Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

David.P wrote:

Dont do it! It'll be just like Hitler and WW2! You may try to appease them but it will backfire and they will invade france then go for britian! God damn weak liberal values! I'm glad the people of the former eastern bloc are'nt as suseptable to this bullshit(Ok except my aunt but she was lured in by a muslim playing it nice at first then she got a shock when they arrived at cairo![I'm not making this up my aunt really was a muslim])
lol

"It'll be just like Hitler and WW2!"

It'll be exactly the opposite. The holocaust came about through exactly this type of phobia of one segregated ethnic/religious group. It is a perfect comparison (I actually alluded to it earlier), but you have it round entirely the wrong way. If, rather than demonising Jews, the German people in the 30s had worked to integrate them into their culture been tolerant/accepting of them, then the holocaust would never have happened.

This sort of xenophobia promotes exactly that kind of facist social response.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

So, solving community problems through equal compromise now amounts to giving the bad guys what they want?


No wonder the US is always at war.
This will be the 3rd or 4th time I asked and has yet to be answered. Show me examples of the extremists groups you intend on appeasing ability to compromise, be rational sensible or moderate.
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+794|6655|United States of America

lowing wrote:

"European socialists have devised their brilliant plan to combat "Islamophobia" ... "LISTEN" to the 20 million European Muslims, try to UNDERSTAND their problems, and provide solutions to ALLEVIATE their grievances."

"In other words ... find out just what they want, and then give it to them."  http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html under reading assignments.

taken from
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detay … ;bolum=102

Pretty much what I have been saying all along. Appeasement is the Liberal/Socialist answer. How about that.
I'm pretty sure that won't work since those millions of Muslims are not the extremists. That group is the one you should really have your eye on, but so what? The Europeans aren't going to submit themselves to extremism, especially that of a minority religion. Europe has the largest group of nonreligious folks in the world, so those extreme Muslims would have quite a hard time if they planned to take over somehow.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

waging war in every muslim dominated country is such a better solution.
PSSST!, Don't look now, but war has been waging in those countries but Muslims long before the New World was even discovered, let alone the US. Do not attempt to try and tell me that this was a peaceful, tolerant religion until the big bad US showed up.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

So, solving community problems through equal compromise now amounts to giving the bad guys what they want?


No wonder the US is always at war.
This will be the 3rd or 4th time I asked and has yet to be answered. Show me examples of the extremists groups you intend on appeasing ability to compromise, be rational sensible or moderate.
This is nothing to do with extremists. It is to do with typical Muslims. Making them feel more comfortable and accepted so that less of them turn to extremism.

I would've thought that was extremely obvious.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6531

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

So, solving community problems through equal compromise now amounts to giving the bad guys what they want?


No wonder the US is always at war.
This will be the 3rd or 4th time I asked and has yet to be answered. Show me examples of the extremists groups you intend on appeasing ability to compromise, be rational sensible or moderate.
Who said anything about appeasing extremists?  That's like arguing with racists.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

Pick up a newspaper every now and again, the spread of Islamic law throughout the world is the agenda we are fighting.
You're hilariously narrow-minded.


Who and what are you talking about? I don't think you could be any more ambiguous if you tried. I don't need to pick up a newspaper, I just need you to form a legible post.

If you think all muslims want to see Sharia law in Europe, you're ignorant. Utterly and entirely ignorant. The vast majority of muslims in Europe are against it, but of course you only need some impartial article about how some people are trying to bridge religious gaps to form some completely far off opinion on something you haven't the slightest idea about.
CAIR Chariman Emeritus (Omaer Ahmad) once said “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.” Other members of CAIR have stated that they would like “to see the US under Islamic law.”

From the biggest Islam lobbyist group in America and Canada, this is just here, are you telling me you have not heard any such rhetoric in Europe?
Wow. One quotation from some deranged person.

No, I have in no place said that I haven't heard that kind of rhetoric in Europe. Stop putting words in my mouth. It doesn't lend well to the credibility of your argument. I am saying that the people that this kind of rhetoric comes from are a very, very small minority.

