Danish queen raps radical Islam

The difference is that the Europeans WERE NOT LIVING ON INDIAN LAND! It was European land, paid for in cash or blood.

Oh come on!!! That's a whole bunch of BS! "Paid for in cash or blood" -- Is that what they have brainwashed you in the American schools to believe? That's scary! The pioneers came to Indian lands that did not belong to them, and which had been taken with the use of violence and massacres. Neither you nor your history books can change those facts!

If the Chinese can buy the land from the US government and start their own new nation fine. If they can take on and beat the US government in war, well then it is now theirs. Since they can't do either of these things, THEY NEED TO LEARN THE DAMNED LANGUAGE!

well according to that kind of mentality and attitude the world would be in total chaos. Are you sincerely telling me that it is totally ok to use violence to in order to take other peoples lands? Are you saying that you think it's just fine to wage wars against other countries for the purpose of taking them?

And another thing - I don't give a # about what religion or Ethnicity is in question. It could be Mexicans or Americans - in this case it happens to be MUSLIMS. Your Islam glasses are really shrowding your view. Stop trying to act like this is some injustice against Islam - it's not. If there is an injustice, it is that immigrants who come to a new country to better their lives can't show the least bit of effort to assimilate into the country.

You know what? I think you're lying! Based on what you are saying, I conclude that you indeed do give a # about what religion or ethnicity is in question! And besides, I don't think you know what the hell you're talking about - I think you're just a bitter bigot. It's astonishing that you can really be serious about that you think "MUSLIMS" do not learn to speak the languages of their adopted homelands. How can the spiritual beliefs of more than one billion people who are of various nationalitites, continents, races, ethnicities and social backgrounds determine that they do not learn to speak the language of the countries they have immigrated to?? I don't think you're getting my point here.... and it's getting really frustrating because I have to repeat the same thing over and over, and yet something so simple just doesn't seem to register for you somehow. Religion cannot possibly be the determinating factor explaining why certain immigrants do not speak a language.

To state that Muslims do not speak the language of the countries where they immigrated to is total nonsense, rubbish and totally false! Enter the universities, corporations, hospitals, offices, banks, investment firms, law firms, NASA, and many other professional institutions in the U.S. and you'll see how incredibly many Muslims work there and how well they speak English! Since I am Iranian, I can tell you with total sincerity that probably 95% of all Iranians in the U.S. speak English, and since 99% of all Iranians are Muslims one can then conclude that at least 95% of all those Iranians are Muslim.

There are just as many immigrants of other faiths who do not speak the language of their new countries, and the reason that Muslims are being pointed out is because of pure bigotry and anti-Islam sentiments.

Well, as long as it doesn't hurt you, why do you care? They're the ones who will suffer from it, nobody else.

As I said, it is because it DOES hurt me! I end up paying for these peoples lives because they can't adapt. Why the hell should we pay for illegal Mexicans children to learn Spanish in school instead of English when it is just going to cost me more money to pay for their government hand outs!

