Interesting CBS article on Britain

[rogueyam]

Given time, their will be a massive backlash across Europe predominately against the Muslims, and probably started by the Germans against the Turks.

 

Europeans often assume that the problem will engender its own solution in the form of a backlash, but of course there are jihadis who are on the lookout for any backlash and intend to avoid it and undermine it until the numbers and the conditions so favor them that resistance is hopeless. Why are you so sure that a bunch of snotty, decadent, selfish and materialistic Eurotards will avoid being outsmarted and ultimately routed by the jihadis?

[rogueyam]

As usual, steve, your post is a tissue of stupidity, nonsense, and lies.

 

Why are some (or more accurately an invididual) on this forum using England or parts of Europe as an example that multiculturalism does not work?

 

America doesn't have a problem with its moslem citizens and residents demanding Sharia law and all that.

 

The jihadis pull the exact same crap everywhere, steve. It just works better in some places than in others. Of the English-speaking countries the UK is going down the fastest and the surest. That is why intelligent people find it useful to observe and analyze Britain's impending doom. But there are plenty of examples here in the US. It is just our culture is more resistant. Your Mr. Goodbar intends to change that if he becomes President.

 

In fact, in some areas, like the San Fernando valley in Los Angeles, moslems are starting their own schools because they are seeing their american born and/or bred children adopt American culture and American boyfriends, girlfriends and spouses. Becoming non practicing moslems or leaving the relgiion entirely.

 

Jihadis will set up madrassas in public schools where and when they can and do so privately where and when they must, both in Europe and in the US. What's your point?

 

We really haven't even defined what multiculturalism is. I bet it means something different to each of us.

 

Speak for yourself. I have and do plainly call multiculturalism exactly what it is - cultural Marxism. Leftists don't define the term because they don't want to defend their agenda of destroying Western civilization for the furtherance of socialism.

 

At one time Beirut, Lebonon had people of all three major religions living peaceably amongst each other. Not too long ago in fact.

 

And then the jihadis put an end to this. Again, what's your point, steve?

 

Furthermore, the extremist Moslems are pretty much the moslem version of the extreme Christian religious right. There are plenty of preachers here who preach, pray and hope for a theocracy in the U.S. where we're truly a 'Christian' nation. Not much difference.

 

This is a stupid lie. The suicide bombings, hijackings, "honor killings", beheading videos, and much much more are 99.99% coming from one side only. When you say the two cultures exhibit "not much difference" you are being intentionally untruthful. That is un-Christian, steve.

 

The far Christian right, the moslem extremists, want you to conver to their religion by force or rule of law. The bible I grew up with said people convert by their own personal choice.

 

Modern Christianity and Islam differ entirely on the subjects of secular government and conversion by force. You know this, steve, and you lie when you state otherwise.

[Bangkoktraveler]

Rogie as a fellow traveler and whore monger, you got it all wrong.

When the White, Christian Capitalist came to what is now the USA, they just about killed off a complete race based upon their religious superiority and their hatred their religions instilled into the hearts of various men. When women, children and old men were massacred in the name of a righteous, Christian god, is it not much different then what the radical Moslems do today. Don't you agree? The only difference is the righteous Christians went after a whole race whereas the Moslems only go after certain people.

[Old Hippie]

Interesting never the less. I think it exagerates the problem slightly' date=' but it is accurate. I feel that Europe has woken up to the problem, just the leaders havent or refuse to take it in.[/quote']

 

From here on out the leftists will be saying that the only problem is those who think there is a problem...

 

 

 

A few weeks ago, a guy on "your side" Was saying we were "...a nation of whiners..." and implied there really were no problems to be concerned about. It seems you are now saying he and the leftists agree there are no problems. Does this now make him leftist?

[Steve]

Modern Christianity and modern Islam believe in secular governments. I.e. Turkey. They are secular Islam nation. England has a state relgion, Anglican, its the official religion of England but its not forced on others. I guess its some people's fantasy that if Falwell, Robertson or Dobson had their way there wouldn't be a de facto theocracy in the U.S.

 

I guess Rog believes modern Islam are all jihadists.