In any event, trying to use that article as an argument for how European socialists want to allow Sharia law in Europe is completely, ridiculously stupid. Trying to bridge gaps and have an understanding does not equal changing the entire rule of law to appease a small ethnic minority. You're an alarmist scaremongerer, and you're trying too hard.
The leader of the biggest pro- Islamic group in this hemisphere and you dismiss him. Sorry but as the leader of his group he speaks for them.

Funny how you will dismiss every single quote posted against Islamic fundamentalism as scaremongering but you will hang your hat on every quote Bush says in order to undermine US policy. Cool double standard.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

So, solving community problems through equal compromise now amounts to giving the bad guys what they want?


No wonder the US is always at war.
This will be the 3rd or 4th time I asked and has yet to be answered. Show me examples of the extremists groups you intend on appeasing ability to compromise, be rational sensible or moderate.
This is nothing to do with extremists. It is to do with typical Muslims. Making them feel more comfortable and accepted so that less of them turn to extremism.

I would've thought that was extremely obvious.
Ummmm correct me if I am wrong, but you guys said the vast majority of muslims in your countries are normal and moderate and content. Sooooooooo, why would you feel like you were obliged to appease anyone that is normal moderate or content. Sounds like they already are appeased. I can only assume you are worried about precisely those that are extreme in their beliefs.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

lowing wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

waging war in every muslim dominated country is such a better solution.
PSSST!, Don't look now, but war has been waging in those countries but Muslims long before the New World was even discovered, let alone the US. Do not attempt to try and tell me that this was a peaceful, tolerant religion until the big bad US showed up.
The Caliphate was one of the most tolerant regimes of its day. The Caliphs allowed complete religious freedom. The same cannot be said of the West throughout the same period.

The strange thing is, that as the originally barbaric religion of Christianity has progressed and become more tolerant and modern, Islam hasn't. In fact Wahabi Islam, which is virtually unknown in Europe, has gone a long way backwards.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

So, solving community problems through equal compromise now amounts to giving the bad guys what they want?


No wonder the US is always at war.
This will be the 3rd or 4th time I asked and has yet to be answered. Show me examples of the extremists groups you intend on appeasing ability to compromise, be rational sensible or moderate.
Who said anything about appeasing extremists?  That's like arguing with racists.
see above
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6531

lowing wrote:

Ummmm correct me if I am wrong, but you guys said the vast majority of muslims in your countries are normal and moderate and content. Sooooooooo, why would you feel like you were obliged to appease anyone that is normal moderate or content. Sounds like they already are appeased. I can only assume you are worried about precisely those that are extreme in their beliefs.
No, we feel the vast majority aren't out to convert or destroy the world.  That doesn't mean that they're happy with a state of affairs where everyone else is outrightly xenophobic.
mikkel
Member
+383|6571

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

CAIR Chariman Emeritus (Omaer Ahmad) once said “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.” Other members of CAIR have stated that they would like “to see the US under Islamic law.”

From the biggest Islam lobbyist group in America and Canada, this is just here, are you telling me you have not heard any such rhetoric in Europe?
Wow. One quotation from some deranged person.

No, I have in no place said that I haven't heard that kind of rhetoric in Europe. Stop putting words in my mouth. It doesn't lend well to the credibility of your argument. I am saying that the people that this kind of rhetoric comes from are a very, very small minority.

In any event, trying to use that article as an argument for how European socialists want to allow Sharia law in Europe is completely, ridiculously stupid. Trying to bridge gaps and have an understanding does not equal changing the entire rule of law to appease a small ethnic minority. You're an alarmist scaremongerer, and you're trying too hard.
The leader of the biggest pro- Islamic group in this hemisphere and you dismiss him. Sorry but as the leader of his group he speaks for them.

Funny how you will dismiss every single quote posted against Islamic fundamentalism as scaremongering but you will hang your hat on every quote Bush says in order to undermine US policy. Cool double standard.
What the hell? You've posted one single quotation from some deranged lunatic, claiming him to represent the opinions of all muslims. That's like saying that the opinions of politicians are the opinions of their party members. It's a logical fallacy, and if that's all you have to offer, I don't get why you even started in the first place.