Yes, that's the problem with people like you. You just think of yourselves and your money. Have you ever thought of how much the RECENT immigrants (I capitalize "recent" because to me YOU too are an immigrant, since the U.S. originally belongs to the native Indians, and anyone who came after them are immigrants) contribute the economy of the U.S.? Most smaller businesses are owned by recent immigrants. I remember visiting the U.S. in 1977. Back then Europeans and others were ridiculing the Americans because of their acute lack of taste when it came to fashion. One would talk about those polyester wearing Americans. And it was true back then. There was no such thing as fashion in the U.S. back in those days. And you would really have to look around to be lucky enough to find a boutique which would have anything remotely close to what was in fashion in Europe and elsewhere. Then came the Iranian revolution in 1979. Millions of Iranians started to leave Iran because of the new theocracy which the revolution brought about. Iranians were fanatic followers of the latest fashion, and anyone who has been to Iran in those days prior to the revolution would know what I'm talking about. Anyway, hundreds of thousands of Iranians emigrated to the U.S. and many of them who had to find ways of supporting themselves in the new country opened fancy European fashion boutiques. Pretty soon American fashion streets like Rodeo Drive in L.A., and Union Street in San Francisco, Georgetown in Washington, D.C., etc, were totally infested and shining with brand new and elegant European fashion boutiques owned by newly arrived Iranian emigres. From there on the American public became more and more exposed to fashion and started to take more and more interest in it. San Francisco Examiner or chronicle, one of the two, actually wrote a whole page article about this phenomenon. This just shows how much the recent immigrants in the U.S. has contributed to American society in various ways. Most of these Iranians were Muslims, and most of them speak English. Most of the Muslims in Denmark speak Danish, therefore it's wrong of the queen to come out and make such a biased remark! Now for those immigrants in Denmark who do not speak Danish, whether Muslim or not, (because their religion really doesn't play the smallest role here), most of them are older people, and because these northern societies are very difficult to get intigrated into for various cultural reasons, it is very difficult for many immigrants to mix with the Danes, and the same goes with other Scandinavians. The Scandinavians are very reserved and introverted, and thus its very difficult to establish relations with them. Ofcourse there are a lot of exceptions too. Furthermore, the Danes are by far the less tolerant ones, which also does not help immigrants to become integrated.

The whole argment I'm holding here is that it is entirely wrong to say "Muslims" do or do not speak Danish sufficiently. This has absolutely nothing to do with religion. If you say Arabs, Iranians, or this or that people, then you might have a point because there might be an inherent NATIONAL and CULTURAL trait of a particular ethnic group or nationality which causes them to beheve in a certain manner, but this does not hold true about a faith like Islam which has a billion followers of various races, countries, ethnic groups and continents.

Sorry, but how can you simply dismiss the FACT that it IS Muslims that this aplies to? In your mind it is OK to label them as Arabs because that puts them in a group defined by genes, but yet people can not define a group by their religion? It makes no sense.

How I can? Because 1) It's not possible that spiritual beliefs of a group of people would determine whether they do or do not learn the language of the country to which they have migrated, UNLESS the teachings of their holy scripts or religion would specifically preach to them to not learn the language of their new countries. This is absolutely not the case with Islam. On the contrary Islam preaches that "One should follow the fashion of the society one lives in", meaning that one should try to adopt to the way of life of the society one lives in. It is absolutely irrational to claim that "Muslims" do not make an effort to learn the new language, and it's false. Have you been to Denmark? I have. And I know that the vast majority of Muslims do speak Danish. There are both Muslims and non-Muslim immigrants in Denmark who do not speak Danish, and they are a minority. The reason the Danish queen has focused on Muslims is because she just like you have fallen victim to the agressive and very ambitious and vicious anti-Islam and anti-Muslim bigotry and propaganda which is actively being disseminated throughout the Western media and internet and by certain Christian and evangelic hategroups and racists and also Jewish hategroups and individuals. So the queen, just like you, can no longer distinguish between facts and prejudices. She can't distinguish between a minority of immigrants who can't speak Danish and the entire Muslim community in Denmark which consists of some 150,000 people from a whle variety of different countries, with different cultures and languages. Whenever she sees or hears about the "bad immigrant" who is either guilty of not speaking Danish or guilty of having committed some crime, she automatically without even thinking about it concludes that it is a Muslim, and it is because it is a Muslim that the immigrant is "bad".

And by the way, since you said it, I would like to point out that Islam IS a cultural trait! Religion is ALWAYS a cultural trait.

It might be in certain ways, but in most it is not. And it certainly does not determine the ability or will of its followers to learn the language of their adopted countries - THAT IS RIDICULOUS!!!!! For instance Islam might have affected the cultures of the Muslim nations in such a way that when we Muslims see a beggar or a very poor person on the street, we help them or give them money, because it is one of the most important pillars of Islam to help the needy. Even non-religious Muslims have grown up with this mentality. Or for instance because of the religious teachings, the people of the Muslim nations are overwhelmingly very hospitable towards strangers and also very unselfish. Many non-Muslim foreigners are astonished when they see how their hosts offer them their best beds and all the food they have even if it would mean that they themselves would not eat. These are the only cultural imprints that I can think of that Islam has left on the cultures of all Muslim nations. But other than that, there are big cultural differences between the Muslim nations. Go to Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan - Three very different countries with very different values and cultures.

