It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Muslim Extremists Preach Violence in Europe

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 07:25 PM
link   
S m P

I am surprised at how you feel it is not a threat. Does it bother you that the mullahs in your own nation are calling for the death of your soldiers and people in Jihad? That doesn't bother you at all?




posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 10:24 PM
link   

- We shal have to agree to disagree.

I see no rational reason to believe European culture or civilisation is under any kind of actual threat whatsoever.


We shall. I think there is a threat, but not in a "the sky is falling" sense.


- The IRA were the most known group but Europe has had more than a few throughout the continent at various times.


- There was a time when English people were peddled that stupidity (about Irish, Scot or Welsh for that matter).
Thankfully we have (well, most of us) moved far away from such retarded notions.


I forgot the smiley on that one. Actually, I think the solution to the "troubles" in Northern Ireland would be the removal of protestants (back to England and Scotland) and the unification of the island. After all, the protestants were first relocated there from Scotland and the border counties in order to give the UK a permanent foothold on the island.


- I am not going to minimise the tragedy of 9/11.
I am simply saying though that I consider the UK and Ireland's loss of 3500+ deaths in our problems a 'greater' loss than the approx 2800 poor souls lost then.



- I suggest you go and google 'muslim influences on europe' or some such; those influences are there whether you accept them or not.

I don't deny any Muslim influence on Europe, those influences tend to be from the past. I am interested in what positve influences Muslim immigrants are having in Europe today.



- They had a right to defend themselves from genocidal attacks upon them.


I agree, but I think that any European who may have to defend himself against a radical Muslim has the same right.


- LMAO.

Mate you want to learn about what people are like here cos that is just so far of the mark it is funny.

People really do not think in those terms.


On what terms do they think?

- No.
The vast majority of us I would suggest simply realise that under it all we are much the same and all deserve the fair shake we would all want for ourselves.

Why can so many people not get a fair shake in thier homelands? I think it is often a reflection of the culture from which they came.


- There is no doubt truth in that but the idea that all Muslims are sympathetic to the ' Sayyid Qutb' version of aggressive political Islam is simply nonsense, even if that seems to be todays western 'orthodoxy'.


I do not mean to infer that all Muslims are sypathetic to the above, but I do think that
there may be enough who are to make massive Muslim immigration to Europe potentially dangerous in the long run. It seems to me that Islam is a belief system (like others) that places faith above reason, and that usually is a very dangerous thing.


- Oh Jayzuss.

Look mate there never was an 'all white Europe'. It is a myth. Black people and others from all over the globe (with, maybe, the exception of some - very - far eastern peoples) have been in Europe as early as records began.

- Africa is mainly populated by black people and China by Chinese, what of it?

- No. Africa is a land with a mostly black population, China one with mostly Chinese and Israel mainly Jewish people.....and what?

They are not "the land of" at all.
People have migrated all over the globe at various times ever since we came to be......and few more so than those of European descent in recent centuries.


No, not in a sense of 100%, but I know you'd be very hard–pressed to find a non–white in say, 10th century Sweden. The point is that any place that has a dominant racial phenotype of, I'll say 0ver 90% can certainly for all practical purposes be considered the land of that type. If in those places, the dominant type has the right to assert its identity and culture, then that ought to be true for anyplace else as well. It seems paradoxical to
me that Europeans seem bent in introducing alien cultures en masse into Europe, even
while it is likey that it would not be the same if the situation were reversed.


- In the light of the way we have collectively treated these people for so long probably not. Hard lives breed hard attitudes.


That's the guilt I mentioned before doing the talking. While I could certainly could never take pride in any atrocites committed by Eurpoeans against non–Europeans, I also do not think it is the duty of Europeans living today to pay for past sins.


Maybe we shall all find out as the ravages of global climate disruption impact more and more.......mass 1st world migration, won't that be an irony!


I wonder how long you'll hold your "land of" ideas then?

And it won't be the first time, either. That's what made the US. I won't hold on to those ideas then, because in such a situation, everyone would likely revert to some ugly Darwinian reality in which there will be even more brutal competition for even less
resources. I imagine I would be one of the first to be trampled by those with a much
stronger survival instinct.



- We shall have to agree to disagree on that. There mere being hwere in my opinion guarantees an infuence, you seem not to agree......that kind of writes off everyone's small influences though doesn't it? If you will only accept large scale obvious influences I mean. Sorry I can't agree with that.


I agree that there's an influence. Is it benificial to everyone though?




- No. In view of what this thread is about and the notion of an alien 'subversion' I'd say the operative phrase was 'Same people, not alien'.


Same people with a religion that opposes the majority.


- Er, actually I meant moderate as in moderate numbers coming to live here.

I have no doubt there will be some fiery loons accompanying those simply trying to make a decent and honest living for themselves and theirs but as is the track record with this kind of thing they will be a tiny minority who will most likely fade away as the new people assimilate.

That kind of scare story goes out with every wave of immigration, it simply isn't true.


Here, successive waves of immigrants tend to grab all they can while they may. Look up 19th century Irish–American politics as an example. Or, look up information on Jewish political influence in the US.In a sense there is assimilation, but there also tend to be negative impacts as well.




-
I knew you wouldn't disappoint!


I rarely do



- We are seeing what we should be seeing. A very healthy, dynamic, confident and evolving civilisation.


Evolving into what?




- I suggest that is your (American) problem.
We in Europe seem to be able to do this 'diversity' quite well without massive crime problems.
As I said it is not problem free - anywhere - but, overall, we do one hell of a lot better than you do in the US.


And I suggest that it is an example of syptoms brought about by 300+ years of
radically different cultures living in the same country. Things have moved much
further along with the joys of multiculturalism in the US than they have in Europe
and the future does not look promising for us here.



- Japan? You must be kidding.
Japan is an example of a mono-culture that suffered unbelievably because of the idiocy that mono-culture 'bred'.
Japan's 'stability' comes from the barrel of a gun telling them what they were going to do and how.


Really? Who is holding the gun? Not the US. After WWII, the US rebuilt the place and gave it back to the Japanese, whereupon they proceeded to beat us in a fine game of industrial capitalism. I think that it is more like a monoculture that recognized the horrible mistakes of its past and used the native intelligence and high degree of motivation of its citizens to produce a truly admirable society. Come on, indeed...




- For some maybe. But Islam is like Christianity. There are numerous versions and the current notion that they are all violent lunatics waiting to suicide themselves and us all to death is ridiculous.


Maybe not "us all" but there may be lunatics enough who would like to remove as many of us as possible. However, I do not worry. I only discuss.



- Well at least I'm sure your mother loved you!



Unfortunately she was indifferent, although I was
not ghastly as a child. I won't elaborate though
because I'm already starting to hear violins.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 10:24 PM
link   

- We shal have to agree to disagree.

I see no rational reason to believe European culture or civilisation is under any kind of actual threat whatsoever.


We shall. I think there is a threat, but not in a "the sky is falling" sense.


- The IRA were the most known group but Europe has had more than a few throughout the continent at various times.


- There was a time when English people were peddled that stupidity (about Irish, Scot or Welsh for that matter).
Thankfully we have (well, most of us) moved far away from such retarded notions.


I forgot the smiley on that one. Actually, I think the solution to the "troubles" in Northern Ireland would be the removal of protestants (back to England and Scotland) and the unification of the island. After all, the protestants were first relocated there from Scotland and the border counties in order to give the UK a permanent foothold on the island.