 

Our friend in this thread conveniently neglects to explain why America doesn't have the same problem with the moslems within our borders. There are least a few million moslems here. More than enough to cause trouble. Why don't we have the same issues?

 

The answer to everyone has a different view of what multiculuralism is was not answered. Well, yes it was indirectly. Not many people share Rog's definition.

 

Not much difference in what extremists want of either religion, that is the point. Both preach for a religious state. I don't know what churches he's been to but I have heard it and seen it. Given the chance we'd see a lot worse than some of the things that happen outside of abortion clinics and such. Not to the level of the jihadist in the middle east but enough to scare the 'hell' (no pun intended) out of most of us. Of course the jihadists have done worse, but the point is about extremism. The point is extremism and given the opportunity I am 100% sure we'd get laws limiting our civil liberties based on the relgious Christian right's interpretation of the bible. Blue laws in the south, where you can't serve liquor on Sundays. Christianity used as a reason to uphold state sponsored apartheid pre Civil Rights. They had city councils set up to make local laws and ordinances based in part on the bible. It may not be deemed extremist to a particular poster on here but to the majority of Americans it would. This was a little over a generation ago.

[chelseafan]

Why are some (or more accurately an invididual) on this forum using England or parts of Europe as an example that multiculturalism does not work?

 

America doesn't have a problem with its moslem citizens and residents demanding Sharia law and all that. In fact, in some areas, like the San Fernando valley in Los Angeles, moslems are starting their own schools because they are seeing their american born and/or bred children adopt American culture and American boyfriends, girlfriends and spouses. Becoming non practicing moslems or leaving the relgiion entirely. (same with a lot of jews, asains, and others)

 

We really haven't even defined what multiculturalism is. I bet it means something different to each of us.

 

At one time Beirut, Lebonon had people of all three major religions living peaceably amongst each other. Not too long ago in fact.

 

Furthermore, the extremist Moslems are pretty much the moslem version of the extreme Christian religious right. There are plenty of preachers here who preach, pray and hope for a theocracy in the U.S. where we're truly a 'Christian' nation. Not much difference. Don't get me wrong, I'm no atheist who is anti religion or anti Christian. I consider myself a Christian (not a good one..hehehe), and shockingly to most, a saved Christian, but I interpret what I read differently than most of the fundamentalists.

 

The far Christian right, the moslem extremists, want you to conver to their religion by force or rule of law. The bible I grew up with said people convert by their own personal choice.

 

 

CS, thats where it starts, slow intergration, first by building their own schools, then mosques and then they start to infiltrate the government and suddenly you find that they have decimated society. In terms of muslims many do well, they propser, integrate and add to society as a whole. However there are a growing number who are becoming extremist and corrupting our values.

I am not anti-muslim, however, you dont see groups of Hindu, Sikh, Jewish people on the streets peddling drugs, treating their women like shit, arrangeing honour killings and bleating the racist card at any opportunity they can. If we did then I would say its society/government that has let them down. Other faiths have integrated exceptionally well into British society - No, they seem too (in a unusally high %age) not want to conform to western standards and run their own agenda.

Their are whole towns in the UK which are no-go areas. The police have their hands tied by governmental red tape and are powerless to stop anti-social behaviour for fear of upsetting the muslim population. That has to be wrong, Muslims, like everyone else abide by British law, not sharia!.

 

Another thing, the Koran is such a fucked up book that we see passages being quoted from an era that was rife with religious wars, it is fundamentally out of date.

 

Come 30 years, Islam will be the biggest religion on the planet. No problem with that but beware what the future holds.

 

 

[chelseafan]

Modern Christianity and modern Islam believe in secular governments. I.e. Turkey. They are secular Islam nation. England has a state relgion, Anglican, its the official religion of England but its not forced on others. I guess its some people's fantasy that if Falwell, Robertson or Dobson had their way there wouldn't be a de facto theocracy in the U.S.

 

I guess Rog believes modern Islam are all jihadists.

 

Our friend in this thread conveniently neglects to explain why America doesn't have the same problem with the moslems within our borders. There are least a few million moslems here. More than enough to cause trouble. Why don't we have the same issues?