I don't think that you have sufficient knowledge about Islam or the different Muslim nations to make such claims! I on the other hand do.

Originally posted by blablablaxyz
wikipedia is not exactly an authoratative source...

Everybody knows - the whole world knows that Bosnia and Kosovo was about Serbian ultra-nationalist Christians who launched a campaing of ethnic cleansing against the Muslims of these lands. Ofcourse after all the incomprehensible authrocities against the Muslims, such as raping 90 year old women to death, will eventually create such fury and rage that some of the Muslim combatants also started to use the same brutal measures in revenge. But everyone knows that it was overwhelmingly the Christian Serbs who committed horrendous crimes against humanity in these conflicts, and it was they who started it. Nothing you say can change that!

Soon their royal family will be foriegn devils too because her son married an Aussie girl. Seriously though, i don't know where all this hype about musilms becoming a majority in Europe is coming from. I mean if you look at the actual statistic the claims are very silly. 2% of the population being muslim isn't very much. Russia is the only country in the region that has a significant percentage of the population that is musilm but that's to be expected because their country spaned such a large area that it used to border Iran when it was the Soviet Union.

Denmark: Evangelical Lutheran 95%, other Protestant and Roman Catholic 3%, Muslim 2%

www.cia.gov...

Islam is perhaps the most vile lie since the invention of the catholic pope. Both are leading thier "flocks" straight to hell. Both ignore many of the 10 commandments and teachings of Christ. Islam in europe as in america is undermining both.

The Danish Queen is right.

Originally posted by paperclip
blablablaxyz, over 200,000 people were killed in Bosnia between 1992 and 1995. Now, read that number again. And again. Those graves exist, the families miss their family members. It is not a made-up story.

Extremist serbs backed by serbian goverment led by Milosevic commited a genocide in Bosnia, a continous systematic murder of muslims and croats. Over 200,000 people. Read that number again. And again. I was there, witnessed it with my own eyes. The women of Srebrenica were sent to my home town after they witnessed the genocide. I was there, talked with them, brought them food, clothes. There were virtually no men. Only a few male kids. They were all killed and buried in mass graves. Mass graves have been found. They exist. It is not just Srebrenica. It is over 200,000 people that have been killed. Read that number again. And again.
Accept it and move on.


[edit on 21-4-2005 by paperclip]

Did you cut 'n paste a CNN pay-per-news report ? So sad.

Serbs historically never have and never will be extremists.

"Because anyone who knows anything about European history before 1945 backs the Serbs. "

In the Yugoslav Civil War the croats and muslims were the extremists and surprise surprise they have a history of extremism and treachery.

Because it wasn't the Serbs who fought with the Nazis in Yugoslavia during the second world war - it was the Croats and the Muslims. (Nazi Muslims! What an absolutely mind- blowingly terrifying concept!)

Milosevic was a Belgrade banker that spent most of his professional life in New York. Doesn't fit in your "dictatorial image" does it ? Also Serbia-Montenegro, Macedonia etc and the whole of former Yugoslavia wasn't in any "Warsaw Pact" or behind the "Iron Curtain" during the Cold War. It was a unique European country.

You quote a figure of 200,000 dead in the Yugoslav Civil War but you fail to say 200,000 dead... ON ALL SIDES.

Originally posted by blablablaxyz
Did you cut 'n paste a CNN pay-per-news report ? So sad.

Serbs historically never have and never will be extremists.

"Because anyone who knows anything about European history before 1945 backs the Serbs. "

In the Yugoslav Civil War the croats and muslims were the extremists and surprise surprise they have a history of extremism and treachery.