- I am not going to minimise the tragedy of 9/11.
I am simply saying though that I consider the UK and Ireland's loss of 3500+ deaths in our problems a 'greater' loss than the approx 2800 poor souls lost then.




- I suggest you go and google 'muslim influences on europe' or some such; those influences are there whether you accept them or not.


I don't deny any Muslim influence on Europe, those influences tend to be from the past. I am interested in what positve influences Muslim immigrants are having in Europe today.



- They had a right to defend themselves from genocidal attacks upon them.


I agree, but I think that any European who may have to defend himself against a radical Muslim has the same right.


- LMAO.

Mate you want to learn about what people are like here cos that is just so far of the mark it is funny.

People really do not think in those terms.


On what terms do they think?


- No.
The vast majority of us I would suggest simply realise that under it all we are much the same and all deserve the fair shake we would all want for ourselves.


Why can so many people not get a fair shake in thier homelands? I think it is often a reflection of the culture from which they came. Unfortunately, it seems that many bring thier problems with them.


- There is no doubt truth in that but the idea that all Muslims are sympathetic to the ' Sayyid Qutb' version of aggressive political Islam is simply nonsense, even if that seems to be todays western 'orthodoxy'.


I do not mean to infer that all Muslims are sypathetic to the above, but I do think that
there may be enough who are to make massive Muslim immigration to Europe potentially dangerous in the long run. It seems to me that Islam is a belief system (like others) that places faith above reason, and that usually is a very dangerous thing.


- Oh Jayzuss.

Look mate there never was an 'all white Europe'. It is a myth. Black people and others from all over the globe (with, maybe, the exception of some - very - far eastern peoples) have been in Europe as early as records began.

- Africa is mainly populated by black people and China by Chinese, what of it?

- No. Africa is a land with a mostly black population, China one with mostly Chinese and Israel mainly Jewish people.....and what?

They are not "the land of" at all.
People have migrated all over the globe at various times ever since we came to be......and few more so than those of European descent in recent centuries.


No, not in a sense of 100%, but I know you'd be very hard–pressed to find a non–white in say, 10th century Sweden. The point is that any place that has a dominant racial phenotype of, I'll say over 90% can certainly for all practical purposes be considered the land of that type. If in those places, the dominant type has the right to assert its identity and culture, then that ought to be true for anyplace else as well. It seems paradoxical to
me that Europeans seem bent in introducing alien cultures en masse into Europe, even
while it is likely that it would not be the same if the situation were reversed.


- In the light of the way we have collectively treated these people for so long probably not. Hard lives breed hard attitudes.


That's the guilt I mentioned before doing the talking. While I could certainly could never take pride in any atrocites committed by Eurpoeans against non–Europeans, I also do not think it is the duty of Europeans living today to pay for past sins.


Maybe we shall all find out as the ravages of global climate disruption impact more and more.......mass 1st world migration, won't that be an irony!


I wonder how long you'll hold your "land of" ideas then?

And it won't be the first time, either. That's what made the US. I won't hold on to those ideas then, because in such a situation, everyone would likely revert to some ugly Darwinian reality in which there will be even more brutal competition for even less
resources. I imagine I would be one of the first to be trampled by those with a much
stronger survival instinct.



- We shall have to agree to disagree on that. There mere being hwere in my opinion guarantees an infuence, you seem not to agree......that kind of writes off everyone's small influences though doesn't it? If you will only accept large scale obvious influences I mean. Sorry I can't agree with that.


I agree that there's an influence. Is it benificial to everyone though?




- No. In view of what this thread is about and the notion of an alien 'subversion' I'd say the operative phrase was 'Same people, not alien'.


Same people with a religion that opposes the majority.


- Er, actually I meant moderate as in moderate numbers coming to live here.

I have no doubt there will be some fiery loons accompanying those simply trying to make a decent and honest living for themselves and theirs but as is the track record with this kind of thing they will be a tiny minority who will most likely fade away as the new people assimilate.

That kind of scare story goes out with every wave of immigration, it simply isn't true.


Here, successive waves of immigrants tend to grab all they can while they may. Look up 19th century Irish–American politics as an example. Or, look up information on Jewish political influence in the US. In a sense there is assimilation, but there also tend to be negative impacts as well.




-
I knew you wouldn't disappoint!


I rarely do



- We are seeing what we should be seeing. A very healthy, dynamic, confident and evolving civilisation.


It doesn't seem very healthy to me. Evolving into what?




- I suggest that is your (American) problem.
We in Europe seem to be able to do this 'diversity' quite well without massive crime problems.
As I said it is not problem free - anywhere - but, overall, we do one hell of a lot better than you do in the US.


And I suggest that it is an example of symptoms brought about by 300+ years of
radically different cultures living in the same country. Things have moved much
further along with the joys of multiculturalism in the US than they have in Europe
and the future does not look promising for us here.



- Japan? You must be kidding.
Japan is an example of a mono-culture that suffered unbelievably because of the idiocy that mono-culture 'bred'.
Japan's 'stability' comes from the barrel of a gun telling them what they were going to do and how.


Really? Who is holding the gun? Not the US. After WWII, the US rebuilt the place and gave it back to the Japanese, whereupon they proceeded to beat us in a fine game of industrial capitalism. I think that it is more like a monoculture that recognized the horrible mistakes of its past and used the native intelligence and high degree of motivation of its citizens to produce a truly admirable society. Come on, indeed...




- For some maybe. But Islam is like Christianity. There are numerous versions and the current notion that they are all violent lunatics waiting to suicide themselves and us all to death is ridiculous.


Maybe not "us all" but there may be lunatics enough who would like to remove as many of us as possible. However, I do not worry. I only discuss.



- Well at least I'm sure your mother loved you!



Unfortunately she was indifferent, although I was
not ghastly as a child. I won't elaborate though
because I'm already starting to hear violins.



[edit on 12/1/2004 by jdster]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 10:50 PM
link   
So Ed, instead of Allah killing me, you want Christ to?
I'm an atheist. If a Muslim radical kills me now for not believing, or Christ kills me upon His return for not believing, aren't they both bad?
Or is it ok if Christ sends me to rot in Hell for all of eternity because I don't believe, but it's bad if someone kills me now, because I don't believe in their God?

To tell you the truth, I don't want pain and suffering for all of eternity, no matter whose God is doing it. Christian, Jew, Islam, or the followers of David Koresh!



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 02:48 AM
link   
curme, I do not think Christ will kill you when he comes back.
I think somehow a lot of people will still get to choose when He comes back. God is more loving than we can understand, which leads me to believe we (as in christians) will see way more people in heaven than we expected there.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted bt Edsinger
S m P

I am surprised at how you feel it is not a threat.


- I have not said there is no threat whatsoever Ed.

I just do not see any kind of plausible threat that in any realistic manner 'threatens' Europe's culture or civilisation.....in fact the only way I believe these can be threatened is from within.

Something along the lines of a gross over-reaction to the current situation leading to the self-inflicted and totally voluntary destruction of hard won (and God knows, once lost, if we'd ever see them back again) liberties for instance? Hmmm?



Does it bother you that the mullahs in your own nation are calling for the death of your soldiers and people in Jihad? That doesn't bother you at all?


- I don't like it, no.
But I'd much rather the nutters were visible and we can all hear their crap and challenge it if needs be.

The point still remains Ed. The extreme fringe are just that.
They do not represent the majority.

I sat and watched Irish people demonised at the height of the 'troubles' in the UK in exactly the same manner as is now going on in places with Muslim people.

