supposed home country instead of the US now.

LIES! MeansToAnEnd is an artist. Ny Nordland is just... annoying?

"I fail to see the problem with this, is there something wrong with Norwegians?"
"Most of them have funny ideas about equality of people with different skin colors and religious freedom. Not to mention the higher than average bigotry and considerable support for radical racists. And again, not to mention, beating people for being different, mistreating them, suggesting they not have equal rights. This is what people mean by cultural differences."

I'm sure there are racist beatings here, whites against non whites and non whites beating whites as well. But violence is rare here, per capita crime as well as absolute numbers (naturally) are much lower than USA. Of course given your incapacity at discussion, it's normal that you dismiss arguments with rather silly jokes or labelling them racist, not much different than labelling critics as heretics and shutting them up and hence debate in mediaval Europe.
Oh and everyone has equal rights here once they enter. Many just dont want them to enter.

@Hortopia: what do you mean by the apple store reference?? :confused:

You mean kinda like when you thought Jocabia was a Jew? And you thought that I was Deep Kimchi (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11152056&postcount=1)? I guess you weren't paranoid then?

Stop being such a shameless fucking hypocrite.

I was right about you being black though, wasnt I?

LIES! MeansToAnEnd is an artist. Ny Nordland is just... annoying?

Very true. NN doesn't qualify for the Wanderjarian War Criminal Award, unlike MTAE, who wins it every post he makes.

I have no idea.


You fear muslim immigrants, not native muslim, don't you? You should be more precise.

If by native muslims, you mean bosnians and albanians, no I dont fear them.

You sir, are a racist. Everything of which you stated is no more true than it is for white people, black people, hispanics, etc.

I'm shocked NN didn't respond to this...

I was right about you being black though, wasnt I?

Nope. Thanks for playing.

He is a racist and a troll. Hes also probably MeansToAnEnd, but using Norway as his supposed home country instead of the US now.

And you are paranoid, among other things.

@Hortopia: what do you mean by the apple store reference?? :confused:

this was found to be crap, probably, it was just put in for fun

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/11/apple_ny_store/

this shit doesnt concern me, if i actually thought this was a view held by even a minority of muslims, i would have joined the BNP

He is NOT MTAE. No way. Neither of them are DEATed and both would be if he was. I wish people would stop saying that. It actually gives MTAE more credit than he deserves. You have to admit NN is still here after all this time. MTAE is going to flame out within the month. And you can quote me on that.

Done. :)

I was right about you being black though, wasnt I?

Just like we were right about you being a racist. Your point would be?

And you are paranoid, among other things.

How am I paranoid? I don't believe that qualifies as paranoia. Merely stating facts as I see them.


Am I paranoid? No. Are you? Yes.

And you are paranoid, among other things.

You fear Muslims and go "let's terminate them so they won't harm my white wrinkled ass!" at every opportunity here, having gone through hitlerian lenghts to try and convince us of the threat that, like the voices you hear, is in your head only.

Who's paranoid again?

You fear Muslims and go "let's terminate them so they won't harm my white wrinkled ass!" at every opportunity here, having gone through hitlerian lenghts to try and convince us of the threat that, like the voices you hear, is in your head only.

Who's paranoid again?


Thank you mate, you read my mind.

I'm sure there are racist beatings here, whites against non whites and non whites beating whites as well. But violence is rare here, per capita crime as well as absolute numbers (naturally) are much lower than USA. Of course given your incapacity at discussion, it's normal that you dismiss arguments with rather silly jokes or labelling them racist, not much different than labelling critics as heretics and shutting them up and hence debate in mediaval Europe.
Oh and everyone has equal rights here once they enter. Many just dont want them to enter.

Ha, my incapacity at discussion. Looks do a poll and see how that comes out, my friend. Considering you've already dismissed three out of about 10 people disagreeing with you with ad hominems, I would say the evidence speaks for itself.

I don't dismiss arguments as racist. I label them as racist and then I show the flaw in them as well. And when all your arguments are about race, then guess what...

Everyone has equal rights once they enter? You've never spoken out about racial mixing? You've never suggested that in addition to closing the borders that further steps of discouragement occur, steps violating their civil rights? Really? Perhaps that was a different Ny Nordland making those arguments in an alternate universe that just happens to look and smell exactly like this one.

Now, you've gotten clear and cogent replies in the other thread and in this one, but you're too busy dismissing everyone's arguments with 'I'm answering to a irrelevant Brazillian.' or 'Then you cant be told what muslim-immigrants-in-europe is, you have to experience it yourself.' or 'an incapacity at discussion'.

Interesting that even with my 'incapacity', I actually manage to reply to people rather than dismiss them as unqualified to be in the discussion. If you can't explain your position to non-Europeans isn't that your failing or is it their fault you fail at communicating?

Before you know it, hes going to be saying that I should be executed because I'm a Red *Points at sig*

ummm, i missed everything in the first few pages right? i havent bothered to read Nordland's posts, but if you are calling him a racist because of posting this story, thats just plain retarded. i know that europeans are worried about this. i am.

is he racist? are you? give me some quotes.

Considering I'm beating the fuck out of you in an argument as we speak, it would go to show, by your own reasoning, that my race (a mix of slovakian, Italian and African) is better than yours, then?

If so many Europeans agree with you, Ny, why is it that most of the many Europeans here condemn you?

http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=22083&sec=33&con=47

Oh lookie. I can also provide poll research to back up my claims. Nice, is it not?

LOL @ your interpretation of my reasoning

From your link:

In Britain, 57 percent said that such immigration was a good thing, in line with previous surveys in May of last year and in 2002.



It found that 59 per cent of people supported a halt to all further immigration to the UK

Source (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=384167&in_page_id=1770)


Ipsos, a Paris-based polling firm, found 60 per cent believing that immigrants were a bad influence on Britain

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=602872004

Hmmm...

Thank you mate, you read my mind.

Whoa, there's a lot of porn in there. :D

Did your mind include the "white wrinkled"? :p

Nope. Thanks for playing.

You admitted yourself.

Coincidence!? I think not! (http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b324/ninebucks/SSNN.jpg)

So as long as they are willing to give up their civil rights they won't have to suffer at the hands of bigots? Good to know. And, of course, the backlash against Muslims has never extended to people who 'look like Muslims', has it? Maybe if those people would just stop looking so brown-skinned they wouldn't have to suffer for being discriminated against and having their civil rights violated.

Way to blame the victim, champ.

I suspect we have reached the far shores of reason at this point. You do realize I am talking about what has happened in the UK, don't you?

If you support people who march the streets holding placards saying "death to those who slander islam" and "britain shall be islamic" etc. all the while expecting the police to arrest peaceful counter protestors, or if you lobby the government to back down on proposed legislation to prohibit the disgusting practice of forced marriage, or your official mouthpiece organization has a disgusting homophobic agenda, and you do all this in a country that doesn't share any of these values - in fact is repulsed by them - and you are a tiny minority, don't be suprised if you experience a backlash for publically associating yourself with them. It has nothing to do with racism. (Doubly so since many groups which 'look like muslims' apparently do not experience anything like the same problems).

So spare me the poor muslim pablum. And the US centric 'civil rights' refrain. This is not birmingham alabama, and it is not 1960.

Whoa, there's a lot of porn in there. :D

Hey! You're not supposed to go there! ;)


Did your mind include the "white wrinkled"? :p

....no!.....

ummm, i missed everything in the first few pages right? i havent bothered to read Nordland's posts, but if you are calling him a racist because of posting this story, thats just plain retarded. i know that europeans are worried about this. i am.

is he racist? are you? give me some quotes.

There is a search function. Use it. You'll find that the vast majority of NN's threads are either a complaint about race, immigration, Muslims or a complaint that his trolling worked and he got flamed. Oh, and many have qualities of all of those things. He has openly dismissed people in his threads as being unable to comment because of their race (e.g. his comment about our Trots being black or his comment about me being a Jew).

@Lacadaemon: Exactly. Muslims in Europe today are not treated like Black people in 1950's America.

You fear Muslims and go "let's terminate them so they won't harm my white wrinkled ass!" at every opportunity here, having gone through hitlerian lenghts to try and convince us of the threat that, like the voices you hear, is in your head only.

Who's paranoid again?

I havent argued for their termination. You are wrong as always.

Coincidence!? I think not! (http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b324/ninebucks/SSNN.jpg)

ROFLMAO!!!

Great dude! If I could sig that, I would.

LOL @ your interpretation of my reasoning

From your link:



Source (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=384167&in_page_id=1770)


http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=602872004

Hmmm...

1- Even assuming these numbers are true, appeal to numbers means nothing. Most people supported Hitler in Germany 1939, and that's not (unlike what you think) a good thing.

2- The point of the research is that Europe is viewing muslims more favorably than it was before - they, unlike you, are learning.

3- Again explain to me why is it that no European here except for you is a paranoid racist.

@Heikoku: Not too long ago you were putting me in the same category as the "paranoid racist" NN, so I guess that makes two of us right? :rolleyes: You didn't respond to my response either.

NN, do you think that I should be executed for being a Red?

You know, we Communists are out to conquer the world!!! :rolleyes:

I suspect we have reached the far shores of reason at this point. You do realize I am talking about what has happened in the UK, don't you?

If you support people who march the streets holding placards saying "death to those who slander islam" and "britain shall be islamic" etc. all the while expecting the police to arrest peaceful counter protestors, or if you lobby the government to back down on proposed legislation to prohibit the disgusting practice of forced marriage, or your official mouthpiece organization has a disgusting homophobic agenda, and you do all this in a country that doesn't share any of these values - in fact is repulsed by them - and you are a tiny minority, don't be suprised if you experience a backlash for publically associating yourself with them. It has nothing to do with racism. (Doubly so since many groups which 'look like muslims' apparently do not experience anything like the same problems).

So spare me the poor muslim pablum. And the US centric 'civil rights' refrain. This is not birmingham alabama, and it is not 1960.

i think i pretty much have to agree with that. dammit. i used to be so liberal.

but seriously, i hope this is the red scare II, and nothing will come of it.

I suspect we have reached the far shores of reason at this point. You do realize I am talking about what has happened in the UK, don't you?

If you support people who march the streets holding placards saying "death to those who slander islam" and "britain shall be islamic" etc. all the while expecting the police to arrest peaceful counter protestors, or if you lobby the government to back down on proposed legislation to prohibit the disgusting practice of forced marriage, or your official mouthpiece organization has a disgusting homophobic agenda, and you do all this in a country that doesn't share any of these values - in fact is repulsed by them - and you are a tiny minority, don't be suprised if you experience a backlash for publically associating yourself with them. It has nothing to do with racism. (Doubly so since many groups which 'look like muslims' apparently do not experience anything like the same problems).