One single quotation from one muslim fundamentalist is turned into "every single quotation", and.. George Bush quotations? What dark orifice are you pulling this from? I'm used to people making up things to support their cause, but this is just hilarious. You're not just making up things to support your argument, you're making up things to make ad logicam arguments to discredit my opinion on a topic. Grasping at straws is one thing, but grasping at straws to grasp at straws is just very, very sad.

lowing wrote:

Ummmm correct me if I am wrong, but you guys said the vast majority of muslims in your countries are normal and moderate and content. Sooooooooo, why would you feel like you were obliged to appease anyone that is normal moderate or content. Sounds like they already are appeased. I can only assume you are worried about precisely those that are extreme in their beliefs.
It must be awfully uninspiring to live in a world as black and white as yours. You're saying that muslims are either fully in sync with Western ideals, or fundamental extremists.

Last edited by mikkel (2007-08-04 08:49:20)

lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

waging war in every muslim dominated country is such a better solution.
PSSST!, Don't look now, but war has been waging in those countries but Muslims long before the New World was even discovered, let alone the US. Do not attempt to try and tell me that this was a peaceful, tolerant religion until the big bad US showed up.
The Caliphate was one of the most tolerant regimes of its day. The Caliphs allowed complete religious freedom. The same cannot be said of the West throughout the same period.

The strange thing is, that as the originally barbaric religion of Christianity has progressed and become more tolerant and modern, Islam hasn't. In fact Wahabi Islam, which is virtually unknown in Europe, has gone a long way backwards.
YOu will not find me defending Christianity either, but, Christians or even extreme christians are not waging war, against western civilization now are they?
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:


This will be the 3rd or 4th time I asked and has yet to be answered. Show me examples of the extremists groups you intend on appeasing ability to compromise, be rational sensible or moderate.
This is nothing to do with extremists. It is to do with typical Muslims. Making them feel more comfortable and accepted so that less of them turn to extremism.

I would've thought that was extremely obvious.
Ummmm correct me if I am wrong, but you guys said the vast majority of muslims in your countries are normal and moderate and content. Sooooooooo, why would you feel like you were obliged to appease anyone that is normal moderate or content. Sounds like they already are appeased. I can only assume you are worried about precisely those that are extreme in their beliefs.
The vast majority of Muslims here are normal and moderate. That does not mean they are all content. Especially when you have Islamophobic fuckheads mocking, threatening or assaulting them.

You make some very strange assumptions. This is all about making the normal Muslims more a part of the community, rather than outsiders within it.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ummmm correct me if I am wrong, but you guys said the vast majority of muslims in your countries are normal and moderate and content. Sooooooooo, why would you feel like you were obliged to appease anyone that is normal moderate or content. Sounds like they already are appeased. I can only assume you are worried about precisely those that are extreme in their beliefs.
No, we feel the vast majority aren't out to convert or destroy the world.  That doesn't mean that they're happy with a state of affairs where everyone else is outrightly xenophobic.
Soi they must be soooooo unhappy with the state of afairs that you feel they will blow shit up if they don't get their way IN YOUR COUNTRY then huh?? ANd you must appease them before they do just that??
mikkel
Member
+383|6571

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:


PSSST!, Don't look now, but war has been waging in those countries but Muslims long before the New World was even discovered, let alone the US. Do not attempt to try and tell me that this was a peaceful, tolerant religion until the big bad US showed up.
The Caliphate was one of the most tolerant regimes of its day. The Caliphs allowed complete religious freedom. The same cannot be said of the West throughout the same period.