It generated a casual callous and utterly counter-productive OTT 'security' response against regular Irish people which ultimately caused far more death and damage - to 'our own' as well as 'them' - than would otherwise have been the case.
'We' took nearly 30yrs to learn that.
I hate seeing it repeated.


Originally posted by jdster
I forgot the smiley on that one. Actually, I think the solution to the "troubles" in Northern Ireland would be the removal of protestants (back to England and Scotland) and the unification of the island. After all, the protestants were first relocated there from Scotland and the border counties in order to give the UK a permanent foothold on the island.


- Yeah well if you don't mind me saying that's the simplistic version, I suppose.
No doubt you were unaware that the 'lowland Scots' who went to Ireland were actually originally from Ireland and were actually returning to their historic home?

I'd like to see you try and uproot around a million people settled anywhere for up to 800yrs + - especially where a majority of those are prepared to resist with all and whatever force they feel appropriate, having been raised to expect to have to 'defend them and theirs'.

I wonder if you'd feel so sympathetic to this kind of idea if the native Americans suggested similar for you and yours?


In any case we're actually in the process of genuinely working it all out without any more of that wasteful violent nonsense.


I don't deny any Muslim influence on Europe, those influences tend to be from the past. I am interested in what positve influences Muslim immigrants are having in Europe today.


- Same as any immigrant community.
They open shops, restaurants.....all kinds of businesses. Their kids go to schools, colleges, university and start/join other firms after and contribute like anyone else.


I agree, but I think that any European who may have to defend himself against a radical Muslim has the same right.


- Yeah well I have never said I have problem with self defence, have I?


On what terms do they think?


- As I said. Most if not all of us would simply see all deserving the fair shake we would all want for ourselves.


Why can so many people not get a fair shake in thier homelands? I think it is often a reflection of the culture from which they came.


- I don't think it is as simple as that. Many of the horribly repressive undemocratic regimes these people have left have had substantial western backing for years if not decades.

'We' have a habit of installing 'strong men' (like Saddam) and turning a blind eye to their 'excesses'.


I do not mean to infer that all Muslims are sypathetic to the above, but I do think that
there may be enough who are to make massive Muslim immigration to Europe potentially dangerous in the long run.


- I do not think anyone is blind to the possibilities. It only takes a handful, we know that.....so therefore, to some extent, the actual numbers aren't quite as relevant as you imply, wouldn't you say?
.....and do you really think the security services in Europe are blind to this possibility?

Of course there could be a terrorist attack. But we've faced them before and no doubt we'll face them again.
Sadly such is life.
But whatever, it will not destroy European civilisation and culture.


It seems to me that Islam is a belief system (like others) that places faith above reason, and that usually is a very dangerous thing.


- Well as far as I'm concerned you just described every religion going just there.
All religions have that 'quality' IMO.
Islam no doubt will 'mature' as Christianity has done and withdraw eventually from the areas it has little or no competence in.


No, not in a sense of 100%, but I know you'd be very hard–pressed to find a non–white in say, 10th century Sweden. The point is that any place that has a dominant racial phenotype of, I'll say 0ver 90% can certainly for all practical purposes be considered the land of that type. If in those places, the dominant type has the right to assert its identity and culture, then that ought to be true for anyplace else as well. It seems paradoxical to
me that Europeans seem bent in introducing alien cultures en masse into Europe, even
while it is likey that it would not be the same if the situation were reversed.


- I think the point is that as we recognise just how inter-dependant and inter-connected the world actually is and is becoming more and more then it makes sense to respond to that.

To say we are introducing alien cultures en mass is simply an exaggeration. There is no country in Europe with an immigrant population (over-looking the fact that we are all originally immigrants) of 10%.
Hardly a 'swamping'.

'We' are not actually changing our culture, we are adding and expanding it to be more than it once was.

I could care less if that was reciprocated. Their loss, their problem, litterally.


That's the guilt I mentioned before doing the talking. While I could certainly could never take pride in any atrocites committed by Eurpoeans against non–Europeans, I also do not think it is the duty of Europeans living today to pay for past sins.


- No. That's not guilt. Thats an honest recognition of how come we are where we are.


And it won't be the first time, either. That's what made the US. I won't hold on to those ideas then, because in such a situation, everyone would likely revert to some ugly Darwinian reality in which there will be even more brutal competition for even less
resources. I imagine I would be one of the first to be trampled by those with a much
stronger survival instinct.


- Or we could attempt to minimise the losses and maximise our gains by cooperating with each other.
But knowing the mentality of many I guess you might well be right. It's hardly the best or intelligent option though is it?


I agree that there's an influence. Is it benificial to everyone though?


- I certainly see none of the harm you seem to imagine going on.


Same people with a religion that opposes the majority.


- Did you just miss the fact that those people are of the majority in the 1st place?!


Here, successive waves of immigrants tend to grab all they can while they may. Look up 19th century Irish–American politics as an example. Or, look up information on Jewish political influence in the US.In a sense there is assimilation, but there also tend to be negative impacts as well.


- Our experience seems to be different.
New immigrants settle in all the really crappy areas of town or city, set up businesses and gradually work their way out.
It can take a hundred or two hundred years or so if the last mass wave Eastern European Jewish immigration to Britain from the 19th century is anything to go by.


Evolving into what?


- Who can tell?
People of Europe from any previous century (obviously excepting those - like the 20th to us - just gone!) would probably have trouble recognising the Europe that came in any of the following succeeding centuries.....a 'quality' that has accelerated over the years.
Why should this natural change be something we 'fear' or insist will bring disaster?


And I suggest that it is an example of syptoms brought about by 300+ years of
radically different cultures living in the same country. Things have moved much
further along with the joys of multiculturalism in the US than they have in Europe
and the future does not look promising for us here.


- No, I don't see any real comparison between Europe and the US in this.

America was treated in a totally different way with no recognised existant culture, political or administrative structures (yeah I realise there was one but which immigrant community ever took much notice of that?).
It's nothing like comparable.


Really? Who is holding the gun? Not the US. After WWII, the US rebuilt the place and gave it back to the Japanese, whereupon they proceeded to beat us in a fine game of industrial capitalism.


- Yeah after their mono-culturally derived disaster had brought them to total and utter ruin.
They were then been told when to jump and exactly how high.

This fine game you call it was 'our' game, not theirs. 'We' owned (and continue to own) many Japanese companies.


I think that it is more like a monoculture that recognized the horrible mistakes of its past and used the native intelligence and high degree of motivation of its citizens to produce a truly admirable society. Come on, indeed...


- Yet this admirable culture is again in trouble for it's closed-ness.
The incestuous relationships between Japanese banking and business has brought 10yrs (and counting) of stagnation coupled with high prices in lifes basics (primarily property).

I would not call their history (except for the brief approx 30yr period 1960 - 1990) one to envy at all......and certainly not one to emulate.


Maybe not "us all" but there may be lunatics enough who would like to remove as many of us as possible. However, I do not worry. I only discuss.


- There are always plenty of nutters around itching to interfere in peoples' lives to promote their 'vision' whatever label they attach to themselves. Unfortunately.


Unfortunately she was indifferent, although I was
not ghastly as a child. I won't elaborate though
because I'm already starting to hear violins.


- Let it all out, you'll feel much better for it......



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 08:25 AM
link   

- Yeah well if you don't mind me saying that's the simplistic version, I suppose.
No doubt you were unaware that the 'lowland Scots' who went to Ireland were actually originally from Ireland and were actually returning to their historic home?

I'd like to see you try and uproot around a million people settled anywhere for up to 800yrs + - especially where a majority of those are prepared to resist with all and whatever force they feel appropriate, having been raised to expect to have to 'defend them and theirs'.