So spare me the poor muslim pablum. And the US centric 'civil rights' refrain. This is not birmingham alabama, and it is not 1960.

You know in the US we occasionally have Christians people parading around calling all other races 'monkeys', suggesting they should be exterminated, threatening people with violence, actually committing violence, etc. Is that a condemnation of all Christian people or just the white people who behave like them? And of course, they are white people as well, so I could easily switch to condemning white people for their behavior as well.

See, unlike you, I'm able to tell the difference between criminals and people who just happen to have the same color skin or the same religion. I'm not willing to violate civil rights to protect civil rights. But, hey, I'm reasonable like that. I don't punish people for crimes they didn't commit.

And, it's unfortunate, one would think that it's not Birmingham, AL and that it's not 1960 would mean it's gotten better. Unfortunately, as is proven by this thread and others some people never learn.

There is a search function. Use it. You'll find that the vast majority of NN's threads are either a complaint about race, immigration, Muslims or a complaint that his trolling worked and he got flamed. Oh, and many have qualities of all of those things. He has openly dismissed people in his threads as being unable to comment because of their race (e.g. his comment about our Trots being black or his comment about me being a Jew).

Pray don't forget the "irrelevant Brazilian" comment.

NN, do you think that I should be executed for being a Red?

You know, we Communists are out to conquer the world!!! :rolleyes:

Yes, but are you a Muslim? ;)

You admitted yourself.

So, you assume I'm black? What if that were so, would you say I probably have less "intelligence" than you? Would you call me a "Non White?" Would you assume I'm more likely to commit rape? Would you say I'm inferior?

Or what if I were to tell you that I am actually more purely white than you will ever be? And that I STILL despise your fucking racist bullshit? Would you call me a race traitor?

It doesn't matter. Your efforts to dismiss me based on your assumption of my ethnic background only prove one thing: you're a fucking racist scumbag. The only difference between you and high-ranking nazi officials is that a) You're still alive and b) You're irrelevant.

@Heikoku: Not too long ago you were putting me in the same category as the "paranoid racist" NN, so I guess that makes two of us right? :rolleyes: You didn't respond to my response either.

No, you I put in the "puppet" category for now. But answer me: Why is it that so many Europeans in this forum condemn NN?

NN, what is the point of this thread?

Are you trying to make a point about Muslim immigrants to Europe? If so, what is that point? That they are increasingly unwanted?

If this is the point you are trying to make, what is the question being debated?

That this is a good thing?

To me, this thing seems like so much spam...

"Puppet"? :p I've never used these forums before today, so I didn't have a clue who NN even was.

And Lacadaemon and Hortopia seem to agree about the subject (danger of Islamification of Europe), so not all Europeans are on your side now are they?

I think it's time to bring out the old favourite:

http://limewoody.wordpress.com/files/2006/03/aw_jeez_not_this_shit_again2.jpg

I know this doesn't sound nice, but really, it is getting boring. We've had years of not having a news broadcast without mentioning Islam, and for the last few weeks in the UK with the whole veils thing, it's been even worse. It's just the same thing, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Why don't we have a NationStates faith-free week? Please?:(

I think it's time to bring out the old favourite:

http://limewoody.wordpress.com/files/2006/03/aw_jeez_not_this_shit_again2.jpg

I know this doesn't sound nice, but really, it is getting boring. We've had years of not having a news broadcast without mentioning Islam, and for the last few weeks in the UK with the whole veils thing, it's been even worse. It's just the same thing, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

Why don't we have a NationStates faith-free week? Please?:(

Sorry, beat ye to it. I posted it a page or two back. ;)

He has openly dismissed people in his threads as being unable to comment because of their race (e.g. his comment about our Trots being black or his comment about me being a Jew).

wow, i searched that and guess what?

he is a complete and utter racist!

Sorry, beat ye to it. I posted it a page or two back. ;)

Bah! Humbug!

Greyenivol Colony

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b324/ninebucks/iranproposal.png

hahahaha not happening!

So, you assume I'm black? What if that were so, would you say I probably have less "intelligence" than you? Would you call me a "Non White?" Would you assume I'm more likely to commit rape? Would you say I'm inferior?

Or what if I were to tell you that I am actually more purely white than you will ever be? And that I STILL despise your fucking racist bullshit? Would you call me a race traitor?

It doesn't matter. Your efforts to dismiss me based on your assumption of my ethnic background only prove one thing: you're a fucking racist scumbag. The only difference between you and high-ranking nazi officials is that a) You're still alive and b) You're irrelevant.

I dont assume you are black. You had told yourself so. Jeez LOL

wow, i searched that and guess what?

he is a complete and utter racist!

Hort, kindly explain NN's appendix, Beethoveny, what you meant?

I gotta go. See you, folks, and, if anyone decides to go to moderation with this thread, make sure to include NN's nice "irrelevant Brazilian" remark. I'm feeling merciful today.

I dont assume you are black. You had told yourself so. Jeez LOL

I told myself? When was this discussion between me and myself occuring, and how is it you managed to eavesdrop?

Like I said, it doesn't matter. You're a racist little troll and you know it. LOLZ!

i think i pretty much have to agree with that. dammit. i used to be so liberal.

but seriously, i hope this is the red scare II, and nothing will come of it.

The problem with the red scare, the treatment of the Japanese during WWII, the treatment of Muslims now, etc., is that they fail to differentiate between people who are dangerous and people who have nothing to do with those dangerous people. We choose to easy blanket way of grouping the dangerous people with a majority of non-dangerous people and then oppress them, in the US examples abound. When we don't actually make an effort to persecute the ACTUAL criminals as opposed to a bunch of people who have not committed a crime, we lend credibility to those who are actually trying to attack our way of life. There is nothing more useful in recruiting people to an anti-West lifestyle than people in the West advocating violence or discrimination towards people without actually focusing that sentiment on the individuals who have actually done something wrong.

Bigots exasperate the problem. They are a catalyst not a cure.

Hort, kindly explain NN's appendix, Beethoveny, what you meant?

huh? i was being serious.

Hort, kindly explain NN's appendix, Beethoveny, what you meant?

I gotta go. See you, folks, and, if anyone decides to go to moderation with this thread, make sure to include NN's nice "irrelevant Brazilian" remark. I'm feeling merciful today.

For a caring liberal-left type, you're pretty arrogant. Putting me in the same category as NN shows that you didn't really understand my argument a few pages back - y'know, the one you ignored.

huh? i was being serious.

So was he. His point was that he wanted you to explain to Beet why we point out the inherent racism of NN's posts.

If by native muslims, you mean bosnians and albanians, no I dont fear them.
By native muslims I mean native (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Native) muslims.

but seriously, i hope this is the red scare II, and nothing will come of it.

It is. It won't.

The problem with the red scare, the treatment of the Japanese during WWII, the treatment of Muslims now, etc., is that they fail to differentiate between people who are dangerous and people who have nothing to do with those dangerous people. We choose to easy blanket way of grouping the dangerous people with a majority of non-dangerous people and then oppress them, in the US examples abound. When we don't actually make an effort to persecute the ACTUAL criminals as opposed to a bunch of people who have not committed a crime, we lend credibility to those who are actually trying to attack our way of life. There is nothing more useful in recruiting people to an anti-West lifestyle than people in the West advocating violence or discrimination towards people without actually focusing that sentiment on the individuals who have actually done something wrong.

Bigots exasperate the problem. They are a catalyst not a cure.

ok, i will just be against radical islam. because i dont think all muslims are radical; thats just retarded. so long as islam doesnt affect me, im fine with it.

ok, i will just be against radical islam. because i dont think all muslims are radical; thats just retarded. so long as islam doesnt affect me, im fine with it.

Fair enough. I'm pretty much against radical anything, which is why some liberals think I'm a conservative and some conservatives think I'm a liberal. Pretty much anything taken too far is a bad thing.

For a caring liberal-left type, you're pretty arrogant. Putting me in the same category as NN shows that you didn't really understand my argument a few pages back - y'know, the one you ignored.

I wouldnt call that arrogance. It's rather pathetic...

So was he. His point was that he wanted you to explain to Beet why we point out the inherent racism of NN's posts.

oh ok, i wasnt reading beet's posts. sorry. its mostly because they are full of racial stereotyping, racial slurs, too much trolling about race. search tool.

So was he. His point was that he wanted you to explain to Beet why we point out the inherent racism of NN's posts.

I am not saying that NN isn't a racist, maybe he is - like I explained before I only started reading and using the forums today so I could hardly have known whether he was or not until I saw more of his posts. A fact ignored by our friend Heikoku so blatantly.

By native muslims I mean native (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Native) muslims.



It is. It won't.


belonging by birth to a people regarded as indigenous to a certain place


Are muslim immigrants from, say, North Africa, indigenous to Europe?

For a caring liberal-left type, you're pretty arrogant. Putting me in the same category as NN shows that you didn't really understand my argument a few pages back - y'know, the one you ignored.

i dont think that anyone was really doing that, he was just asking because i had read some of his posts. plus im like the centre party now apparently.

What's the Centre Party?

Fair enough. I'm pretty much against radical anything, which is why some liberals think I'm a conservative and some conservatives think I'm a liberal. Pretty much anything taken too far is a bad thing.

i agree.

What's the Centre Party?

there is no actual "Centre Party," i guess i should have said "a centre party." well i cant agree completely with liberals or conservatives in this thread, so yeah, centre party.

Are muslim immigrants from, say, North Africa, indigenous to Europe?

Those born in and descended from Turks in Europe are. And you certainly have a problem with them.

So what, europes bitching because its their turn to be colonized and forced into the costums of another religion?!??!?!?!???! They did it all over the world from midevil times up until about 70 years ago. At the top of the world to a colony, lets see how you like it. Don't deserve it you say? It was their elders that did it and not them? well the people they horribly abused and colonized never did either. Its called karma, what goes around comes around bitch.

Wake up, Europe. Defend your culture and your heritage. Recognize the enemy and do what needs to be done.

So what, europes bitching because its their turn to be colonized and forced into the costums of another religion?!??!?!?!???! They did it all over the world from midevil times up until about 70 years ago. At the top of the world to a colony, lets see how you like it. Don't deserve it you say? It was their elders that did it and not them? well the people they horribly abused and colonized never did either. Its called karma, what goes around comes around bitch.

stupid

Are muslim immigrants from, say, North Africa, indigenous to Europe?