Because it wasn't the Serbs who fought with the Nazis in Yugoslavia during the second world war - it was the Croats and the Muslims. (Nazi Muslims! What an absolutely mind- blowingly terrifying concept!)

Milosevic was a Belgrade banker that spent most of his professional life in New York. Doesn't fit in your "dictatorial image" does it ? Also Serbia-Montenegro, Macedonia etc and the whole of former Yugoslavia wasn't in any "Warsaw Pact" or behind the "Iron Curtain" during the Cold War. It was a unique European country.

You quote a figure of 200,000 dead in the Yugoslav Civil War but you fail to say 200,000 dead... ON ALL SIDES.

Well for a guy that refuses to accept wikipedia as a valid source of information, is then quoting this Silly Article from Guardian for the third time! And this forty "facts" are supposed to back your story? PLEASE!Now lets look at these "facts" a little closer:

7) Because my father taught me never to kiss a Nazi, whereas I've certainly snogged a few Serbs in my time.

Well, the author of this forty "facts", Julie Burchill, is clearly saying that she has a very biased point of view over this situation, since she has certainly snogged a few Serbs in Her Time! Wow. Who really cares?

8) Because Robin Cook says they are

Now that really means something - if Robin Cook says so, then its True!

9) Because Clinton is a liar.

And what politican is Not a Liar? To be a politician you must a cheater and a liar, and when you are not kissing babies, you are stealing their lollipops.

10) Because Milosevic doesn't have a moustache.

WTF?

Anyway, forty "facts" - more like forty really stupid points, that are more likely a joke, written by a very biased and pro-serbian writer, that can hardly call herself a journalist!

Now lets look at some facts.

During the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s, the concept of a Greater Serbia was widely seen outside of Serbia as the motivating force for the military campaigns undertaken to form and sustain Serbian states on the teritorries of the breakaway Yugoslav republics of Croatia (the Republic of Serbian Krajina) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (the Republika Srpska). This strategy was closely associated with the former Serbian president Slobodan Milošević and his Socialist Party of Serbia, although the ostensible goal was "all Serbs in one state" rather than an explicit Greater Serbia. From the Serb point of view, the objective of this policy was to assure Serbs' rights by ensuring that they could never be subjected to potentially hostile rule, particularly by their historic Croatian enemies (cf. Ustase). Unifying Yugoslavia's Serbs was a very widely supported objective within Serbia during the wars; however, only the Serbian Radical Party has explicitly promoted a Greater Serbian ideal. However- having in mind extremely hostile attitude of virtually entire Serbian elite and the majority of people towards all other peoples in Yugoslavia (Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, Albanians), the difference between "Serboslavia" of quasi-Yugoslav Serbian supremacists like communist Milosevic and "Greater Serbia" concept of more traditional Serbian nationalists like Seselj of Serbian Radical Party- meant little or nothing.

The concept of a Greater Serbia has been widely criticised by other nationalities in the former Yugoslavia as well as by foreign observers. The two principal objections have been:

* Questionable historical justifications for claims to territory; for instance, during the Croatian war, Dubrovnik and other parts of Dalmatia were claimed as a historically Serbian territory — claims which were opposed by Croatian authorities and international community.

* The coercive nature of creating a Greater Serbian state against the will of other nations; before the wars, the peoples of Yugoslavia were highly intermingled and it was physically impossible to create ethnic states without taking in large numbers of other ethnic groups against their will. An answer to this was the widespread use of ethnic cleansing to ensure that mono-ethnic territories could be established without opposition from potentially disloyal minority groups. A converse argument is used against the upgrading the status of Croatia and of Bosnia and Herzegovina from republics to independent states -- taking in large numbers of other ethnic groups against their will in the process.