I wonder if you'd feel so sympathetic to this kind of idea if the native Americans suggested similar for you and yours?


Actually, I might be if they had a large enough population and a strong political organization. As it is many of those nations survive only by owning and operating casinos.


In any case we're actually in the process of genuinely working it all out without any more of that wasteful violent nonsense.


I hope so.

No, I don't mind you saying, but I tried to be brief. In fact, I am well aware of the lowland
Scots being settled there, but that took place primarily during the 17th and 18th centuries in order to remove a potential Jacobite threat. They became fiercely loyal to the crown because they were given land holdings in Ireland in order to supress Irish nationalists who were seen as even more of a threat than lowland Scots with potential or actual Jacobite tendencies. So I would would say that the protestants who are part of the problems of Northern Ireland have been there for roughly 300 years. Whatever the case I think there should be a united Ireland and I think that those from Northern Ireland would make far better immigrants than Muslims, who incidentally lived in there
native lands for much more than 800 years, so it couldn't be that painful, as I am sure that there have been more than a million Muslim immigrants to the UK in the past forty
or so years.



- Same as any immigrant community.
They open shops, restaurants.....all kinds of businesses. Their kids go to schools, colleges, university and start/join other firms after and contribute like anyone else.


That is good as far as they adopt and assimilate western ways, but I can't imagine a Muslim proudly flying the Union Jack. What about the contribution of Islamic culture?



- Yeah well I have never said I have problem with self defence, have I?


You or your descendants may see it come to that.



- I don't think it is as simple as that. Many of the horribly repressive undemocratic regimes these people have left have had substantial western backing for years if not decades.

'We' have a habit of installing 'strong men' (like Saddam) and turning a blind eye to their 'excesses'.




- I do not think anyone is blind to the possibilities. It only takes a handful, we know that.....so therefore, to some extent, the actual numbers aren't quite as relevant as you imply, wouldn't you say?
.....and do you really think the security services in Europe are blind to this possibility?

Of course there could be a terrorist attack. But we've faced them before and no doubt we'll face them again.
Sadly such is life.
But whatever, it will not destroy European civilisation and culture.


I think we'll have to agree to disagree. I still think the potential is there. I base that assumption on long and atrocious human history.



- Well as far as I'm concerned you just described every religion going just there.
All religions have that 'quality' IMO.
Islam no doubt will 'mature' as Christianity has done and withdraw eventually from the areas it has little or no competence in.


As I wrote, among others. I don't think that Christianity has matured so much as having
become mostly irrelevant, at least in Europe. We still have to deal with a lot of fundamentalist lunacy here...


- I think the point is that as we recognise just how inter-dependant and inter-connected the world actually is and is becoming more and more then it makes sense to respond to that.


I agree, but I don't think that it means that it means that there should be mass immigration from less viable cultures to more viable cultures. We can be interdependent
and still have places to call our own.


To say we are introducing alien cultures en mass is simply an exaggeration. There is no country in Europe with an immigrant population (over-looking the fact that we are all originally immigrants) of 10%.
Hardly a 'swamping'.


If the population of Europe is about 200 million, then I would say that about 20 million immigrants is hardly a small number, although it may apear that way in terms of percentages.




'We' are not actually changing our culture, we are adding and expanding it to be more than it once was.


That seems to me to describe manners of change.


I could care less if that was reciprocated. Their loss, their problem, litterally.


Too bad so many who have recently emigrated to Europe could not hold the same
attitude.



- No. That's not guilt. Thats an honest recognition of how come we are where we are.


As you would say: Jayzuss!!!!



- Or we could attempt to minimise the losses and maximise our gains by cooperating with each other.
But knowing the mentality of many I guess you might well be right. It's hardly the best or intelligent option though is it?


I base that presumption on human history. Technology may have changed, but it seems that human nature hasn't. How often do we choose the intelligent option? UGH!




- I certainly see none of the harm you seem to imagine going on.


I see a potentially volatile situation evolving.



- Did you just miss the fact that those people are of the majority in the 1st place?!


Of a region of what was once a larger nation, but I would say that they were not
the majority in what was Yugoslavia, which raises the interesting point that it took a repressive regime to keep the respective ethnic and religious enclaves from each others'
throats. More human nature at work...




- Our experience seems to be different.
New immigrants settle in all the really crappy areas of town or city, set up businesses and gradually work their way out.
It can take a hundred or two hundred years or so if the last mass wave Eastern European Jewish immigration to Britain from the 19th century is anything to go by.


New immigrants to the US do tend to follow a similar pattern of settlement.

I think that it is because Europe is a comparative newcomer to the modern immigration game that it may seem different.



- Who can tell?
People of Europe from any previous century (obviously excepting those - like the 20th to us - just gone!) would probably have trouble recognising the Europe that came in any of the following succeeding centuries.....a 'quality' that has accelerated over the years.
Why should this natural change be something we 'fear' or insist will bring disaster?


Not fear so much as dislike.



- No, I don't see any real comparison between Europe and the US in this.

America was treated in a totally different way with no recognised existant culture, political or administrative structures (yeah I realise there was one but which immigrant community ever took much notice of that?).
It's nothing like comparable.


Again, I think it's because it's still in its early stages for you.



- Yeah after their mono-culturally derived disaster had brought them to total and utter ruin.
They were then been told when to jump and exactly how high.

This fine game you call it was 'our' game, not theirs. 'We' owned (and continue to own) many Japanese companies.


By whom? Based on what happened here , it wasn't the US. Also, I think that there are
many companies in the US (and probably Europe) that are Japanese owned. I guess this means that we can always spread the blame around when our economies falter.


For evidence of our defeat in the game, I would recommend a google search on Detroit and the US auto industry. I have borne first-hand witness to the ravages brought about
by the loss of heavy industry in the US (not brought about entirely by the Japanese, but
also greedy CEOs, but that's another story). An amazing but true fact about the US is that up until about the mid 1970s, an person with virtually no education could get a family-sustaining factory job.




- Yet this admirable culture is again in trouble for it's closed-ness.
The incestuous relationships between Japanese banking and business has brought 10yrs (and counting) of stagnation coupled with high prices in lifes basics (primarily property).

I would not call their history (except for the brief approx 30yr period 1960 - 1990) one to envy at all......and certainly not one to emulate.


Every nation has its difficulties. If Japan were a glorious multicultural nation however, I think that if its economic difficulties became serious enough, ethnic and racial strife would of course follow, much as it often happens in the US.

I do not envy Japan so much as admire it as a success and I can't think of any nation whose history I would want to emulate. (Although Tibet might come close, unfortunately
a land composed of such a sensible people could only be eaten alive. (One more for human nature)


- There are always plenty of nutters around itching to interfere in peoples' lives to promote their 'vision' whatever label they attach to themselves. Unfortunately.


I think that's another cause for violins, if not strait jackets.





- Let it all out, you'll feel much better for it......


Nothing beer can't manage, although it's early here...




[edit on 12/2/2004 by jdster]

[edit on 12/2/2004 by jdster]



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by jdster
If the population of Europe is about 200 million, then I would say that about 20 million immigrants is hardly a small number.


- The last figures I saw were that the current EU population is approx 470millions with approx 37million Muslims scattered around it with the greatest concentrations in the new Eastern European members (who have been there centuries like they have in the former Yugoslavia) and France, thanks to it's ex-empire's Muslim connections.

Funnily enough you will find that some European countries do not see this east/west division.
Many Greeks for example see themselves as both.