Silly boy. You just said they were immigrants.

See? You fear the muslim immigrants, not the natives. As you said previously. :)

Wake up, Europe. Defend your culture and your heritage. Recognize the enemy and do what needs to be done.

Yeah. Damn canadian hippies! *Shakes fist at the Canadians*

Wake up, Europe. Defend your culture and your heritage. Recognize the enemy and do what needs to be done.

Ah yes. "Wake up." the rallying cry of Stormfront assholes who suffer under the delusion that they're the only ones "awake" to the "threat" of damn furreners.

It's politically correct, you see, to hate and fear Muslims.

Like it was once politically correct to hate and fear Jews.

Muslim-baiting is a popular sport especially on NS General. Basically "Post a few insensitive or downright inflammatory comments, hope some nutcase reads it and goes homicidal, then use that as more reasons to call for the extermination of t3h 3b1l |\/|0zl3|\/| 80rg ⌐0ll3⌐71\/3."

As long as there's enough jihadist fruitcakes willing to respond violently that exists, the world will be obcessed with Muslim-baiting like it was American Idol until the space aliens decide to show up publically.

Greyenivol Colony

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b324/ninebucks/iranproposal.png

hahahaha not happening!

Bit of a threadjack but...

There are worse potential Imperial powers than Iran. They are highly respected in the region and would probably do a lot better job of keeping Law and Order, (and something vaguely resembling liberty), in Shi'a Iraq and the Afghan Wild West than the Coalition and NATO could ever do.

Unless you're talking about the independent Kurdistan... those guys have been really unlucky in their legitimate goal of securing a homeland.

Anyway... this is a really bad threadjack... so *schtum*

So what, europes bitching because its their turn to be colonized and forced into the costums of another religion?!??!?!?!???! They did it all over the world from midevil times up until about 70 years ago. At the top of the world to a colony, lets see how you like it. Don't deserve it you say? It was their elders that did it and not them? well the people they horribly abused and colonized never did either. Its called karma, what goes around comes around bitch.
Yes, because only "Europe" (as you know, "Europe" as a whole enslaved the entire world) did bad stuff in the past. It's not like other nations enslaved people, invaded countries, murdered en masse...

And no, we aren't being colonized.

Time for this little man: :rolleyes:

I find it amusing that while simultaneously accusing various posters of not posting any substance NN refuses to address any of the points made in this thread and others where he popped in to preach. Plenty of time to complain about Americans not being qualified to post, but nothing of substance to rebutt the claims of others. Hmmmm...

You know in the US we occasionally have Christians people parading around calling all other races 'monkeys', suggesting they should be exterminated, threatening people with violence, actually committing violence, etc. Is that a condemnation of all Christian people or just the white people who behave like them? And of course, they are white people as well, so I could easily switch to condemning white people for their behavior as well.

See, unlike you, I'm able to tell the difference between criminals and people who just happen to have the same color skin or the same religion. I'm not willing to violate civil rights to protect civil rights. But, hey, I'm reasonable like that. I don't punish people for crimes they didn't commit.

And, it's unfortunate, one would think that it's not Birmingham, AL and that it's not 1960 would mean it's gotten better. Unfortunately, as is proven by this thread and others some people never learn.

As I said, the far shores of reason. It has nothing to do with skin color though you seem fixated upon that aspect for some reason.

And actually, your position is quite unreasonable. It sounds very high minded, but it completely ignores the underlying reasons for the current backlash against muslims in the UK. It sounds nice to talk about not violating civil rights to protect civil rights but it is naive in the extreme to think that the example you give is in any way applicable to the UK in 2006. If indeed radical christians behaved the way you described in England, they would be quickly arrested, tried and convicted for it. The fundamental problem here is that muslims engage in similar behaviour and are not. (Moreover they recieve police protection at taxpayer expense when they choose to spew their hate).

All this wouldn't be a problem had the government chosen to crack down on extremism in the first place and treat islamic radicals like they would any other group that publically called for beheadings, engaged in forced marriage, threatened terrorism everytime someone offended them, but they chose instead to pander to pressure from the likes of Iqbal Sacranie who recieved a knighthood after suggesting death was too good for Salman Rushdie.

The plain fact is the vast majority of people in england do not want to live in an islamic republic. They do not think that sharia law should be incorporated into the british legal frame work. They do not want mandatory islamic holidays. They do not wish for the islamification of their financial institutions. They do not believe in censorship of free speech that british islamic groups call for almost daily. They do not condone institutions such as forced marriage. They are disgusted with the homophobia, sexism and intolerance which is part of and parcel of british islam. Yet they are confronted on a semi regular basis with radical pressure groups that demand all this and more in the name of islam, often in violent and illegal terms, while the government sits on its hands and does nothing. Islamic moderates such as they are, are conspiciously absent from these debates except to mumble the usual "yes, but....". Further, these groups are often sucessful in advancing their radical agenda because the cowardly government capitulates to their demands; often at the expense of the so-called "civil rights" of the rest of the population which you claim to hold so dear.

And the government has created a legislative framework where it is extremely difficult to address these issues in public debate. Islamic groups are free to pursue an islamification agenda, loudly and threateningly, while any criticism is muted in the face of fear of prosecution; (or, more troublingly, death threats and violence from muslims directly).

So it's inevitable, therefore, that the point has been reached where a groundswell of anti-islamic sentiment is starting to rise in the non muslim community. It's unreasonable to expect non-muslims to embrace an angry minority that seemingly wants nothing more or less to enforce all its traditions and rules on the much larger majority. Especially when many of those traditions are so at odds with the fundamental values which the majority believes in. And doubly so when that minority has been so sucessful in using the government to stifle debate from its critics.

What really doesn't help is attitudes like yours. It's easy to sit in the US and take cheap shots about the very real problems in the UK and dismiss all of this as the work of biggoted neanderthals and badly educated simpletons. But that is far from the case. The recent backlash did not just arise spontaneously: there are very real causes for it; and a great number of them stem from the attitude of the muslim community itself, which believes, in britian, that it is above any form of criticism while any other group is fair game for their hate. (I am not going to be as foolish to deny that there has not always been an element which hated muslims simply because they were not white britons, but the facts are this type of behavior has generally been confined to a small minority of the british public and in no way explains why all of a sudden britian has a small but funcitoning Nazi party). Yet, the position that you hold, (no-one should criticize islam in general because it unfairly tars the moderates with the extremist brush), is exactly the type of justification that has been used to silence any debate about the shape and future of the islamic community in the UK and its relationship to the rest of society as a whole. It's nothing more than a wholesale denial of some very real problems that need to be addressed. More troublingly it's also led to a stifiling of the ordinary political process and has driven some people to support political viewpoints that probably would have disgusted them twenty years ago.

So continue to smugly tell people how you can tell the difference between this and that, and how you have it all figured out. The fact is you are still making hasty and ill considered judgments about the causes of all this.

As I said, the far shores of reason. It has nothing to do with skin color though you seem fixated upon that aspect for some reason.

I mentioned it because the author of this thread does very much care about skin color. It would be absurd to ignore it when it is so clearly and often tied up in this issue.


And actually, your position is quite unreasonable. It sounds very high minded, but it completely ignores the underlying reasons for the current backlash against muslims in the UK. It sounds nice to talk about not violating civil rights to protect civil rights but it is naive in the extreme to think that the example you give is in any way applicable to the UK in 2006. If indeed radical christians behaved the way you described in England, they would be quickly arrested, tried and convicted for it. The fundamental problem here is that muslims engage in similar behaviour and are not. (Moreover they recieve police protection at taxpayer expense when they choose to spew their hate).

No, it doesn't ignore the reasons. It just takes a bit more reasonable response than 'two wrong make a right'. Okay, you made an assertion, that radical Christians ARE arrested for similar behavior. Back it up. I'll wait.


All this wouldn't be a problem had the government chosen to crack down on extremism in the first place and treat islamic radicals like they would any other group that publically called for beheadings, engaged in forced marriage, threatened terrorism everytime someone offended them, but they chose instead to pander to pressure from the likes of Iqbal Sacranie who recieved a knighthood after suggesting death was too good for Salman Rushdie.

Again, please provide proof. I've seen no evidence that there has been significantly different responses to the calls for the extermination of Muslims or to the calls for the extermination of those who stand against Islam.


[QUOTE=Lacadaemon;11827154]The plain fact is the vast majority of people in england do not want to live in an islamic republic. They do not think that sharia law should be incorporated into the british legal frame work. They do not want mandatory islamic holidays. They do not wish for the islamification of their financial institutions. They do not believe in censorship of free speech that british islamic groups call for almost daily. They do not condone institutions such as forced marriage. They are disgusted with the homophobia, sexism and intolerance which is part of and parcel of british islam. Yet they are confronted on a semi regular basis with radical pressure groups that demand all this and more in the name of islam, often in violent and illegal terms, while the government sits on its hands and does nothing. Islamic moderates such as they are, are conspiciously absent from these debates except to mumble the usual "yes, but....". Further, these groups are often sucessful in advancing their radical agenda because the cowardly government capitulates to their demands; often at the expense of the so-called "civil rights" of the rest of the population which you claim to hold so dear.

This would be amusing if the thinking weren't so dangerous. The majority of people are tired of the intolerance so their response is... intolerance. And, no, it's not reasonable to be decide that because some members of one group are intolerant of others that it's okay for us to be intolerant of the entire group even those that have done nothing wrong. And, yes, most of those that you are talking about do not make any effort to address only those that are the problem.

I will not give up liberty out of fear. It's counter-productive and unnecessary. The claim there is a growing threat is paranoi. The only real threat is to liberty and it's by those claiming that we should abridge it in order to protect it.


And the government has created a legislative framework where it is extremely difficult to address these issues in public debate. Islamic groups are free to pursue an islamification agenda, loudly and threateningly, while any criticism is muted in the face of fear of prosecution; (or, more troublingly, death threats and violence from muslims directly).

Again, I call BS. Prove it.


So it's inevitable, therefore, that the point has been reached where a groundswell of anti-islamic sentiment is starting to rise in the non muslim community. It's unreasonable to expect non-muslims to embrace an angry minority that seemingly wants nothing more or less to enforce all its traditions and rules on the much larger majority. Especially when many of those traditions are so at odds with the fundamental values which the majority believes in. And doubly so when that minority has been so sucessful in using the government to stifle debate from its critics.