The fundamental problem of the policy has been that its definition of a Serbian national space - i.e. all lands where Serbs live - conflicts with other nationalities' conceptions of their national spaces. Many Serbs point out, however, that a converse argument can also apply: the independence movements in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo all took little regard of Serbs' desire to live in a unified state. It must be stressed that "the wish to live in a unified state" has been, in practice, the goal of only and exclusively Fascist and proto-Fascist ideologies and movements (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Serbian "Black Hand", Croatian "Ustashe", Albanian "Balli Kombatar",..). Having in mind that Germans, Russians or French live dispersed in many countries, and that this poses no problem for these nations- the virulent nature of Greater Serbian concept becomes all too visible.

[edit on 24/4/05 by Souljah]

Originally posted by Siroos I have really nothing much more to discuss with a racist.

Im a "Raccieeessst" now am I? Please forgive my ignorance Siroos. Im ignorant in the "peaceful" teachings of Mohammed...May Allah shower his blessings upon him.

Im just a poor Beer-drinking, Pick-up truck driving, a**-kicking American Infidel who speaks out when I see and hear Lies tossed around about my beloved country.


Radical Islam is cutting the heads off of innocents, blowing up police stations, threatening politicians in Britain, threatening politicians in the Netherlands, Islam is fighting with every religion in the world (Jews, Christians, Buhddist) etc etc ....while Al Jazeera and the Mullahs cheer them on, but Im the Raciest?

What a world we live in.

So be it, Every word I said is 100% true. I may not be the most elequaint writer in ATS, but I always tell the raw, un-filtered truth as best I know it.

Maximu§



[edit on 123030p://000 by LA_Maximus]

Originally posted by blablablaxyz


Did you cut 'n paste a CNN pay-per-news report ? So sad.

Serbs historically never have and never will be extremists.

Did you read what I wrote? I LIVED through that war, I didn't copy/paste anything. I was there, smack down in the middle of genocide.

Sadly, there will always be people who deny that Holocaust happened (or blame Jews for it), there will always be people who deny that rwandan genocide happened, there will always be people who cheer Bin Laden and there will always be people who deny that bosnian genocide happened. Nothing I can do about it, I guess.

I am talking about the genocide in Bosnia between 1992 and 1995, you are obviously avoiding talking about it and are linking to dubious sites about WWII. Whatever dude, do what you want.

I know what happened, I was there. You can link a billion links to events of WWII, I know what happened in Bosnia at the end of 20th century, the whole world knows thanks to thousands of pieces of EVIDENCE. Why you keep defending mass murderers is beyond me. Maybe you should reflect on that a bit...


Anyways, this is WAY off topic of this thread, which is about muslims in denmark, so I am not going to post here anymore about bosnian genocide.

Souljah, The Guardian is considered an anti-Serb paper in Belgrade so if you get the odd human being with a spine that says it like it is don't get your knickers in a twist.

Historically the Serbs have always been the good guys.

Radical Islam suits America in Europe because it seems that all the USA lives for is money.

Peace and stability in Europe doesn't generate profit, accordimg to some great lobbysists ... err I mean "advisors".

Originally posted by paperclip

Originally posted by blablablaxyz


Did you cut 'n paste a CNN pay-per-news report ? So sad.

Serbs historically never have and never will be extremists.

Did you read what I wrote? I LIVED through that war, I didn't copy/paste anything. I was there, smack down in the middle of genocide.

Sadly, there will always be people who deny that Holocaust happened (or blame Jews for it), there will always be people who deny that rwandan genocide happened, there will always be people who cheer Bin Laden and there will always be people who deny that bosnian genocide happened. Nothing I can do about it, I guess.

I am talking about the genocide in Bosnia between 1992 and 1995, you are obviously avoiding talking about it and are linking to dubious sites about WWII. Whatever dude, do what you want.

I know what happened, I was there. You can link a billion links to events of WWII, I know what happened in Bosnia at the end of 20th century, the whole world knows thanks to thousands of pieces of EVIDENCE. Why you keep defending mass murderers is beyond me. Maybe you should reflect on that a bit...


Anyways, this is WAY off topic of this thread, which is about muslims in denmark, so I am not going to post here anymore about bosnian genocide.

15,000,000 Orthodox Christians killed in the Holocaust.
5,000,000 Jews killed in Holocaust.