That seems to me to describe manners of change.


- As I said, of course it's a kind of change but it isn't a replacement of 'our culture' by 'theirs'.


Too bad so many who have recently emigrated to Europe could not hold the same
attitude.


- Either they will or their kids will learn.
That's the track record so far.



As you would say: Jayzuss!!!!


- Well if you say so.
We find that understanding how we got here and the role we played in that a help.

Simply ignoring the consequences of those actions and refusing to put right any on-going problems that they have caused, or helped cause, is not IMO a matter of refusing to feel guilty.
It is a refusal to face reality and heal wounds that need healing.
People still experience either benefit or hurt today. They are still relevant today therefore we still have a need to address those issues today.

I suggest this American attitude (which I think you are typifying here) in regards to your own pretty recent problems regarding slavery do not help you at all. They merely put off the day when you have to address the issue.


I base that presumption on human history. Technology may have changed, but it seems that human nature hasn't. How often do we choose the intelligent option? UGH!


- Yet we must live with an attitude of optimism and attempting to do better.....otherwise what is the point of anything beyond some kind of mere ludicrous animalistic existance?


I see a potentially volatile situation evolving.


- Why? We have come far closer to mass civil unrest in the past and survived it without the volitility you imagine.

Obviously that was not the case in central Europe not so long ago but at least it is totally unthinkable to imagine a realistic chance of a repeat of that today.


Of a region of what was once a larger nation, but I would say that they were not
the majority in what was Yugoslavia, which raises the interesting point that it took a repressive regime to keep the respective ethnic and religious enclaves from each others'
throats. More human nature at work...


- Or alternatively it is much more convincing to me to argue that it took enmities derived from an out-break of mono-cultural crazies at the time of WW2 to be stoked by the latest mono-cultural crazy and his tediously out-worn retread of a 'greater.......blah blah blah' (in this case Serbia).


I think that it is because Europe is a comparative newcomer to the modern immigration game.


- This is simply not true.
Europe has experienced immigration for centuries thanks to empire.

But OK, in terms of the American mass immigration to (what the settlers came to regard as an 'empty continent') there is no parallel with Europe at all.

It is not our experience and never will be.
......and what?


Not fear so much as dislike.


- Maybe for some. Not all.
But ultimately tough, get used to it.
Every new generation makes it's changes. It always was like that and it always will be.
You cannot guaranteed any particular future.....'cept our own turning our toes up!


Again, I think it's because it's still in its early stages for you.


- Oh come on. This is nothing like similar.
Even if we go with you implied notion of uncontrolled immigration (which is a total myth) there simply aren't the numbers to do this.

If Europe is already around 440 non-muslims how could the logistics for such a population to be 'swamped' ever arise?
The very idea is absurd.


By whom?

For evidence of our defeat in the game, I would recommend a google search on Detroit and the US auto industry. I have borne first-hand witness to the ravages brought about
by the loss of heavy industry in the US (not brought about entirely by the Japanese, but
also greedy CEOs, but that's another story). An amazing but true fact about the US is that up until about the mid 1970s, an person with virtually no education could get a family-sustaining factory job.


- That is exactly the point. The Japanese did not destroy the US auto industry any more than they destroyed the British one.

American and British financiers actually did that.
There was where the majority of the international funding, for their heavy investment that brought about their productivity miracle, came from.

Did you know that British car firms used to own Nissan? Or that Ford owns most of Mazda, that Renault owns most of Toyota?


Every nation has its difficulties. If Japan were a glorious multicutural nation however, there would be chaos there. Because of economic difficulties, ethnic and racial strife would of course follow, much as it often happens in the US.


- Well as I said I think the USA has problems very specific to itself in that regard.
Other people can manage the multicultural approach without the desparate problems the USA has in places.


I do not envy Japan so much as admire it as a success and I can't think of any nation whose history I would want to emulate. (Although Tibet might come close, unfortunately
a land composed of such a sensible people could only be eaten alive. One more for human nature)


- I think you're having to overlook a hell of a lot of closed horizons, suffocatingly rigid social structures, lack of opportunity, failure and 2nd rate-ism if all you can see is this historic Japanese 'success'.

As for Tibet? China can point to maps thousands of years old showing Tibet a part of China (one such map exists in the British museum for instance).

I wonder how the USA will regard any separatists in future? Do you imagine the USA pointing to old maps to indicate these people should get lost as 'such and such' has been part of the USA for centuries?

(yeah and I know, the irony of this is not lost on me either.
It's very funny given the historic US land-grabs and thefts of neighbours' territory.)


I think that's another cause for violins, if not strait jackets.


- You seem to mistake here a sober rational thinking approach for weak kneed spinelessness.

Clearly you either chose to or just forget our history in Europe.

We have tried to learn from our past so as not to blindly repeat the wasteful cruel and ruinous tragedy of it and to make the life-opportunities for us and ours so much better than we ever had before.

Very successfully too.

But make no mistake we as a people have probably more blood on our hands than any branch of mankind that ever walked.
If we feel the need we will defend what is ours with a single-minded ruthlessness unmatched in human history and - to our shame - give it no thought whilst we do it.

If we always now insist on an intelligent considered response that should never be mistaken for cowardice or a lack of will in the face of any actual threat.
That would be a very grave mistake by any potential adversaries.

By and large in this matter of any 'Muslim threat' we see the USA over-reacting to a situation that is likely to only get as bad as you help make it.

It also worries us deeply to see the casual talk about culture and race war/clashes.
Been there done that and, if you'll take a warning I would say if you do persue it - despite the US's original denials that any of this was ever about that, it will cost you and your culture dear - with you own future generations.


Nothing beer can't manage...


- We'll let you know when the rot becomes too obvious, ok?





[edit on 2-12-2004 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 09:42 AM
link   
The most annoying thing is that in Europe now, although most people in my experience have had enough of these foreign extremists coming in, claiming social security benefits and political asylum, they have to keep quiet for fear of upsetting the politically correct minority who call any criticism of an 'open door' immigration policy racist.

I am sure this sort of nonsense would not be tolerated by the much stronger Christian right in the USA. Don't make our mistake America, don't let it happen in your country.

Freedom of speech is one thing, but giving a 'starving man' food and shelter whilst he is plotting to murder you is another

[edit on 2-12-2004 by Englishman_in_Spain]



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Englishman_in_Spain
The most annoying thing is that in Europe now, although most people in my experience have had enough of these foreign extremists coming in, claiming social security benefits and political asylum, they have to keep quiet for fear of upstting the politically correct minority who call any criticism of an 'open door' immigration policy racist.


- That might be because those who talk about "these foreign extremists coming in, claiming social security benefits and political asylum" actually don't know what they are talking about.
It is mostly popular myth fed by 'newspapers' in the UK following their own agenda.

Firstly the 'social security' is extremely hard to get and if it is obtained it is less than £40 per week per individual adult. Now if you think that is the land of milk and honey feel free, I don't.

Secondly whilst there may be one or two more well known and vocal 'extremists' on the TV once in a while the vast majority of asylum seekers are genuinely fleeing the most appalling regimes.....I take it you'd just ignore this and deport them back to it, hmmm? Nice.

Asylum is not the same issue as general immigration......although the deliberate confusing of the 2 issues is an on-going problem.

There is no 'open door' policy, that is simply not true. Every UK Gov since the mid 1960's onward has tightened immigration policy (with exceptional instances like when Amin threw out the Ugandan asians - and we had the same transparent crap about them then too) ...... so what is the surprise if one questions the motives of those who insist there is?

.....and as for people feeling they have to keep quite?!
Have you seen The Sun. Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph and The Express lately?
You call that maintaining a silence on the issue?!



I am sure this sort of nonsense would not be tolerated by the much stronger Christian right in the USA. Don't make our mistake America, don't let it happen in your country.


- What are you talking about?
If ever there was a country built on immigration it is the USA.



Freedom of speech is one thing, but giving a starving man food and shelter whilst he is plotting to murder you is another


- ......so this wave of murderous immigrants is happening to whom where then?

I've seen one murder of a famous dutch man (apparantly, but not proven) with a Muslim connection and a little further back the murder of a Dutch gay right-wing politician (with no obvious immigrant of Muslim connection)......so, for the sake of debate I'll accept the first case might be related to Muslim immigrants, for now til shown otherwise; so where is the rest this wave immigrants murdering?

As has been pointed out countless times before this is exactly the kind of alarmist ignorant nonsense talked about with every wave of immigration.

I wonder if the Spainish feel that way about you? 'Taken over' a little bit of Spain have we......or is that OK for your kind, hmm?

[edit on 2-12-2004 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 05:30 PM
link   

- As I said, of course it's a kind of change but it isn't a replacement of 'our culture' by 'theirs'.


No, it isn't, but it could become so. To you, it seems that it would not necessarily be a bad thing for many, but don't think many people visit Europe for its Mosques.




- Either they will or their kids will learn.
That's the track record so far.


As it usually seems to go...


- Well if you say so.


I say so.


We find that understanding how we got here and the role we played in that a help.

Simply ignoring the consequences of those actions and refusing to put right any on-going problems that they have caused, or helped cause, is not IMO a matter of refusing to feel guilty.
It is a refusal to face reality and heal wounds that need healing.
People still experience either benefit or hurt today. They are still relevant today therefore we still have a need to address those issues today.

I suggest this American attitude (which I think you are typifying here) in regards to your own pretty recent problems regarding slavery do not help you at all. They merely put off the day when you have to address the issue.


I think that healing of wounds does not mean that the decendants of the wounded ought to be living among you. I think that those issues would be better addressed if those people lived in countries where thier cultures predominate.

As for our own pretty recent problems with slavery, let us not forget who brought massive slave trade to what is now the US. It certainly did not occur spontaneously. Most who were to be slaves and have descendants who would be slaves were transported here during the time that what is
now the US was 13 British colonies. (roughly from 1619–1783) The importation of slaves was banned
by the US in 1808 (although there were certainly many smuggled in up until the civil war) Also, since this seems to lean towards racial guilt, I would recommend doing some research on "indentured servitude in America in the colonial period". Believe it or not, there were white slaves as well as black slave owners. I think that those of us who are descendants of those who never owned or traded slaves have a particular cause to be bitter, given the current racial situation in the US.



- Yet we must live with an attitude of optimism and attempting to do better.....otherwise what is the point of anything beyond some kind of mere ludicrous animalistic existance?


I would say cautious optimism is a good attitude. I would also say that those who live among us who cling to any antiquated faith make that a hard attitude to maintain whenever they have any cultural influence.



- Why? We have come far closer to mass civil unrest in the past and survived it without the volitility you imagine.


Because those who have the potential for causing mass civil unrest certainly must have some connection to a force that is out of Europe's sphere of influence, which is the greater Muslim world of over a billion people, many of whom surely harbor [perhaps justified] anti–Western sentiments.


Obviously that was not the case in central Europe not so long ago but at least it is totally unthinkable to imagine a realistic chance of a repeat of that today.


I hope so.


- Or alternatively it is much more convincing to me to argue that it took enmities derived from an out-break of mono-cultural crazies at the time of WW2 to be stoked by the latest mono-cultural crazy and his tediously out-worn retread of a 'greater.......blah blah blah' (in this case Serbia).


Which is an example of how small things can turn into big problems. That is the same region where WWI began.


- This is simply not true.
Europe has experienced immigration for centuries thanks to empire.


Yes, but I would say that the vast percentage of immigrants and thier descendants
have been recent arrivals.


It is not our experience and never will be.
......and what?


I don't know what makes you so certain of that, but it could be that if there is enough
immigration there, the only thing that would prevent it from happening would be for your
tolerance to reach its limit.




- Maybe for some. Not all.
But ultimately tough, get used to it.
Every new generation makes it's changes. It always was like that and it always will be.
You cannot guaranteed any particular future.....'cept our own turning our toes up!


I'm already used to it, which is what inclines me towards pessimism.


No, nothing is guaranteed, but if we are not to live a a ludirous animalistic existence, then of course we do what we can, then we turn our toes up





- Oh come on. This is nothing like similar.
Even if we go with you implied notion of uncontrolled immigration (which is a total myth) there simply aren't the numbers to do this.

If Europe is already around 440 non-muslims how could the logistics for such a population to be 'swamped' ever arise?
The very idea is absurd.


Well, as I understand it, much of the native European birthrate is already below replacement levels. If that is the case, it may be possible.


- That is exactly the point. The Japanese did not destroy the US auto industry any more than they destroyed the British one.

American and British financiers actually did that.
There was where the majority of the international funding, for their heavy investment that brought about their productivity miracle, came from.

Did you know that British car firms used to own Nissan? Or that Ford owns most of Mazda, that Renault owns most of Toyota?


No, not by itself. How it seemed to happen here is: Beginning in the 1960s, Japanese
auto manufacturers began to export small, fuel–efficient vehicles to the US market, which
was then dominated primarily by large gas–guzzlers.Then, there was not much of a market becaus gas was cheap. After the 1973 Oil Crisis, The US market became inundated with Japanese cars with which the US auto industry could not compete because of outdated designs and factories as well as indifferent CEOs. The corporate takeover craze came in the 1980s.


- Well as I said I think the USA has problems very specific to itself in that regard.
Other people can manage the multicultural approach without the desparate problems the USA has in places.


I don't know what makes you so certain of that.


- I think you're having to overlook a hell of a lot of closed horizons, suffocatingly rigid social structures, lack of opportunity, failure and 2nd rate-ism if all you can see is this historic Japanese 'success'.


I hardly think that the Japanese are closed–minded or are being suffocated by thier own culture. Just because a nation knows who it is and acts accordingly does not cause it to wither and die. Lack of opportunity? Massive poverty and unemployment hardly seems to be a problem there. I would hardly call Japan a failure. I don't see Japan as second–rate, either. They outstripped your country long ago. I don't think that there success will last forever though. Whose does?


As for Tibet? China can point to maps thousands of years old showing Tibet a part of China (one such map exists in the British museum for instance).


Yes I am aware of that as well. Tibet came into being when enough of its leaders decided that they had had enough of the typical warlord–dominated societies which were found there at that time. So, they decided to govern themselves according to Buddhist principles and actually became a place where Chinese would go to learn
those principles. Tibet became nation that was, for the most part, respected by its neighbors for its learning and its peaceful ways from about the 14th century up until 1959, when China invaded.



I wonder how the USA will regard any separatists in future? Do you imagine the USA pointing to old maps to indicate these people should get lost as 'such and such' has been part of the USA for centuries?


Well, we saw how they were regarded during our civil war. I don't think that a situation
like what you describe will ever happen because I think that the dissolution of the US may very well happen during my lifetime.




- You seem to mistake here a sober rational thinking approach for weak kneed spinelessness.

Clearly you either chose to or just forget our history in Europe.