Again, you make generalizations that are unsupported and obviously not true to reality.



What really doesn't help is attitudes like yours. It's easy to sit in the US and take cheap shots about the very real problems in the UK and dismiss all of this as the work of biggoted neanderthals and badly educated simpletons. But that is far from the case. The recent backlash did not just arise spontaneously: there are very real causes for it; and a great number of them stem from the attitude of the muslim community itself, which believes, in britian, that it is above any form of criticism while any other group is fair game for their hate. (I am not going to be as foolish to deny that there has not always been an element which hated muslims simply because they were not white britons, but the facts are this type of behavior has generally been confined to a small minority of the british public and in no way explains why all of a sudden britian has a small but funcitoning Nazi party). Yet, the position that you hold, (no-one should criticize islam in general because it unfairly tars the moderates with the extremist brush), is exactly the type of justification that has been used to silence any debate about the shape and future of the islamic community in the UK and its relationship to the rest of society as a whole. It's nothing more than a wholesale denial of some very real problems that need to be addressed. More troublingly it's also led to a stifiling of the ordinary political process and has driven some people to support political viewpoints that probably would have disgusted them twenty years ago.

Yes, golly, I certainly hope that attitudes like mine will stop hurting all the bigots. How dare I suggest you treat individuals like individuals instead of rounding them up and abusing them based on gross generalizations. How dare I? I really should stop thinking and start acting out of emotion. That would be much better.


So continue to smugly tell people how you can tell the difference between this and that, and how you have it all figured out. The fact is you are still making hasty and ill considered judgments about the causes of all this.

Nope. I'm not making hasty judgements on the causes. The causes don't excuse the behavior. A reaction that punishes one for the actions of another is irrational, immoral and abominable. You may wish to chastise me for wishing to respect the rights of EVERYONE, but don't expect me to act like you're not just showing that you don't respect rights. And, yes, if rights don't belong to everyone, they belong to no one.

Now you've made a lot positive assertions about how the majority are being mistreated in England at the hands of the Muslims. I'll wait for proof as there was not one shred of it in this diatribe. Poor majority. If only they would be allowed to mistreat Muslims with abandon. How dare I suggest otherwise?

Ironic that Europe use to talk that way about Jews...:D

i take you are an american?

oh help i think i'm turning muslim! quick get some booze!
*downs a bottle of paddy*
ah back to catholic.

oh help i think i'm turning muslim! quick get some booze!
*downs a bottle of paddy*
ah back to catholic.

You convert to islam when you get sober?

:confused:

You convert to islam when you get sober?

:confused:

I hear its a serious problem in some people.

Just thought I'd share this with you:

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,717952,00.jpg
source (http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,442516,00.html)

The year? 1934.

That being said, I think the "Leitkultur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leitkultur)" idea is not a bad one (in the original form proposed by Bassam Tibi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bassam_Tibi):
Bassam Tibi first suggested a 'Leitkultur' in his 1998 book Europa ohne Identität ('Europe without identity'). He defined it in terms of what are commonly called western values, and spoke of a European rather than a German 'Leitkultur'. "The values needed for a core culture are those of modernity: democracy, secularism, the Enlightenment, human rights and civil society." (B. Tibi, Europa ohne Identität, p. 154). These core values are similar to those of the 'liberal-democratic basic order' (Freiheitlich-demokratischen Grundordnung) which is considered the foundational value of the post-war Federal Republic of Germany, and the unified German state after 1990. Tibi advocated a cultural pluralism based on a value consensus, rather than monoculturalism. However, he also opposed a value-blind multiculturalism, and the development of 'parallel societies' where immigrant minorities live and work, isolated from the western society around them. Tibi advocated a structured immigration policy, and opposed illegal immigration into Germany.
Now, what is so bad about this idea? Shouldn't both lefties and righties be happy with this?

I hear its a serious problem in some people.

dont worry drink up and an infedel.

If any group of people (let's call them "Blerks") immigrat to a country (let's call it... "Florblina") that doesn't hold the same values they do, and then they whine about it, why should the country they move into adapt to their demands? The Blerks are the ones who move to the Florblina, and are the ones who ought to adapt.

The Blerks knows full well that if a group from the nation they moved to (let's call this second group the "Flobles"), moved to the Blerk's old nation (Blerkinstan) that the Flobles would have to adapt and that if they whined, and moaned, they would be punished because Blerkistan is not liberal like Florblina is.

But, the media has indoctrined the Florbles so that they believe that they should change their laws to make the Blerks happy. But, the Blerks are never happy because they want things that the Florbles find morally bankrupt, such as oppression of women, criminalization of homosexuality, forced marriages, honour killings, et cetera....

This is what happens in this world.

There are VERY backward thinking nations with people who want to "escape" the oppression, but when they arrive in the new country they bring with them what is known as "cultural baggage".

This is why some people oppose immigration because they are being forced to pay the price for the "cultural baggage".

If any group of people (let's call them "Blerks") immigrat to a country (let's call it... "Florblina") that doesn't hold the same values they do, and then they whine about it, why should the country they move into adapt to their demands? The Blerks are the ones who move to the Florblina, and are the ones who ought to adapt.

The Blerks knows full well that if a group from the nation they moved to (let's call this second group the "Flobles"), moved to the Blerk's old nation (Blerkinstan) that the Flobles would have to adapt and that if they whined, and moaned, they would be punished because Blerkistan is not liberal like Florblina is.

But, the media has indoctrined the Florbles so that they believe that they should change their laws to make the Blerks happy. But, the Blerks are never happy because they want things that the Florbles find morally bankrupt, such as oppression of women, criminalization of homosexuality, forced marriages, honour killings, et cetera....

This is what happens in this world.

There are VERY backward thinking nations with people who want to "escape" the oppression, but when they arrive in the new country they bring with them what is known as "cultural baggage".

This is why some people oppose immigration because they are being forced to pay the price for the "cultural baggage".

And you would have a point if anyone was arguing they get special consideration, but the fact is that people are simply arguing that they get the same consideration that you would get if you moved there, which is freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. No one is arguing they should get to murder people, rape people or whatever. They just should be allowed to excercise their civil rights as they wish.

I always love these special rights arguments. Can you tell me where anyone has complained that a Muslim who violated the law was punished? Can you tell me where anyone claimed that other religions shouldn't get the same consideration as Muslims get? Or is it important that you continue the strawman?

And you would have a point if anyone was arguing they get special consideration, but the fact is that people are simply arguing that they get the same consideration that you would get if you moved there, which is freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. No one is arguing they should get to murder people, rape people or whatever. They just should be allowed to excercise their civil rights as they wish.

I always love these special rights arguments. Can you tell me where anyone has complained that a Muslim who violated the law was punished? Can you tell me where anyone claimed that other religions shouldn't get the same consideration as Muslims get? Or is it important that you continue the strawman?
I'm talking about the immigrant group forcing its will on the nation they move to, forcing the country to shed its much valued freedom, liberties and rights so that these minorities don't feel offended because someone kisses their gay partner in public, or... there is a show on TV that challenges the nature of a religion.

No.. this isn't a strawman. I'm simply pointing out that some people when they move to other nations do bring their "cultural baggage" with them and that will effect the relationship between the citizens and the immigrants (and first generation citizens).

People hate change. It's simple.

That's why people don't like when minorities demand that there be changes made that are unreasonable in the eyes of those who value their traditions, such as being able to go out in public and not fear intolerance because you're different, or you're not covered from head to toe.

No... I have no problem with immigrants. I just have a problem with assholes who move to a new country and demand that the new country become a little like the old one.

It's like if someone walks into your house and starts making unreasonable demands, but you can't throw them out because the rules say it's not right. But, if you change the rules, it becomes racism...

I'm talking about the immigrant group forcing its will on the nation they move to, forcing the country to shed its much valued freedom, liberties and rights so that these minorities don't feel offended because someone kisses their gay partner in public, or... there is a show on TV that challenges the nature of a religion.

No.. this isn't a strawman. I'm simply pointing out that some people when they move to other nations do bring their "cultural baggage" with them and that will effect the relationship between the citizens and the immigrants (and first generation citizens).

People hate change. It's simple.

That's why people don't like when minorities demand that there be changes made that are unreasonable in the eyes of those who value their traditions, such as being able to go out in public and not fear intolerance because you're different, or you're not covered from head to toe.

No... I have no problem with immigrants. I just have a problem with assholes who move to a new country and demand that the new country become a little like the old one. They're permitted to desire change, request change, even demand change. You've shown no evidence that anyone is arguing that they should actually get the change you're claiming they want, and it's only natural that they feel like they should be permitted to express their desires of the government just like everyone else. You're arguing that they don't deserve the rights you get.

It's like if someone walks into your house and starts making unreasonable demands, but you can't throw them out because the rules say it's not right. But, if you change the rules, it becomes racism...

Dissent is not permitted or even supported in Europe? Really? So no one in Europe that was born there complains about a show they don't like or a news story they didn't approve of? Or is dissent more allowable if you approve of it first?

This was in the times a week ago, old news.

If any group of people (let's call them "Blerks") immigrat to a country (let's call it... "Florblina") that doesn't hold the same values they do, and then they whine about it, why should the country they move into adapt to their demands? The Blerks are the ones who move to the Florblina, and are the ones who ought to adapt.

The Blerks knows full well that if a group from the nation they moved to (let's call this second group the "Flobles"), moved to the Blerk's old nation (Blerkinstan) that the Flobles would have to adapt and that if they whined, and moaned, they would be punished because Blerkistan is not liberal like Florblina is.

But, the media has indoctrined the Florbles so that they believe that they should change their laws to make the Blerks happy. But, the Blerks are never happy because they want things that the Florbles find morally bankrupt, such as oppression of women, criminalization of homosexuality, forced marriages, honour killings, et cetera....

This is what happens in this world.

There are VERY backward thinking nations with people who want to "escape" the oppression, but when they arrive in the new country they bring with them what is known as "cultural baggage".

This is why some people oppose immigration because they are being forced to pay the price for the "cultural baggage".


You forgot to mention that Blerks breed much faster than Florbles and are expected to double their population in less than 25 years while the native Florbles are declining. This would suggest, considering basic math, IF TRENDS CONTINUE, Blerks will be a majority in sometime in the future, turning their "cultural baggage" to cultural invasion.

Silly boy. You just said they were immigrants.