 

The answer to everyone has a different view of what multiculuralism is was not answered. Well, yes it was indirectly. Not many people share Rog's definition.

 

Not much difference in what extremists want of either religion, that is the point. Both preach for a religious state. I don't know what churches he's been to but I have heard it and seen it. Given the chance we'd see a lot worse than some of the things that happen outside of abortion clinics and such. Not to the level of the jihadist in the middle east but enough to scare the 'hell' (no pun intended) out of most of us. Of course the jihadists have done worse, but the point is about extremism. The point is extremism and given the opportunity I am 100% sure we'd get laws limiting our civil liberties based on the relgious Christian right's interpretation of the bible. Blue laws in the south, where you can't serve liquor on Sundays. Christianity used as a reason to uphold state sponsored apartheid pre Civil Rights. They had city councils set up to make local laws and ordinances based in part on the bible. It may not be deemed extremist to a particular poster on here but to the majority of Americans it would. This was a little over a generation ago.

 

An interesting post. You may not have problems with Islamic fundementalists at the moment but give it time and I think you may have.

You have to remember the US is a BIG country with over 500 million people, you also have a very good green card system that weeds out undesireables. The UK on the other hand seems determined to take any Tom, Dick or Hamad they can find. We also have a government that has been for some years leaning way too far to the left. Not so in the US (for the moment). How do the populace feel when they introduce such idiotic laws as "incitement to racial hatred", I dont say that the the intention was well meant, but its protectionism for the minority. There were already sufficent laws in place to deal with this sort of thing. Now you cant even make a funny racial joke (Theres a Englishman, Scotsman and Irishman...) without being accused of racism. There has to be a balance for sure but that has long since gone and unless the government starts to tackle the problem head on, well, something will give.

 

[chelseafan]

Given time' date=' their will be a massive backlash across Europe predominately against the Muslims, and probably started by the Germans against the Turks.[/quote']

 

Europeans often assume that the problem will engender its own solution in the form of a backlash, but of course there are jihadis who are on the lookout for any backlash and intend to avoid it and undermine it until the numbers and the conditions so favor them that resistance is hopeless. Why are you so sure that a bunch of snotty, decadent, selfish and materialistic Eurotards will avoid being outsmarted and ultimately routed by the jihadis?

 

Hey, I didnt say that the Jihadists will lose and thats the scary thing. The backlash in this country will start with the BNP realising more influence, it is after all the only way a Christion can voice his/her concern discreetly. I don't believe they will get into power in my lifetime but mark this post because I can see them becoming a major influence in British politics - to me thats a scary thought.

 

[rogueyam]

Interesting never the less. I think it exagerates the problem slightly' date=' but it is accurate. I feel that Europe has woken up to the problem, just the leaders havent or refuse to take it in.[/quote']

 

From here on out the leftists will be saying that the only problem is those who think there is a problem...

 

A few weeks ago, a guy on "your side" Was saying we were "...a nation of whiners..." and implied there really were no problems to be concerned about. It seems you are now saying he and the leftists agree there are no problems. Does this now make him leftist?

 

Hippie wake up! That was Phil Gramm talking about the economic gloom-and-doom leftists are campaigning on. This thread is about jihad. Two entirely different subjects.

[Steve]

chelseafan, I believe the reason why America and England have vastly different experiences with moslems from, say, Pakistan and other places is because of our histories with both places. It was a former colony of yours. England took in all comers from different social classes.

 

America was selective. We didn't take the hundreds of thousands of the poor. We took the educated and those with marketable skills who are almost all middle and upper class here.

 

There are Pakistanis in England who feel disenfranchised with high unemployment, etc. The opposite here. They are almost all not only gainfully employed but are doctors, engineers, etc.

 

The reasons why both start their own schools are totally different. The moslems in England do because they feel they are not part of the society. Our moslems do because their children are becoming TOO MUCH a part of our society.

 

Since 911 a lot of our moslem organizations have gone to great pains NOT to seem too militant. They are enjoying the life of Reilly here, they know that. They don't want it to end.