The strange thing is, that as the originally barbaric religion of Christianity has progressed and become more tolerant and modern, Islam hasn't. In fact Wahabi Islam, which is virtually unknown in Europe, has gone a long way backwards.
YOu will not find me defending Christianity either, but, Christians or even extreme christians are not waging war, against western civilization now are they?
No, they're waging war on Middle Eastern civilisation.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:


PSSST!, Don't look now, but war has been waging in those countries but Muslims long before the New World was even discovered, let alone the US. Do not attempt to try and tell me that this was a peaceful, tolerant religion until the big bad US showed up.
The Caliphate was one of the most tolerant regimes of its day. The Caliphs allowed complete religious freedom. The same cannot be said of the West throughout the same period.

The strange thing is, that as the originally barbaric religion of Christianity has progressed and become more tolerant and modern, Islam hasn't. In fact Wahabi Islam, which is virtually unknown in Europe, has gone a long way backwards.
YOu will not find me defending Christianity either, but, Christians or even extreme christians are not waging war, against western civilization now are they?
No. They're waging war against Islamic civilisation. They wouldn't attack themselves, that would be silly.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6531

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ummmm correct me if I am wrong, but you guys said the vast majority of muslims in your countries are normal and moderate and content. Sooooooooo, why would you feel like you were obliged to appease anyone that is normal moderate or content. Sounds like they already are appeased. I can only assume you are worried about precisely those that are extreme in their beliefs.
No, we feel the vast majority aren't out to convert or destroy the world.  That doesn't mean that they're happy with a state of affairs where everyone else is outrightly xenophobic.
Soi they must be soooooo unhappy with the state of afairs that you feel they will blow shit up if they don't get their way IN YOUR COUNTRY then huh?? ANd you must appease them before they do just that??
No, I choose to want to work with them because I don't see the point in ostracising them just because Johnnie Howard hates blackie.  I'm not scared that they'll blow me up.  I don't think they'll do it, and even if they do there are worse things than death.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

lowing wrote:

Ummmm correct me if I am wrong, but you guys said the vast majority of muslims in your countries are normal and moderate and content. Sooooooooo, why would you feel like you were obliged to appease anyone that is normal moderate or content. Sounds like they already are appeased. I can only assume you are worried about precisely those that are extreme in their beliefs.
No, we feel the vast majority aren't out to convert or destroy the world.  That doesn't mean that they're happy with a state of affairs where everyone else is outrightly xenophobic.
Soi they must be soooooo unhappy with the state of afairs that you feel they will blow shit up if they don't get their way IN YOUR COUNTRY then huh?? ANd you must appease them before they do just that??
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the purpose of government to appease its citizens? To keep them happy to avoid revolution? If a number of citizens have valid concerns, then they should be addressed by the government - that is what's happening.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

mikkel wrote:

lowing wrote:

mikkel wrote:


Wow. One quotation from some deranged person.

No, I have in no place said that I haven't heard that kind of rhetoric in Europe. Stop putting words in my mouth. It doesn't lend well to the credibility of your argument. I am saying that the people that this kind of rhetoric comes from are a very, very small minority.

In any event, trying to use that article as an argument for how European socialists want to allow Sharia law in Europe is completely, ridiculously stupid. Trying to bridge gaps and have an understanding does not equal changing the entire rule of law to appease a small ethnic minority. You're an alarmist scaremongerer, and you're trying too hard.
The leader of the biggest pro- Islamic group in this hemisphere and you dismiss him. Sorry but as the leader of his group he speaks for them.

Funny how you will dismiss every single quote posted against Islamic fundamentalism as scaremongering but you will hang your hat on every quote Bush says in order to undermine US policy. Cool double standard.
What the hell? You've posted one single quotation from some deranged lunatic, claiming him to represent the opinions of all muslims. That's like saying that the opinions of politicians are the opinions of their party members. It's a logical fallacy, and if that's all you have to offer, I don't get why you even started in the first place.