See? You fear the muslim immigrants, not the natives. As you said previously. :)

Yeah I said immigrants but I believe we disagree on what is a immigrant and what is a native and clearly you didnt read the dictionary very well, given you missed the "indigenous" reference there :)

Those born in and descended from Turks in Europe are. And you certainly have a problem with them.

Most Turks arent native European neither. That's not up for discussion as 97% of Turkey is outside Europe.

Just thought I'd share this with you:

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,717952,00.jpg
source (http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,442516,00.html)

The year? 1934.



They were right, werent they? The population of Germany were more or less stagnant in 20th century and lately it's declining. This highly contrasts with non-european countries, most of which at least tripled their populations.

Yes, because only "Europe" (as you know, "Europe" as a whole enslaved the entire world) did bad stuff in the past. It's not like other nations enslaved people, invaded countries, murdered en masse...

And no, we aren't being colonized.

Time for this little man: :rolleyes:

Are you denying the atrocities commited by Slovenians in Africa. ARE YOU??? :mad:

The population of Germany were more or less stagnant in 20th century and lately it's declining.
What a strange thing to say for our resident demographer...

Germans in Germany

-around 1900: 56 million
-around 1950: 68 million (that's what two wars will do to you...)
-around 1997: 75 million

Either way, here (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1536049) are the current predictions. But then, this may well just be a negative baby boom and the birth rates could go back up. And if they don't, so be it. What me worry, I'll be dead by the time it matters.

What a strange thing to say for our resident demographer...

Germans in Germany

-around 1900: 56 million
-around 1950: 68 million (that's what two wars will do to you...)
-around 1997: 75 million

Either way, here (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1536049) are the current predictions. But then, this may well just be a negative baby boom and the birth rates could go back up. And if they don't, so be it. What me worry, I'll be dead by the time it matters.

http://www.waxingamerica.com/images/alfred_2_1.jpg

http://www.waxingamerica.com/images/alfred_2_1.jpg
;)

If any group of people (let's call them "Blerks") immigrat to a country (let's call it... "Florblina") that doesn't hold the same values they do, and then they whine about it, why should the country they move into adapt to their demands? The Blerks are the ones who move to the Florblina, and are the ones who ought to adapt.

The Blerks knows full well that if a group from the nation they moved to (let's call this second group the "Flobles"), moved to the Blerk's old nation (Blerkinstan) that the Flobles would have to adapt and that if they whined, and moaned, they would be punished because Blerkistan is not liberal like Florblina is.

But, the media has indoctrined the Florbles so that they believe that they should change their laws to make the Blerks happy. But, the Blerks are never happy because they want things that the Florbles find morally bankrupt, such as oppression of women, criminalization of homosexuality, forced marriages, honour killings, et cetera....

This is what happens in this world.

There are VERY backward thinking nations with people who want to "escape" the oppression, but when they arrive in the new country they bring with them what is known as "cultural baggage".

This is why some people oppose immigration because they are being forced to pay the price for the "cultural baggage".

I agree actually, just look at the muhammed drawings. and no, I know that most countries is against to criminize gays and so forth, but here in norway our own primeminister said that the people who printed the muhammed drawings (can't remember their names) should take partial blame for the wrecking of our ambassies in syria and such.

WTF? he should be held responible for what some wackos does on the under side of the globe?? freedom of speech goes both ways and we (should) have a right to be provocative.

It's like if someone walks into your house and starts making unreasonable demands, but you can't throw them out because the rules say it's not right. But, if you change the rules, it becomes racism...

good one and and I actually agree :eek:

What a strange thing to say for our resident demographer...

Germans in Germany

-around 1900: 56 million
-around 1950: 68 million (that's what two wars will do to you...)
-around 1997: 75 million

Either way, here (http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1536049) are the current predictions. But then, this may well just be a negative baby boom and the birth rates could go back up. And if they don't, so be it. What me worry, I'll be dead by the time it matters.

Oh wow, a 33% inrease in almost 100 years. Lets compare it to India:

pop in 1900: 271,306,000
pop in 1997: 962378,000

increase: 255%



Kenya:

pop in 1950: 6,416,000
pop in 1997: 27,885,000
http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Africa/Kenya-POPULATION.html

increase in less than 50 years: 350%



Another industrialized country, Japan:

pop in 1920: 55M
pop in 2000: 126M
http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/kokusei/2000/final/hyodai.htm

increase in 80 years: 129%

So they were right, afterall, in that poster.

;)
What can I say? It made me think of you :p

Yeah I said immigrants but I believe we disagree on what is a immigrant and what is a native and clearly you didnt read the dictionary very well, given you missed the "indigenous" reference there :)
Don't worry your pretty little head, I saw it. ;)

The question would be: For how many generations back would you demand they've lived in a place before you would classify them as natives?

And what is your definition of an immigrant?

And you also don't fear people who convert to Islam, right?

What can I say? It made me think of you :p


Don't worry your pretty little head, I saw it. ;)

The question would be: For how many generations back would you demand they've lived in a place before you would classify them as natives?

And what is your definition of an immigrant?

And you also don't fear people who convert to Islam, right?

For all muslims; dislike & concern =/= fear

Whilst studying Islam it became apparent to me that Islam is a good religion if you are a muslim! It seems to have some good qualities about it. However, it is stubborn and arrogant to other religions. It is true that Christianity was once like this but it has changed because it had to if it was to remain true to its peace loving values. It could not preach love but declare a crusade on those who didn't share the faith without being hypocritical. Islam needs to grow up and mature in the same manner. It too states that it is a faith of peace. In order for it to grow up it needs to accept the world as it is and intergrate into it quietly. Sad news is that it doesn't want to. Recently the head of the Muslim society in Holland said that "Amsterdam is filthy and must change its ways" when pointed out that it is known for it liberal ways and Muslims moving here should accept it and intergrate the response he gave was "Muslims do not intergrate".
Says it all really, Look at England, whole areas are 100% muslim occupied. There is no multi cultural society there, just a patchwork of different conflicting ideals that will one day errupt into bigger problems, maybe even like that of 1936 Germany. If Muslim's want to be a part of Europe there should be laws that will force intergration. This is for the greater good of both the current ethnic europeans (who will feel less "invaded") and for the incoming Muslims, who will not feel as much of a target if they are better intergrated.

For all muslims; dislike & concern =/= fear

Oh, so it's dislike muslims and fear immigrants then? :confused:

For all muslims; dislike & concern =/= fearThe lies we keep telling ourselves... :D

The lies we keep telling ourselves... :D
The lies Europe keeps telling itself. :)

The lies Europe keeps telling itself. :)

Indeed. We should start exporting the scum now. And if they make a fuss? Well, a few bullets should make them think otherwise....damn Jewis...Muslims. Yes...Muslims...

For all muslims; dislike & concern =/= fear

Oh, and you forgot to answer the questions...

You forgot to mention that Blerks breed much faster than Florbles and are expected to double their population in less than 25 years while the native Florbles are declining. This would suggest, considering basic math, IF TRENDS CONTINUE, Blerks will be a majority in sometime in the future, turning their "cultural baggage" to cultural invasion.
The point that you make is understandable, but you are missing something in your math considerations.

IF the Florbles do not allow ANY immigration, then eventually they will become extinct, or almost non existent. Before they become extinct, the population will age to the extent that there will be less and less people to look after the aging population, and economic prosperity and quality of life will decline significantly.

In most western countries, immigration bolsters the declining indigenous populations, and provides workers/consumers to allow for economic growth.

Most Turks arent native European neither. That's not up for discussion as 97% of Turkey is outside Europe.

Since reading isn't your thing, I'll help -
"Those born in and descended from Turks in Europe are. And you certainly have a problem with them."

The point is that some of them are and you don't care about whether THEY are indigenous. You've already made it clear that indigenous is not the deciding factor or do we need to mention the indigenous population of Norway that you also don't like?

Oh wow, a 33% inrease in almost 100 years. Lets compare it to India:

pop in 1900: 271,306,000
pop in 1997: 962378,000

increase: 255%



Kenya:

pop in 1950: 6,416,000
pop in 1997: 27,885,000
http://www.nationsencyclopedia.com/Africa/Kenya-POPULATION.html

increase in less than 50 years: 350%



Another industrialized country, Japan:

pop in 1920: 55M
pop in 2000: 126M
http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/kokusei/2000/final/hyodai.htm

increase in 80 years: 129%

So they were right, afterall, in that poster.

A positive increase still isn't a decline. Now our populations can continue to grow until, like some other countries, people are starving in the streets, or perhaps, perhaps, we could consider that much of the world is over-populated and many countries are over-populated and look for a more graceful solution. You can keep throwing nuclear bombs at cockroaches, but don't surprised when you clear away the rubble and the only thing left is the cockroach.

You forgot to mention that Blerks breed much faster than Florbles and are expected to double their population in less than 25 years while the native Florbles are declining. This would suggest, considering basic math, IF TRENDS CONTINUE, Blerks will be a majority in sometime in the future, turning their "cultural baggage" to cultural invasion.

Ah, yes, the INVASION. Fear the INVASION, boys. We're being INVADED. I'm so glad I don't live in the state of fear that some on your side of the fence do, NN.

Ah, yes, the INVASION. Fear the INVASION, boys. We're being INVADED. I'm so glad I don't live in the state of fear that some on your side of the fence do, NN.

Oh, not just invasion! It's genocide! Against Whites! :rolleyes:

The point that you make is understandable, but you are missing something in your math considerations.

IF the Florbles do not allow ANY immigration, then eventually they will become extinct, or almost non existent. Before they become extinct, the population will age to the extent that there will be less and less people to look after the aging population, and economic prosperity and quality of life will decline significantly.

In most western countries, immigration bolsters the declining indigenous populations, and provides workers/consumers to allow for economic growth.

Not really. There are 770M people in Europe. Let's say 700M are real Europeans, a conservative guess, which is kinda depressing when we consider the population of china and india and than add them together. Anyways, It'd take us couple of milleniums for us to be extinct if trends continue. However such trends wouldnt continue for such large periods. Therefore your extinction theory is not plausible. Besides, declining population trends can be reversed, as is happening in France. I may create a thread about it soon.
Anyways, with immigration and higher than avarage birthrates, muslims/immigrants can outnumber ethnic/native/indiginous europeans within this century, if trends dont change, that's plausible.

Oh, and you forgot to answer the questions...

Hopefully, next time you wont "guess" my feelings...

Anyways, with immigration and higher than avarage birthrates, muslims/immigrants can outnumber ethnic/native/indiginous europeans within this century, if trends dont change, that's plausible.