We have tried to learn from our past so as not to blindly repeat the wasteful cruel and ruinous tragedy of it and to make the life-opportunities for us and ours so much better than we ever had before.

Very successfully too.

But make no mistake we as a people have probably more blood on our hands than any branch of mankind that ever walked.
If we feel the need we will defend what is ours with a single-minded ruthlessness unmatched in human history and - to our shame - give it no thought whilst we do it.

If we always now insist on an intelligent considered response that should never be mistaken for cowardice or a lack of will in the face of any actual threat.
That would be a very grave mistake by any potential adversaries.

By and large in this matter of any 'Muslim threat' we see the USA over-reacting to a situation that is likely to only get as bad as you help make it.

It also worries us deeply to see the casual talk about culture and race war/clashes.
Been there done that and, if you'll take a warning I would say if you do persue it - despite the US's original denials that any of this was ever about that, it will cost you and your culture dear - with you own future generations.


No, I haven't overlooked the history of Europe, which is why I posted. Given your long
history of an inabilty to get along (to say the very least) , why would you want people even MORE different to live there?? Do you have something to prove to yourselves?

I am only too well aware of what the current war is already costing us. (see above) I also think it's only the beginning....


I don't think you'll be able to defend what is yours if you are unable to figure out what is yours. Whatever the case, I hope you don't have to do so.






- We'll let you know when the rot becomes too obvious, ok?




Fair enough....hic






[edit on 12/2/2004 by jdster]



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdster
No, it isn't, but it could become so. To you, it seems that it would not necessarily be a bad thing for many, but don't think many people visit Europe for its Mosques.


- I'm sorry I cannot accept this prospect as in any way realistic.

To stand a hope of becoming so it relies on Europe's birth rate remaining below replacement levels for decades and for immigration to be sustained at record ultra high levels (way beyond anything seen to date) and the immigrant population to sustain an ultra high birth rate for decades too (something which has not ever happened before).

Mosques in themselves don't bother me but the idea that European would really be visited for it's Mosques is pretty remote (although the main one in London is actually quite a spectacle, it's a very beautiful building) - don't you have any in the USA?


I think that healing of wounds does not mean that the decendants of the wounded ought to be living among you.


- They are a minority here and staying that way by any rational reckoning, so what?


I think that those issues would be better addressed if those people lived in countries where thier cultures predominate.


- I don't think the addressing of those issues is the point of why they are here.
Some have fled here and some have simply come here for a better life as we would probably do were we in their place.....which also can be seen in many immigrants not insisting on trying to simply recreate things 'exactly as they were back home' (unfortunately few seem to want to accept this truth).


As for our own pretty recent problems with slavery, let us not forget who brought massive slave trade to what is now the US. It certainly did not occur spontaneously. Most who were to be slaves and have descendants who would be slaves were transported here during the time that what is
now the US was 13 British colonies. (roughly from 1619–1783) The importation of slaves was banned
by the US in 1808 (although there were certainly many smuggled in up until the civil war) Also, since this seems to lean towards racial guilt, I would recommend doing some research on "indentured servitude in America in the colonial period". Believe it or not, there were white slaves as well as black slave owners. I think that those of us who are descendants of those who never owned or traded slaves have a particular cause to be bitter, given the current racial situation in the US.


- I am simply saying that it is clearly a recent issue (great-grandfather's time for many?) and clearly still has aspects to it that need addressing. Obviously it is still a problem in America, not here in Europe.



I would say cautious optimism is a good attitude. I would also say that those who live among us who cling to any antiquated faith make that a hard attitude to maintain whenever they have any cultural influence.


- Well if there aren't that many of them to be frightened of what is the problem.
.....and there aren't that many of them.


Because those who have the potential for causing mass civil unrest certainly must have some connection to a force that is out of Europe's sphere of influence, which is the greater Muslim world of over a billion people, many of whom surely harbor [perhaps justified] anti–Western sentiments.


- Yet our experiences to date (where Muslims have been here in the UK and in continental Europe for decades) show nothing of the sort.

It seems there is a myth of some recent massive influx; that is simply not true.
There have been some, yes, but hardly a great 'deluge'.....and if we can stop pratting about in the ME there will be even less of them fleeing the place for anyone to worrying about, eh?


Yes, but I would say that the vast percentage of immigrants and thier descendants
have been recent arrivals.


- Well yes, ok, if only because populations are so much greater now.


I don't know what makes you so certain of that, but it could be that if there is enough
immigration there, the only thing that would prevent it from happening would be for your
tolerance to reach its limit.


- The idea of an unregulated immigration into Europe is a myth.

Europe is usually happy to give political asylum to people (if they meet the various criteria laid down to make a genuine claim). It gets tougher and tougher to come here.

This is not the same as regular immigration.

There has not been a massive wave of immigration. There has been a rise in asylum applications but that is hardly the same......and almost no-one ever mentions the Muslim asylum seekers who came during the Kosovo and Yugoslavian conflicts who have now gone home. Ditto with some of the people who fled to Britain from Iraq.


Well, as I understand it, much of the native European birthrate is already below replacement levels. If that is the case, it may be possible.


- Certainly no time soon at these rates.


No, not by itself.


- No, I did not mean to say that was it all in it's entirety.


I don't know what makes you so certain of that.


- Because we have been managing very well to date.


I hardly think that the Japanese are closed–minded or are being suffocated by thier own culture. Just because a nation knows who it is and acts accordingly does not cause it to wither and die. Lack of opportunity? Massive poverty and unemployment hardly seems to be a problem there. I would hardly call Japan a failure. I don't see Japan as second–rate, either. They outstripped your country long ago. I don't think that there success will last forever though. Whose does?


- I was saying that to see only success out of Japanese history is odd to me.
Obviously there was a successful period 1960-1990 but before that there was utter disaster in WW2 and before that a very closed society.

I see nothing in broad terms that appeals.


I don't think that a situation
like what you describe will ever happen because I think that the dissolution of the US may very well happen during my lifetime.


- Really? I would be surprised.


-No, I haven't overlooked the history of Europe, which is why I posted. Given your long
history of an inabilty to get along (to say the very least) , why would you want people even MORE different to live there?? Do you have something to prove to yourselves?


- No, I don't think so. I just think we've learned that there is more to life and artificially closing ones' self off from the world actually makes us the lesser/loser. We don't need to be like that so why do it?


I am only too well aware of what the current war is already costing us. (see above) I also think it's only the beginning....


I don't think you'll be able to defend what is yours if you are unable to figure out what is yours. Whatever the case, I hope you don't have to do so.


- I think our civilisation and culture is far stronger, much more resilient and far better understood by our people than you seem to think.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 08:56 PM
link   

- I'm sorry I cannot accept this prospect as in any way realistic.

To stand a hope of becoming so it relies on Europe's birth rate remaining below replacement levels for decades and for immigration to be sustained at record ultra high levels (way beyond anything seen to date) and the immigrant population to sustain an ultra high birth rate for decades too (something which has not ever happened before).

Mosques in themselves don't bother me but the idea that European would really be visited for it's Mosques is pretty remote (although the main one in London is actually quite a spectacle, it's a very beautiful building) - don't you have any in the USA?


There are, but none that I have seen. It seems that Muslims tend to keep a VERY low
profile here, especially with the current state of things.


- They are a minority here and staying that way by any rational reckoning, so what?

- I don't think the addressing of those issues is the point of why they are here.
Some have fled here and some have simply come here for a better life as we would probably do were we in their place.....which also can be seen in many immigrants not insisting on trying to simply recreate things 'exactly as they were back home' (unfortunately few seem to want to accept this truth).