I quoted 100-150,000 deaths from the Yugoslav Civil War. One of the other posters quoted 200,000. That's ON ALL SIDES. Terrible yes, what war isn't ?

Genocide NO.

It's hard to get an exact number because several thousand foreign Islamic terrorists were taken care of by the Serbian armed forces and they are probably included in the sillypedia stats.

Yes, the same islamic maniacs that crashed planes into NY skrapers.

[edit on 24-4-2005 by blablablaxyz]

Originally posted by blablablaxyz
Souljah, The Guardian is considered an anti-Serb paper in Belgrade so if you get the odd human being with a spine that says it like it is don't get your knickers in a twist.

So whats your point then? I dont get it...

Radical Islam suits America in Europe because it seems that all the USA lives for is money.

Peace and stability in Europe doesn't generate profit, accordimg to some great lobbysists ... err I mean "advisors".

I agree with you here. Radical Islam is needed in order to maintain this bogues War on Terrorism - when actually the real State Sponsor of Terrorism is USA itself. Since the 9-11 everybody in the world has started their little crusade against Islamic world - people walk around talking how the Arabs are Evil, how all the Muslims are Terrorists, how we must Nuke Iran before they Nuke us. The entire World has become scared and paranoid of Islam, and most of them dont know the diffrence between Radical and any other Islam. Mister Bush has started a crusade with words like: "Either your With US, or you are with Terrorists!" And ofcourse now everybody can become a General and start their little cruade against just about any Islamic question there is.

Yes, Peace and Stability does not bring Money to Corporations that are in business of War - their craft is war. In order to make more bombs and more airplanes they need constant war and constant state of fear - and since 9-11 most of the West lives in Fear of another big terrorist attack.

So do you honestly think that current American goverments Crusade against Terrorism will help in anyway or anyhow the world wide phenomenon of Terrorism - or will it do just about the opposite, Enforce it?

Originally posted by Ulvetann
And here are the suspects...

The 27 years old sudanese, 'Jaguar' and the arrested suspect, 34 year old Jared Heller.
'Jaguar' is wanted through Interpol and Schengen
Heller has not broken yet, and still pleeds not guilty.

As an update to the killing of the taxidriver, described earlier in this tread:
I can now inform you that the local news could tell us today, that the american, Jared Heller, has been found free of charges regarding the killing, but found guilty in 'indecent behaviour with a corpse'. I.e. he helped 'Jaguar' in partitioning the body.
'jaguar' is still wanted regarding the act of killing, but is being suspected of residing in Sudan.

So who here is causing all the drama?
All these ppl QQ about these islamic nations and there people in other countrys and not assimilating to there way of life? So im trying to say here is that these people move to other countrys, and expect to continue there way of life which the rest of the world dosent like. Then they cry, i mean if i was the leader of the country and there was somuch crime being commited by foreigners i would simply just kick out them and everybody who is affiliated with them.

There seems to be one easy solution, eliminate all islamic nations and the religion all together so we can all live in harmony!

Originally posted by drex4ever
There seems to be one easy solution, eliminate all islamic nations and the religion all together so we can all live in harmony!

do which nazi group do you represent?
ps sort out your grammer

Am I the only one to see the irony of spelling grammar grammer?



Seems we have problems on many levels in this thread.

Which is: Danish queen raps radical Islam

Curb your personal attacks or don't post at all.

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: WOT Posting Conduct – Please Review Link.

Originally posted by Ulvetann

'jaguar' is still wanted regarding the act of killing, but is being suspected of residing in Sudan.

Sudan...? hmmm. Yes, I guess they need more butchers like him down there... Violence, anarchy, interethnic clashes, looting and burning is spinning out of control in Sudan right now. "Number of dead and wounded is still unknown"...

As for the Danish Queen, I think it´s ok for her to rap radical Islam. Honor killings and Sharia laws don´t belong in Denmark. This is not politics, it is common sense and Danish laws. Generally the Monarks should not speak politics.