And there's not a damned thing you can do about it.

Since reading isn't your thing, I'll help -
"Those born in and descended from Turks in Europe are. And you certainly have a problem with them."

The point is that some of them are and you don't care about whether THEY are indigenous. You've already made it clear that indigenous is not the deciding factor or do we need to mention the indigenous population of Norway that you also don't like?


97% of Turkey is in Asia. And the nativeness of Turks in European side is questionable. You see Turks arent indiginous to Europe, they arrived from Central Asia. They absorbed some European peoples, so there probably are native European Turks, but they are a slim minority hence while discussing Turks, I find those elements negligible, like rounding up fractions.
About Norway, Germanics are indigenous to southern areas as well.

A positive increase still isn't a decline. Now our populations can continue to grow until, like some other countries, people are starving in the streets, or perhaps, perhaps, we could consider that much of the world is over-populated and many countries are over-populated and look for a more graceful solution. You can keep throwing nuclear bombs at cockroaches, but don't surprised when you clear away the rubble and the only thing left is the cockroach.

I didnt say German pop. declined in 20th century. Looking over the statistics again, Kenya adds one Norway in each 8 years.

97% of Turkey is in Asia. And the nativeness of Turks in European side is questionable. You see Turks arent indiginous to Europe, they arrived from Central Asia. They absorbed some European peoples, so there probably are native European Turks, but they are a slim minority hence while discussing Turks, I find those elements negligible, like rounding up fractions.
About Norway, Germanics are indigenous to southern areas as well.

You can't find them negligible when I'm talking about them specifically. If they exist, and they do, then they are people. You admit that you don't like them because of the country they live in even though they are native Europeans. Quit squirming.

And my point about Norway was not about the Germanics, it was about the Samis which you also have a problem with and claim aren't really Norwegian. I wasn't saying anything about the Germanics.

Ah, yes, the INVASION. Fear the INVASION, boys. We're being INVADED. I'm so glad I don't live in the state of fear that some on your side of the fence do, NN.

You usually criticisize me of not answering your points. This is another example of why, which usually makes me like...whatever!

I didnt say German pop. declined in 20th century. Looking over the statistics again, Kenya adds one Norway in each 8 years.

So? Why should we care? Do you really want to have the same problems as Kenya or India? It's not a race to see who can put more people on the planet despite you're fairly simplistic view on population. If people keep breeding at the rate they are, it won't be a good thing for white people to be in the majority in 30 years.

Oh, not just invasion! It's genocide! Against Whites! :rolleyes:

Yo bro, wassup?

Hopefully, next time you wont "guess" my feelings...

I apologise if I hurt your feelings. I'm just trying to figure out what you're thinking.

Now... Care to answer?

You usually criticisize me of not answering your points. This is another example of why, which usually makes me like...whatever!

You use a term like invasion, hoping for an emotional response. It's a fear tactic. I simply responded to it. You know and I know it's not actually an invasion. And before you pretend you were using it differently you are clearly trying to associate their coming with the invasion of an army.

Yo bro, wassup?

Hey that's pretty funny. Cuz I'm a black man, right? And Jocabia is a Jew? And Deep Kimchi is me? And etc etc ad nauseam.

I guess I should be offended, but I'm not. You'll have to try harder, nazi boy.

let everybody go singing toward the 12.....
http://www.mwscomp.com/sounds/mp3/brghtsd.mp3

You can't find them negligible when I'm talking about them specifically. If they exist, and they do, then they are people. You admit that you don't like them because of the country they live in even though they are native Europeans. Quit squirming.

And my point about Norway was not about the Germanics, it was about the Samis which you also have a problem with and claim aren't really Norwegian. I wasn't saying anything about the Germanics.

Actually, about native European Turks, I wouldnt mind them living in Europe as long as they integrate culturally. But such a screening process of incoming Turks is unlikely in RL so that's why I neglect them.

Not really. There are 770M people in Europe. Let's say 700M are real Europeans, a conservative guess, which is kinda depressing when we consider the population of china and india and than add them together. Anyways, It'd take us couple of milleniums for us to be extinct if trends continue. However such trends wouldnt continue for such large periods. Therefore your extinction theory is not plausible. Besides, declining population trends can be reversed, as is happening in France. I may create a thread about it soon.
Anyways, with immigration and higher than avarage birthrates, muslims/immigrants can outnumber ethnic/native/indiginous europeans within this century, if trends dont change, that's plausible.

What? You've actually learned something. *beams* You're correct. Extinction is not plausible.

Meanwhile, you still treat populations like a competition. What would be kinda depressing is if every country in the world was irresponsible with their population growth as China and India.

I apologise if I hurt your feelings. I'm just trying to figure out what you're thinking.

Now... Care to answer?

What was the question? :p

Hey that's pretty funny. Cuz I'm a black man, right? And Jocabia is a Jew? And Deep Kimchi is me? And etc etc ad nauseam.

I guess I should be offended, but I'm not. You'll have to try harder, nazi boy.

I was just trying to be friendly :(

Actually, about native European Turks, I wouldnt mind them living in Europe as long as they integrate culturally. But such a screening process of incoming Turks is unlikely in RL so that's why I neglect them.

Amusing. You've stated clearly that your concern is white people and that you hope for white people to be in the majority in the world. We know this isn't about whether they were born on one side of that line or the other, and you know it. Being disingenuous doesn't help your cause.

Neither does "yo bro, wassup?" Calling people black isn't an insult to anyone except you. To the rest of us, it just makes us think you're sad and scared.

I was just trying to be friendly :(

By assuming I'm black? And assuming that would be an insult? It only shows that you're a fucking racist scumbag. Not that I mind... feel free to come clean with your bigotry more often. It's better than your pathetic attempts to hide it for the sake of PC.

Amusing. You've stated clearly that your concern is white people and that you hope for white people to be in the majority in the world. We know this isn't about whether they were born on one side of that line or the other, and you know it. Being disingenuous doesn't help your cause.

Neither does "yo bro, wassup?" Calling people black isn't an insult to anyone except you. To the rest of us, it just makes us think you're sad and scared.

Being the "racist eugenicist" I am, I'll suggest you and Gravlen breed together. The resulting baby(ies) would have excellent mind reading powers, hence a great asset to our species ;)

By assuming I'm black? And assuming that would be an insult? It only shows that you're a fucking racist scumbag. Not that I mind... feel free to come clean with your bigotry more often. It's better than your pathetic attempts to hide it for the sake of PC.

HAHA. Assuming? Why would I assume when you have told me so, yourself? :)

Being the "racist eugenicist" I am, I'll suggest you and Gravlen breed together. ;)

is there somewhere a "hall of fame thingy"?
After the process that is.

is there somewhere a "hall of fame thingy"?

to include Mr Irony?

to include Mr Irony?

of course.

.humble:)

You use a term like invasion, hoping for an emotional response.

Meanwhile, you still treat populations like a competition.

Rule number one: everything is an invasion. Rule number two: everything is a competition. People who are winning these invasions and competitions just pretend they aren't.

Being the "racist eugenicist" I am, I'll suggest you and Gravlen breed together. The resulting baby(ies) would have excellent mind reading powers, hence a great asset to our species ;)

Yes, we're all idiots. We can't see through the thick veil you placed on your post. That's what is so sad about your behavior, NN, you think you're so sneaky and then get mad that every sees right through it. You admitted to supporting eugenics just this week. Or did you forget. And you've admitted to being a racist or did you forget. Now, of course, you didn't use those words but you admitting to all the qualities that would fit those words, and we're quite capable of applying the dictionary.

Meanwhile, as usual, you are quite careful to avoid substantive posts while you post your drivel intending to insult people for being non-whites.

Yes, we're all idiots. We can't see through the thick veil you placed on your post. That's what is so sad about your behavior, NN, you think you're so sneaky and then get mad that every sees right through it. You admitted to supporting eugenics just this week. Or did you forget. And you've admitted to being a racist or did you forget. Now, of course, you didn't use those words but you admitting to all the qualities that would fit those words, and we're quite capable of applying the dictionary.

Meanwhile, as usual, you are quite careful to avoid substantive posts while you post your drivel intending to insult people for being non-whites.

OMG Jocabia, take a good look at yourself just this once. Have I ever said being black is an insult/negative?

Yes, we're all idiots. We can't see through the thick veil you placed on your post. That's what is so sad about your behavior, NN, you think you're so sneaky and then get mad that every sees right through it. You admitted to supporting eugenics just this week. Or did you forget. And you've admitted to being a racist or did you forget. Now, of course, you didn't use those words but you admitting to all the qualities that would fit those words, and we're quite capable of applying the dictionary.

Meanwhile, as usual, you are quite careful to avoid substantive posts while you post your drivel intending to insult people for being non-whites.
i'm white,

What was the question? :p
The question would be: For how many generations back would you demand they've lived in a place before you would classify them as natives?

And what is your definition of an immigrant?

And you also don't fear people who convert to Islam, right?
Being the "racist eugenicist" I am, I'll suggest you and Gravlen breed together. The resulting baby(ies) would have excellent mind reading powers, hence a great asset to our species ;)
They would probably learn some manners as well ;)

HAHA. Assuming? Why would I assume when you have told me so, yourself? :)

Find the quote, Einstein. (Oops, Einstein wasn't Nordic White Ubermensch, he was a Jew. Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you!)

Otherwise hey. "Ny Nordland told me he has sexual feelings towards domesticated sheep." Must be true! :) :) :)

Find the quote, Einstein. (Oops, Einstein wasn't Nordic White Ubermensch, he was a Jew. Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you!)

Einstein was just as white as me.

Einstein was just as white as me.

stop

OMG Jocabia, take a good look at yourself just this once. Have I ever said being black is an insult/negative?

No, you've not said it. You've just used it that way repeatedly. As well as being Brazilian, Muslim and any number of other terms you like to throw around as if they're insults. Why does it matter if he is black or isn't? Because you think it dismisses him as a person whose opinion on the racist subjects you spout don't count. Otherwise, why bother to argue with him about it. The color of his skin has NOTHING to do with debate. Nor does whether or not I'm a Jew, which you said to me to dismiss me, or whether someone is an 'irrelevant Brazilian'.

Now as to the eugenist point -
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11825980&postcount=141
Just yesterday espousing eugenics.

And I don't think racism is up for debate when you admit that you wish for a majoritively white world.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11807647&postcount=14
Apparently there are only whites and non-whites and the non-whites are all ganged up against whites according to you.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11650468&postcount=222
"And I'd prefer a world with a white majority, but that's just too surreal."

Seriously, let's not pretend like things are different than they are and move on. You're here to complain about non-whites. You know it, I know it. Let's just be honest about it so we can have a real discussion instead of you playing the "I didn't actually say it" game. You treat everyone like they're too stupid to see through your rather simple attempts to hide your purpose and then get angry when it turns out that most people aren't as stupid as you'd like them to be.

Einstein was just as white as me.

NN is a big fan of Angry White Female, and other nazis whose idea of "racial purity" is such that they generally don't consider Jews human, let alone "white."

Find the quote, Einstein. (Oops, Einstein wasn't Nordic White Ubermensch, he was a Jew. Sorry, I didn't mean to insult you!)

Otherwise hey. "Ny Nordland told me he has sexual feelings towards domesticated sheep." Must be true! :) :) :)

Ok. I hope you arent going to deny that you were Trostia as well or go edit your post.


Oh, so you think Heikoku and I have the same mental capacity?

Well, I'll have you know I'm black, and Heikoku sounds Asian to me. Since you've posted numerous links to studies that show how much more intelligent Asians (or whites) compared to blacks, I think you are now disagreeing mostly with yourself, mein herr. Clearly Heikoku's got far more mental capacity than me

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11274985&postcount=275



Oh you are black huh? Why did you claim to be white in previous threads?

I dunno, why do you keep claiming not to be a bigoted xenophobe?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11275030&postcount=285


Edit: Reading the posts, my apologies for the flames, Trostia/Santa Barbara/Republica de Tropico/Greater Trostia. Sorry.

Ok.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11274985&postcount=275


http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11275030&postcount=285

Ha! When I said "Heikoku sounds Asian," I was mocking YOUR habit of assuming people's ethnic background based on their forum handles. I'm not surprised you failed to see that and you just assumed I was actually being as bigoted as you.

Leave it to you to come around months later and go, "Yo, bro, wassup?"

As for being black, you can assume whatever the fuck you want. Like I said, getting you to expose and admit your own obvious racism has been something of a triumph for me. Any means to an end, as they say. ;)

Well well well, what do we have here? NN trying to escape his beating in this argument by attempting to turn it into a "wether X said that he was black" contest! That's cute, only it does NOT answer any points of the topic at hand.

Still, it's cute. Like a baby trying to type. Well... Like NN.

Can we get back on topic? I understand that NN started it with the "Yo, bro, wassup? comment, but by totally hijacking the topic, you're just doing what he wants. He's trolling, we all know it. Calling him names or hijacking the topic are all the negative attention he so obviously craves. Plus, since we're all non-whites according to him, it confirms that we're all out to get him.

fuck you all,where is the center?

I notice that attacking the poster rather than the argument is entirely acceptable when it's Ny Nordland. :rolleyes:

I notice that attacking the poster rather than the argument is entirely acceptable when it's Ny Nordland. :rolleyes:

Agreed and it shouldn't be. However, he kind of makes his bed when he makes comments about people's origin, race and whatnot as if they are insults or dismiss their arguments. Shall I show you how many times he's refused to address an argument because of the poster who wrote, a poster he's repeatedly comment is part of non-white group X.

I notice that attacking the poster rather than the argument is entirely acceptable when it's Ny Nordland. :rolleyes:

"Yo bro, wassup?" is an argument? Hmm, ad hominem maybe. But I guess your point is that he should be allowed to say whatever he wants, but the rest of us should censor ourselves so as not to hurt his delicate sensibilities.

I notice that attacking the poster rather than the argument is entirely acceptable when it's Ny Nordland. :rolleyes:Accepted or acceptable?

I notice that attacking the poster rather than the argument is entirely acceptable when it's Ny Nordland. :rolleyes:

*shrug* Pretty much. Plan to do something about it?

OHNOES TEH MUSLIMS! :rolleyes:

Don't you ever get tired of whining about Muslims polluting your idea of a Pure White North?

Sorry? Pure white? I sincerely doubt that. I, and Nordland, may object to the fact that, despite the irreconcililable disparities between Islam and the West, multiculturalism, and immigration, is still prosecuted, however we by no means deplore all immigration.

Sorry? Pure white? I sincerely doubt that. I, and Nordland, may object to the fact that, despite the irreconcililable disparities between Islam and the West, multiculturalism, and immigration, is still prosecuted, however we by no means deplore all immigration.

Speak for yourself - NN has made his position clear many times on immigration (he's against it) as well as his white racism.

Speak for yourself - NN has made his position clear many times on immigration (he's against it) as well as his white racism.

In truth, so am I. British immigration was originally justified upon economic grounds, a justification that is now neither viable nor teneble.

In truth, so am I. British immigration was originally justified upon economic grounds, a justification that is now neither viable nor teneble.

Well, he also wishes for a majority white world as quoted, admits that he only classifies people as white and non-white as quoted and he dismisses the opinion of anybody who is non-white, jewish, etc. You can argue about your position, but he has made his clear.

In truth, so am I. British immigration was originally justified upon economic grounds, a justification that is now neither viable nor teneble.
that is it, you justify something that can not be...
Slavery

that is it, you justify something that can not be...
Slavery

Slavery? How so? Did you think he said Imperialism?

Well, he also wishes for a majority white world as quoted, admits that he only classifies people as white and non-white as quoted and he dismisses the opinion of anybody who is non-white, jewish, etc. You can argue about your position, but he has made his clear.

Yet you still dont understand it, obviously.

Yet you still dont understand it, obviously.

How so? What is your position?

They would probably learn some manners as well ;)

:(

As for the question, anyone who isnt indigenous European is an immigrant in Europe. Anyone who is indigenous European but who can not be integrated into the European culture(s) (ex: some muslims) are immigrant in Europe as well. So basically I define immigrants based on ethnical and cultural grounds.

In truth, so am I. British immigration was originally justified upon economic grounds, a justification that is now neither viable nor teneble.

Majority of British agrees with you.

:(

As for the question, anyone who isnt indigenous European is an immigrant in Europe. Anyone who is indigenous European but who can not be integrated into the European culture(s) (ex: some muslims) are immigrant in Europe as well. So basically I define immigrants based on ethnical and cultural grounds.So most Americans are European?

So most Americans are European?

If they can be integrated into European cultures. That requires living here for awhile.

If they can be integrated into European cultures. That requires living here for awhile.

Actually I'm doing pretty well with that at the moment.

If they can be integrated into European cultures. That requires living here for awhile.You can do the same with other immigrants.

You can do the same with other immigrants.

You know that I dont think that. Besides, Americans are light years closer culturally than, say, muslims...

You know that I dont think that. Besides, Americans are light years closer culturally than, say, muslims...I know that you don't speak from experience. ;)
The muslims I know integrated perfectly. Some don't, but then again, some indigenous Europeans don't either.

Yet you still dont understand it, obviously.

As Py said, how so? I quoted you explicitly stating everything I've said is your position. If I don't understand by regurgitating what you've actually said, then perhaps the failure is your ability to communicate what you believe.

Are you denying that you said that you hope for a majority white world?

Are you denying that when someone said that just because whites won't be in the majority that doesn't mean that some other group will become the majority, but instead that all groups would be less than the majority and your response was ... non-white will be the majority? Are you denying that you tried to claim that the division is whites and non-whites?

Are you denying that you've repeatedly dismissed the arguments of others not based on their merit but instead based on the color of someone's skin, their ethnicity, their religion or their location?

You know that I dont think that. Besides, Americans are light years closer culturally than, say, muslims...

Did they forget to tell you? Reality is not shaped by your opinions. You are not a god.

Majority of British agrees with you.
How the fuck do you know?

:(

As for the question, anyone who isnt indigenous European is an immigrant in Europe. Anyone who is indigenous European but who can not be integrated into the European culture(s) (ex: some muslims) are immigrant in Europe as well. So basically I define immigrants based on ethnical and cultural grounds.
Strange definition in my mind, but no matter.

Then how would you define an indigenous European?
You know that I dont think that. Besides, Americans are light years closer culturally than, say, muslims...
:rolleyes:

I simply don't know what else to say. I won't even mention american muslims. Your lack of differentiation is astounding.

How so? What is your position?

Give him time to come up with some shabby lie that either contradicts everything he's posted on the subject so far, or tries yet again to justify and dismiss his bigotry as some kind of gospel truth.

If they can be integrated into European cultures. That requires living here for awhile.What's integrated? Do define. Is having a restaurant/small business integrated? (Well, of course not, cos average Norwegian won't take a chance and go small business... it's just taxes and overheads). The average Muslim in Norway is more integrated than you are, NN, face it now.

Indeed. We should start exporting the scum now. And if they make a fuss? Well, a few bullets should make them think otherwise....damn Jewis...Muslims. Yes...Muslims...
Wow. All I had to say is a couple of words, and yes, we managed to infer all of this. How clever we are. :D

...Europe is currently facing a major problem - it is facing immigrants who are not integrating well, economic systems which are being crippled by the costs of integration (e.g. Sweden, to give an example), yet whose livelihood depends on it (again, Sweden's lavish welfare state would crumble without immigrants), leading essentially to spiralling destruction. What do we do? We stick our heads in the ground, wax rapturous about multiculturalism and the "European social model", and we move deeper and deeper into trouble.

We have cases such as professors in Norway claiming that Norwegian girls should shoulder the burden of their rape by Muslims "because we are living in multicultural societies, and they must realise this." We have Judges telling rapists that a letter of apology to their victim is sufficient because they are not aware, somehow, that Swedish girls studying in Britain don't like rape. We have 14-year old girls being accused of racism because they refuse to work in a group which does not speak their language. And on top of this, every fucking Nazi party is making electoral gains due to said stupidity. Not to mention 40% of Muslims in the UK saying they'd be comfy with Sharia Law...

Make no mistake - I have no problem with Muslims or immigrants, and least of all Jews (they tend to be invisible in fact) - so long as they integrate and are culturally compatible, without putting a significant strain on the host nation - ergo this is on the assumption of a minimal state, where the shiny welfare state is considerably slimmed down and available to citizens only.

Yes, Europe is still wonderful. In fact, let us call this Europe's Golden Age! ^^ Of course, when we realise that this "gold" is nothing but fool's gold, remove our tinfoil hats, and we start waking to up what is going on around us, then maybe we will realise we are indeed the ones deluding ourselves, and that Europe needs reform.

Nordland, this European is with you. Go to www.prophetofdoom.org to see more about Mohammed, leader of the cult of Islam.

Website does not exist....I'm hoping your being sarcastic.

Agreed and it shouldn't be. However, he kind of makes his bed when he makes comments about people's origin, race and whatnot as if they are insults or dismiss their arguments. Shall I show you how many times he's refused to address an argument because of the poster who wrote, a poster he's repeatedly comment is part of non-white group X.
Bash him when he does that, but when he posts and intelligent piece, discuss it, rather than bash him personally.

"Yo bro, wassup?" is an argument? Hmm, ad hominem maybe. But I guess your point is that he should be allowed to say whatever he wants, but the rest of us should censor ourselves so as not to hurt his delicate sensibilities.
Is ther something wrong with your browser that caused you to miss the entire article he posted? I don't like NN and think that he deserves what he gets when spouting racist bullshit, but that doesn't mean we should flame him whenever he opens his mouth.

This 'punishment' mentality is damaging to intelligent debate.

Hey, it is at www.prophetofdoom.net

I'll let the Quran speak for me as far as violence goes, I don't need to use weasel words. Quran encourages violence.

In Cyprus, where I am from, Turkish occupied area has no churches, all Churches were converted into Mosques or demolished. In free Cyprus the Government uses taxpayers money to help upkeep the Mosques. Is this fair? I am sick of kow-towing to the Muslims, I am SICK of it.

"By God, he is not a true believer,
from whose mischief his neighbors do not feel secure."
Prophet Mohammed (Bukhari, Muslim)

Whoever does good equal to the weight of an atom shall see it and whoever does evil equal to the weight of an atom shall see it.
(Quran 99:7-8)

25:63:

The worshippers of the All-Merciful are they who tread gently upon the earth, and when the ignorant address them, they reply, "Peace!"



25

64. They pass the night in adoration of their Lord, prostrating themselves and then rising.

65. They say, "Our Lord, avert from us the torment of hell. Its torture is ruinous.

66. It is an evil place and abode."

67. When they spend, they are neither spendthrifts nor miserly, but keep to a golden mean.

68. They do not call on any deity other than the one God. They do not kill a person, the taking of whose blood God has forbidden, except for just cause. They do not commit adultery. Those who commit these acts must pay. Their torment on the Judgment Day will be doubled, and they will be consigned to eternal abasement--

69. Unless they repent, have faith, and do righteous works. For such as these, God changes their evil deeds into good works. God is forgiving and compassionate.


28:55, And when they hear vain talk, they turn away from it and say: "To us our deeds, and to you yours; peace be to you: we do not seek out the ignorant."

Quran 5:69 says (Arberry): "Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Christians, and those Sabeaans, whoso believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness--their wage waits them with their Lord, and no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow."


5:82. " . . . and you will find the nearest in love to the believers (Muslims) those who say: 'We are Christians.' That is because amongst them are priests and monks, and they are not proud."

[4:90] Exempt those who join a people with whom you have concluded a peace treaty, and those who come to you with hearts unwilling to fight you, nor to fight their relatives. Had God willed, he could have placed them in power over you and they would have made war on you. Therefore, if they leave you alone, refrain from fighting you, and offer you peace, then God gives you no way to go against them.

Quran 4:94:

. . . Do not say to one who offers you peace, "You are not a believer," seeking the spoils of this life. For God has abundant treasure. You used to be like them, after all, and then God blessed you.

Hey, it is at www.prophetofdoom.net

I'll let the Quran speak for me as far as violence goes, I don't need to use weasel words. Quran encourages violence.

In Cyprus, where I am from, Turkish occupied area has no churches, all Churches were converted into Mosques or demolished. In free Cyprus the Government uses taxpayers money to help upkeep the Mosques. Is this fair? I am sick of kow-towing to the Muslims, I am SICK of it.
I've lived in Cyprus for a few years, and indeed the politics of the island are insane - I cannot believe the absurdities on part of the Turkish-Cypriot pseudostate most of the time. Nor can I stop being amazed at Ankara's defiance, even at the doors of the EU, to put an end to its idiotic practises and foolish arrogance.

We have cases such as professors in Norway claiming that Norwegian girls should shoulder the burden of their rape by Muslims "because we are living in multicultural societies, and they must realise this." We have Judges telling rapists that a letter of apology to their victim is sufficient because they are not aware, somehow, that Swedish girls studying in Britain don't like rape. We have 14-year old girls being accused of racism because they refuse to work in a group which does not speak their language. And on top of this, every fucking Nazi party is making electoral gains due to said stupidity. Not to mention 40% of Muslims in the UK saying they'd be comfy with Sharia Law...
In Cyprus, where I am from, Turkish occupied area has no churches, all Churches were converted into Mosques or demolished. In free Cyprus the Government uses taxpayers money to help upkeep the Mosques. Is this fair? I am sick of kow-towing to the Muslims, I am SICK of it.
And in this we see the problem. Who says Norwegian girls should be blamed for their rape? Norwegian professors. Who says that letters of apology to rape victims are sufficient? Swedish judges. Who gives taxpayers' money to the mosques? The government. I don't see any Muslims there. The problem is not on their end, it's on the idiots who insist on pandering to them. Of course you have extremist nuts who advocate the same, but you have extremist nuts everywhere from all religions. The Muslims just get more air time.

And in this we see the problem. Who says Norwegian girls should be blamed for their rape? Norwegian professors.Problem is, these mentalities are actually widespread! I've had friends in Sweden tell me how girls there do indeed often think it's partially their fault for not being "sensitive enough to the culture of immigrants." Scandinavians are in part conformists, and if you have an idiot elite telling you how to think, then such problems will arise.



Who says that letters of apology to rape victims are sufficient? Swedish judges.
English ones. This happened in England.

Who gives taxpayers' money to the mosques? The government. I don't see any Muslims there. The problem is not on their end, it's on the idiots who insist on pandering to them. Of course you have extremist nuts who advocate the same, but you have extremist nuts everywhere from all religions. The Muslims just get more air time.
I think you misunderstood me - I wasn't lashing out at Muslims, but at said idiots who insist on pandering them. That is why I said Europe suffers from self-delusions. There are problems within our minorities, and we keep on letting them go unsolved due to the idiots who we put into power (and later realize we cannot remove so easily). Personally, I am aware that socialdemocratic governments thrive off such social "problems" - therefore it's rarely in their interest to address them - and this frustrates me.

We could, of course, go on believing we live in a EUtopia.

Is ther something wrong with your browser that caused you to miss the entire article he posted? I don't like NN and think that he deserves what he gets when spouting racist bullshit, but that doesn't mean we should flame him whenever he opens his mouth.

Is there something wrong with my eyes that means I should pretend I don't see when he does post racist bullshit? And ALL of his articles are designed purely to push his white racist agenda. Every last one. If I wanted to argue with article writers, I would, but all I have is this fucking racist who, guess what, I'm gonna keep pointing out when he's a fucking racist.

This 'punishment' mentality is damaging to intelligent debate.

So is Islamophobic bigotry.

Qur’an:9:88 “The Messenger and those who believe with him, strive hard and fight with their wealth and lives in Allah’s Cause.”

Qur’an:9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

Qur’an:9:112 “The Believers fight in Allah’s Cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed.”

Qur’an:9:29 “Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission.”

Ishaq:325 “Muslims, fight in Allah’s Cause. Stand firm and you will prosper. Help the Prophet, obey him, give him your allegiance, and your religion will be victorious.”

Qur’an:8:39 “Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.”

Qur’an:8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”

Ishaq:324 “He said, ‘Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals.’”

Qur’an:9:14 “Fight them and Allah will punish them by your hands, lay them low, and cover them with shame. He will help you over them.”

Ishaq:300 “I am fighting in Allah’s service. This is piety and a good deed. In Allah’s war I do not fear as others should. For this fighting is righteous, true, and good.”

Ishaq:587 “Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutilated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace.”


Is'haq=Isaac an old testament prophet, not muhammed's words, nice try at bullshitting there.

Secondly "disbelievers" refers to pagan meccans, which don't exist anymore. Christians, Jews, and Sabian(zoroastrians/parsis) are "people of the book"


Ancient arabic is a bitch to translate, there are hundreds or different interpretation of the Q'uran and can be perceived in different ways...

Erm, Ibn Ishaq was the first recorder of the Hadiths, which are canonically part of the Quran. You quoted some yourself in fact. Nice try at bullshitting though.

ah, no
Ishaq (Arabic إسحق or إسحاق) is a prophet of Islam mentioned in the Qur'an. It is the Arabic name for Isaac.

Ishaq was the second son of Ibrahim by his first-wife Sarah. Islamic tradition holds that he was born nine years after Ishmael who was Ibrahim's son from his second-wife Hagar. He was born after Ibrahim attempted to sacrifice Ishmael. Ishaq lived in Canaan and was made a prophet there. He was married at the age of 40. He also had twin sons, Yisau and Yaqub. As he grew older, he went blind. When he died, he was buried in Hebron along with his parents.


Ahh, I get it, so it's ok to murder Pagan Meccans! Gotcha!

Strawman, much?

I said it is irrelevent seeing as how it refers to a people that don't exist anymore.

Wow! We are so well respected we only had to pay the humiliation tax and languish in abject nothingness when we were under Muslim rule. Those TOLERANT, TOLERANT muslims!

Yup, thats why I don't get why the jews didn't move to christian europe! where all they had to endure was having a metal pear-like object shoved up their ass and expanded till their rectum ruptured, then have every joint in their body pulled out of socket and burned alive....Those poor fools.

Yup, thats why I don't get why the jews didn't move to christian europe! where all they had to endure was having a metal pear-like object shoved up their ass and expanded till their rectum ruptured, then have every joint in their body pulled out of socket and burned alive....Those poor fools.
Why do you dodge the bullet this way? So you wilfully refuse to acknowledge that Muslims can do wrong too, and have done so? "Hey, but them Euros did it too!" Yes, makes it perfectly okay... And by the way, if by Christian Europe you mean the Nazis, who are you trying to kid? No one tries to claim that old Europe was tolerant - so why do you bring it up?

Yup, thats why I don't get why the jews didn't move to christian europe! where all they had to endure was having a metal pear-like object shoved up their ass and expanded till their rectum ruptured, then have every joint in their body pulled out of socket and burned alive....Those poor fools.
The western world has largely moved away from our religious dark age. The muslim world hasn't. I don't see why events of the past should force us to crawl to their primitive culture.