- I am simply saying that it is clearly a recent issue (great-grandfather's time for many?) and clearly still has aspects to it that need addressing. Obviously it is still a problem in America, not here in Europe





- Well if there aren't that many of them to be frightened of what is the problem.
.....and there aren't that many of them.


Well, in the case of the US, I offer up our own president as an example of one who clings to an antiquated faith and you see where that's got us.




- Yet our experiences to date (where Muslims have been here in the UK and in continental Europe for decades) show nothing of the sort.

It seems there is a myth of some recent massive influx; that is simply not true.
There have been some, yes, but hardly a great 'deluge'.....and if we can stop pratting about in the ME there will be even less of them fleeing the place for anyone to worrying about, eh?


- Well yes, ok, if only because populations are so much greater now.


- The idea of an unregulated immigration into Europe is a myth.

Europe is usually happy to give political asylum to people (if they meet the various criteria laid down to make a genuine claim). It gets tougher and tougher to come here.

This is not the same as regular immigration.

There has not been a massive wave of immigration. There has been a rise in asylum applications but that is hardly the same......and almost no-one ever mentions the Muslim asylum seekers who came during the Kosovo and Yugoslavian conflicts who have now gone home. Ditto with some of the people who fled to Britain from Iraq.

- Certainly no time soon at these rates.


- No, I did not mean to say that was it all in it's entirety.



- Because we have been managing very well to date.



- I was saying that to see only success out of Japanese history is odd to me.
Obviously there was a successful period 1960-1990 but before that there was utter disaster in WW2 and before that a very closed society.

I see nothing in broad terms that appeals.





- Really? I would be surprised.


Well, it seems to me that we never really have been all that united here and the
only thing that has really held us together since the civil war is a strong federal government. But, as we continue to blunder through our way of dealing with the rest of the world, our government seems to ignore a crumbling physical infrastructure, an economy headed for disaster, unchecked illegal immigration of unassimilable third–world people who add to the problem of an ever–diminishing (yet paradoxically ever more complacent) middle class by forcing down wages for the native born population because they accept a MUCH lower standard of living, an educational system that is producing a very large contingent of readily duped and easily exploited functional illiterates, Racial and ethnic strife brought about by so much "diversity" and so many with no sense of identity nor awareness of history all seem to me to add up to a nation that will surprise me if it IS still "united" in the next 50 or so years.



- No, I don't think so. I just think we've learned that there is more to life and artificially closing ones' self off from the world actually makes us the lesser/loser. We don't need to be like that so why do it?



I don't think you'll be able to defend what is yours if you are unable to figure out what is yours. Whatever the case, I hope you don't have to do so.

- I think our civilisation and culture is far stronger, much more resilient and far better understood by our people than you seem to think.


As for the rest, it seems that time will tell and discussing it further it will only lead us in circles, so I think we'll have to agree to disagree [unless you like going in circles
]and leave it at that.

Now, for another beer....




[edit on 12/2/2004 by jdster]



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 06:11 AM
link   
In reply to sminkey pinkey, I respect your right to disagree with what I say, would you get that same freedom of speech if certain immigrant elements within the UK took over?

I very much doubt it.

I would also beg to differ that most new arrivals in the UK are fleeing tyrannical regimes. Obviously you think it depends which newspaper you read, well I am sorry, but, unlike you, I do not read the Grauniad.

As regards my own situation in Spain, I and my family are welcomed here with open arms because;
1. we are no threat to the status quo. We do not practice any religion at all and certainly respect the local devout Roman Catholicism which is very important to our hosts. We recognise that we are guests in their country and show respect accordingly.
2. we ask nothing of the state, having started our own business, employing Spanish workers in the process and paying large amounts of tax, thus contributing in a very big way to the Spanish economy
3. I and my family are making every effort to integrate by involving oursleves fully in the local community, recognising that in a foreign country I should make every effort to learn their language, not expect them to speak mine. All of my family are therefore fluent in Spanish.
4. my daughter goes to a Spanish state school and has many Spanish friends with whom she socialises.

So with the greatest respect, I would say you have jumped to one or two erroneous conclusions. Remember, not everybody is the same as you dear chap.

[edit on 3-12-2004 by Englishman_in_Spain]



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Englishman_in_Spain
In reply to sminkey pinkey, I respect your right to disagree with what I say, would you get that same freedom of speech if certain immigrant elements within the UK took over?

I very much doubt it.


[edit on 3-12-2004 by Englishman_in_Spain]


Of course we would. But we do not need to worry about such a scenario, as it will never happen.



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Englishman_in_Spain

In reply to sminkey pinkey, I respect your right to disagree with what I say, would you get that same freedom of speech if certain immigrant elements within the UK took over?


- No doubt from some yes and others no.

But as this has absolutely zero chance of happening what are you on about?


I would also beg to differ that most new arrivals in the UK are fleeing tyrannical regimes.


- Some are and some aren't. I never said otherwise.

I did point out that the issue of asylum is not one and the same as the issue of general immigration.

Which is true.


Obviously you think it depends which newspaper you read, well I am sorry, but, unlike you, I do not read the Grauniad.


- I think a one-sided diet of the right-wing care stories typical of the papers I mentioned is unlikely to give one an accurate picture of what is going on and why, yes.

Until very recently more people left the UK than immigrated to it....bit like yourself I suppose, hmm?


So with the greatest respect, I would say you have jumped to one or two erroneous conclusions.


- Er, you'll find I did not 'conclude' anything I made a scarcastic quip in fact.



Remember, not everybody is the same as you dear chap.


- Of that I am only too well aware and grateful; old chap.



Originally posted by Kriz_4
But we do not need to worry about such a scenario, as it will never happen.


- Absolutely correct Kris; I just can't see why some people 'worry' and wind themselves up about something that is never going to happen.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Just out of interest, this came up in 'The Observer' sunday newspaper this weekend. maybe you'd like a look?

Part 1 - observer.guardian.co.uk...

Part 2 - observer.guardian.co.uk...

I thought it was a very good article and looked at this issue in a reasonable and balanced manner without any of the, sadly all to usual, hyperbole or hysterics.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4

Originally posted by Englishman_in_Spain
In reply to sminkey pinkey, I respect your right to disagree with what I say, would you get that same freedom of speech if certain immigrant elements within the UK took over?

I very much doubt it.


[edit on 3-12-2004 by Englishman_in_Spain]


Of course we would. But we do not need to worry about such a scenario, as it will never happen.


And which one might that be? Can I guess?



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger


And which one might that be? Can I guess?

Firstly the last person who tried to kill the gov got his ahem privates inserted in between the bell on big ben and was kept there until a few minutes after 12.
Now this might not sound sore but imagine if you will that there is a very large hammer gonging the bell and his genetils are in the hammers path..........its not nice is it?

Also i would like to see some forigners take scotland, ever been to glasgow? Just shout "i love england" at 18 Kerrydale or Edmiston Drive and well hope you have good trainers.



posted on Dec, 7 2004 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger


And which one might that be? Can I guess?

Firstly the last person who tried to kill the gov got his ahem privates inserted in between the bell on big ben and was kept there until a few minutes after 12.
Now this might not sound sore but imagine if you will that there is a very large hammer gonging the bell and his genetils are in the hammers path..........its not nice is it?

Also i would like to see some forigners take scotland, ever been to glasgow? Just shout "Scotland sucks" at 18 Kerrydale or Edmiston Drive and well hope you have good trainers.

Or similar try something like "England sucks" at Old Trafford...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join