One single quotation from one muslim fundamentalist is turned into "every single quotation", and.. George Bush quotations? What dark orifice are you pulling this from? I'm used to people making up things to support their cause, but this is just hilarious. You're not just making up things to support your argument, you're making up things to make ad logicam arguments to discredit my opinion on a topic. Grasping at straws is one thing, but grasping at straws to grasp at straws is just very, very sad.

lowing wrote:

Ummmm correct me if I am wrong, but you guys said the vast majority of muslims in your countries are normal and moderate and content. Sooooooooo, why would you feel like you were obliged to appease anyone that is normal moderate or content. Sounds like they already are appeased. I can only assume you are worried about precisely those that are extreme in their beliefs.
It must be awfully uninspiring to live in a world as black and white as yours. You're saying that muslims are either fully in sync with Western ideals, or fundamental extremists.
YOur ramblings have missed itsa mark:

you will no doubt dismiss every quote I or anyone else will post to support our opinions. I then said you will quote a single man ( in this case I used Bush) to prove a point. I used Bush as an example nothing more, so put away your cry rag and your pitty, because it isn't needed.

It is very hard to quote anything except a single man. SO the now the question will then be, how many quotes from how many different people are needed before you will not dismiss the argument before you?

Can you please tell me about any other groups of people in your country you are trying to appease so they don't blow your shit up? Surely in the world, their are more than just Muslims who go unappreciated by us that need attention before they kill our women and children.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6621|USA

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:


No, we feel the vast majority aren't out to convert or destroy the world.  That doesn't mean that they're happy with a state of affairs where everyone else is outrightly xenophobic.
Soi they must be soooooo unhappy with the state of afairs that you feel they will blow shit up if they don't get their way IN YOUR COUNTRY then huh?? ANd you must appease them before they do just that??
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the purpose of government to appease its citizens? To keep them happy to avoid revolution? If a number of citizens have valid concerns, then they should be addressed by the government - that is what's happening.
Answerthe above question then, who else in your country are you trying to appease for fear that they will blow up your shit if you don't?? Surely there is someoneelse.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6531
Did you miss the part about it's not because we think we're gonna be blown up?
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|6736|UK

lowing wrote:

PureFodder wrote:

lowing wrote:

"European socialists have devised their brilliant plan to combat "Islamophobia" ... "LISTEN" to the 20 million European Muslims, try to UNDERSTAND their problems, and provide solutions to ALLEVIATE their grievances."

"In other words ... find out just what they want, and then give it to them."  http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html under reading assignments.



taken from
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detay … ;bolum=102




Pretty much what I have been saying all along. Appeasement is the Liberal/Socialist answer. How about that.
We we've tried it the conservative way with the bombing and the troops and it resulted in a spectacular increase in Islamic extremism. Rather than continue to headbutt the wall, some people have decided to try the door instead.

What possible harm could there be in asking them what they want and see if theres a REASONABLE solution to the problem. Clearly there's absolutely no chance of this resulting in introducing stict Islamic law across all of Europe. If they can find a reasonable SOLUTION rather than following the conservative approach of MAKING IT WORSE what is exactly wrong with that? It's not like the two approaches are mutually exclusive either.
What is wrong with it?? We are not happy so we will blow up women and children?? Make us happy or we will blow up women and children??


Tell me something, give me one example where "reason" and sensibility, or moderation comes into play in this religion or their actions???
Sorry but since when did Muslim = terrorist. Damn arent you in you late 30s, I didnt expect this kind of ignorance from you.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6531

Vilham wrote:

Sorry but since when did Muslim = terrorist. Damn arent you in you late 30s, I didnt expect this kind of ignorance from you.
You do know you're talking about lowing?
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6552|SE London

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:


Soi they must be soooooo unhappy with the state of afairs that you feel they will blow shit up if they don't get their way IN YOUR COUNTRY then huh?? ANd you must appease them before they do just that??
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the purpose of government to appease its citizens? To keep them happy to avoid revolution? If a number of citizens have valid concerns, then they should be addressed by the government - that is what's happening.
Answerthe above question then, who else in your country are you trying to appease for fear that they will blow up your shit if you don't?? Surely there is someoneelse.
I've answered it already. Twice I think.

This is an atempt to address the very real and valid concerns of the moderate Muslim population of Europe. The connection with extremism is almost superfluous - it is certainly not applicable in the way you seem to think.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard