[Skybird]

This is what I wanted to answer, let me play with the forum now:
DO NOTHING!
Nothing at all! Every single damned policy towards Muslims in Europe has only made the situation worse!

Guaranteed suicide. While I agree that all Western interventions in the Muslim sphere, since the Medieval, did not achieve anything, we cannot afford to do nothing with regard to our own homes. Islam already is too strong in our own places and has developed a self-dynamic that will guarantee it’s total victory within the next 200 years (at the latest) if we do not do anything about that – and that can only mean: accept the challenge, pick up the fight, con-front Islam head on, and brake it with superior force, as far as our territories and homes that we need to defend are concerned. Superiority power and might ALWAYS has been the only language Islam has ever understood. It never stopped anywhere when not being con fronted by a superior force that pushed it back vio9lantly, never. You will not get a true free-dom by that, but a constant cease-fire that will last as long as you keep your status of being the undisputable superior opponent that it cannot overcome.
That’s the grim, scaring truth, and to some degree I can understand people’s hesitation to accept it. I do not like the sheer size of this conflict myself, too. But it will not go away just because I hope for something better. If you help your enemy to become stronger, this must not necessarily earn you his sympathy, and make him your friend. It is more likely that you just win a stronger enemy. That is especially true for an enemy whose declared goal and intend is total, undisputed, uncompromised global ruling and the deleting of any culture, religion and tradition that is not himself.

Do NOT build them public schools, there are already plenty of problems with the public education system, but Muslim children must see, talk, play, and make friends with native Europeans. No, they don't have to be best friends, no they don't have to engage in long-term love relationships, no they don't need to like native Europeans. They need to know them and respect them, and they shall get respect in return and be welcomed. What Muslim children don't need is complete alienation and segregation, we don't need gangs of Muslims walking around together because they can't communicate with anybody else or know anybody else, we want them walking together because that's what they chose to do, they know everybody else, they know every group and are most comfortable around that oe, but nothing stops them from meeting a new native friend tomorrow.

You’re cute. Be advised that all these invitations are given in Germany since decades. I needed to craw the conclusions that they did not work too well. Those Muslims that have integrated themselves, have so many basic violations against Islamic ideology and it’s most fundamental principles in their bookings that I cannot see them fulfilling Islam’s definition of what a Muslim is. They may think of themselves as Muslims, but they are not. In fact, their description of Muslim faith shows that they have big holes in their knowledge about what they claim to be. That is why it is so important to confront “moderate Muslims” and make them aware of the contradiction they are living in without realizing it. Tolerating them as well as you tolerate other types of Muslims (types as defined by Western thinking) does not help, by that you just help to increase the ignorance and uncritical attitude that helps the true and real Islam to spread in these moderate Muslim’s names while being anything else but Muslim. If these people do not understand how far they are different from true Islam, and do not challenge it and testify their factual retreat from basic principles of Islam, you do damage to them, and you do damage to us non-Muslims. All in the name of your good inten-tions and your tolerance and willingness for coexistence. An attitude of indifference is de-structive, and leads to our western cultural death.

France, the lovely country that gives university students assistance to pay their rent, allowing you to live in Paris even with a substandard job. Now, what was the policy in France towards the Muslims? Help them pay their rent too, but how did it turned out? They took every incoming Muslim and settled them at the isolated cités, creating a massive segregated ghetto. It would've been better to let Muslims homeless sleeping on the streets or seeking their own homeless shelter! Don't do this, don't throw all the Muslims into the same isolated basket just because it's easier to contain any revolt there or kill them all with one bomb. If you want to help them pay their rent, spread them apart, these immigrant-only communities are pure hell to get rid of, and it can create, when too isolated, a state within a state, they will feel free to make their own laws and rules and carry out their sentences.

that is a very complex theme for itself, and I do not open a parallel discussion on it. Just say that you see it in form of simplified clichés, ignoring the inner dynamic of Muslim immigra-tion in general, and the details of social communities in the West, and French strategic poli-cies designed to be in opposition to the anglosaxon alliance and it’s influence in Europe (which the French still think of as their backyard, somehow )

Don't give them any legal priviledges.

Easier said than done when they hide behind freedom of religion to push Islamic political agendas. Unfortunately, Islam does not know the concept of secularism. That way they can turn our own constitutional orders against us and destroy our legal system and communties by that.

f they immigrated to Europe it's because they are seeking something Europe has to offer.

Yes. It is rich, and wealth is what Islam demand to earn now, although having done nothing to build that wealth. It’s is a selfish perspective of a certain old desert bandit who robbed and stolen himself excessively, you know.
I wonder why Europeans usually take is as granted that every guy coming here from other continents should have a right to squeeze himself into our homes and places. Why do we have no right to demand something in return that he must offer for our acceptance of him? Why do we not object when it is said he has a right to live in our place? Do you open yo0ur appartmenet for every stranger who strolls by and demands to live in your third room from now on? Has he any historical merits for having build our homes?

Be it a new home, a better home, a job, an opportunity.

Be advised that on the level of global strategy many Islamic clerics have expressed in clear words that they understand immigration as the new weapon in Islam’s jihad to subjugate the West. I have repeatedly quoted in the last 18 months or so from conference papers where they talk of “demographic bombs replacing the swords”, “Muslim colonies”, the “driv-ing out of the infidels from Islam’s heritage in Europe”, and that Europe must be brought to fall by sending more Islamic population there. It is a strategy for conquest. This sounds so absurd that it is completely ignored in the West, and people laugh about it. They still laugh although it is highranking representatives and conferences saying that, and in clear words. Islam will be the last man laughing, thanks to the silliness of the Europeans who always think they know it better than the speaker of words himself.

Then it is in the best interest of Muslims that European Democracy isn't destroyed by approving a separate parallel Muslim Constitution. Treat everybody as equal before the law. Muslims want to be treated equally,

No, they want more and more be treated on the basis of Islamic cultural demands. Western democracies and their understanding of liberty and freedom and the value of the individual are so much in opposition to Islamic views that they are understood to be the arch-enemy of Islam. Democracy and Islam are excluding each other, that’s why Islam tries to overcome the West. If it wants to remain true Islam, it MUST do so.

they don't want this new society to become just like their old home, otherwise they'd have never immigrated at all.

that may be true for those “Muslims” that are not really Muslim in an Islamic understanding, like I explained above. Such people are not the problem that finds my hostility, but true Muslims. Unfortunately we learned in recent years that both types of Muslims, the true and the untrue ones, are more and more difficult to discriminate. That is because even the un-true Muslims do not take effective measurements and do not take an active stand against true Islam, that way they behave as if they are true Islamic. And now it starts to be difficult, doesn’t it!? If a Muslim is against certain aspects of Islam, but still confesses to Islam and defends it and does nothing to see "extremists" being overcome and does nothing to prevent them acting in his name – he still is helping the cause of true Islam by his passivity and ignorance, and acts the same way like a true Muslim. What is “Mitläufer” in English? However, when behaving in this way, he poses the same problem like a true Muslim for Western communities. And if he is critical of some aspects of Islam or not, does not change anything in the real effects that result in the end - he helps the cause of true Islam by his passivity. Judge them by deeds, not words. And when doing that, I must reject to see socalled “moderate” Msulims so much different from true Muslims.

But if you do want to do something positive about it, then allow and protect Muslims who want to discuss and question concepts in Islam, that is, rejecting Islam as a block and creating a new religion.

Now here you touch the important thing: you talk about “new religion”.

Why isn't there a single Quran out there that rejects Jihad?! Not ONE! How come there isn't any Muslim out there who has his own church where all mankind is Ummah and Dar al-Harb is extraterrestrial?! This can only mean two things: either all Muslims are blood-thristy Jihadists, or most Muslims ignore Jihad, don't give a damn about it at all, never thought about it, never knew they were allowed to think about it, and when necessary imag-ines it to be a simple holy-bath of purification. I believe the reality is the latter, which means most immigrant Muslims are heretics and practice their own religion, they are one step away from breaking with the Middle Eastern Islam.

It would spend too much time to go into the history of the creation of the Quran again, and to analyse the character and personality of Muhammad. I refer top my old essay “The his-tory of Islam” chapter 2 where I gave a brief introduction on the creation of quran and Hadith and the historical biograhy of Muhammad. Nevertheless you are in great need to read one or two books about these two issues alone. You think it is queer that there is no quran banning jihad. But in reality it is a consequence deriving from Muhammad’s way of thinking. It is not queer at all (and I ignore the constant debate the inner and the outer aspects of the idea of jihad here).

So if a Muslim wants to start a new church, without any blood or confront like it took the Christian churches of the past, then he must be encouraged to do so and be assured he will not become the target of the religious intolerance of his cousins and will be protected from terrorism like anybody else.

According to our more developed set of values. Remind you that the Western civilization has moved beyond a state where it was dominated by comparable levels of religious blindness and intolerance. We just moved on and left that state behind since long. Islam has not changed and developed since over a thousand years – it is stuck where we were in the early medieval. It is a clash of civilizations, and a clash of times. Of different millenias in this case. When the Europeans came to china, this giant was so much frozen in it’s history of not hav-ing changed since many centuries that it was complelety unable to react to the pressure fromm outside, and the Chinese emperors very much destroyed themselves by that. Islam is even more frozen, but where china was focussed on it’s centre (the empire, and the em-peror) and ignored the outside (foreign countries), Islam ignores it’s centre (does not exam-ine itself in self-reflecting and self-testing), but focuses on the outside: it conquers, subju-gates and consumes the prey. All this religious theatre is only for one reason, in the end: like Muhammad was a robber and bandit and assaulted other tribes and subjugated them, Islam’s history is about control, conquest, and securing power over foreign wealth and res-sources.

The current Dalai Lama has said that when science proves Bhuddism wrong, then Bhuddism is wrong indeed and must be changed. Have you ever seen a Muslim say that since Islam no longer exists in an enviroment of tribal warfare the entire concept of the holy-warrior is outdated and unecessary to the modern peacefull man and should be kept as a souvenir, not as practical doctrine?

That just is a logical consequence and not the thing to wonder about as you paint it.
[quote]You certainly don't see the Pope invoking the faithfull to engage on a holy-war of preaching, how would you react if Pope Benedict XVI called every Catholic to a ceremonial holy-war of pilgrimage? There is no place for "war" in a religion of peace, you can philosophy about the concept of a fair war and how to treat the enemy and their prisioners nicely, but not the other way around, philosophy about how vicious and ferocious and powerfull you can become when fighting a holy-war and how many unarmed citizens you can behead in a min-ute.

If most Muslims living abroad are not Jihadists, then they have already fomed their own chuch but don't realise it, and nobody is willing to inform them of such because then they would start picking different Immams, forming their own Immam schools instead of importing them, rejecting the occasional obscure ones who came from Iran, and eventually develop a doctrine that condemns alot of stuff necessary to support Sharia, creating a differ-ent juridical code, probably similar to the truly peacefull religious codes out there.

Na ja… While it seems to be something like what I expressed somewhere above, it just seems so. Your questions nevertheless indicate that you have not realized the true nature of Islamic ideology.

True. Everybody willing to join, not willing to destroy, is welcome, but if mass man-power is required, there are certainly possible alternatives out there.

certain basic economical thoughts indicate that we do not need plenty of workers paying into the social insurances to secure social systems and future security for the old. Despite the constant loss of jobs in the last 15 years, the economy grew nevertheless and in germany booked one record profit following the next. To produce the cash that is needed for commu-nal structure to remain functional, you do not need high job numbers in principal. The prob-lem is that too much of the profits get consumed by a more and more greedy elite that does not return these cash funds into the economical cycle. That too many betray the system is what threatens us, not so much sinking birth rates that need to be compensated by import-ing future tax payers from Muslim countries. The whole discussion is very premature, but without doubt wanted in this style and course by those you profit from this constant crime of robbing the chashflows of a nations economy.
I oppose the idea of everybody who wants to come can join us. I oppose the idea of unlim-ited immigration. I reserve the right to ask what they have to offer us in return that is of important value for us. I also reserve the right to keep our national character and cultural identities. And that excludes something like unlimited immigration.

Example: In the US Brazilian immigrants should be preferred instead of Mexican (ex-cept in Connecticut), because the Brazilian immigrant has to take a plane to immigrate, this means he's either from a low (or middle) middle-class or has the cunning to raise enough money for the trip, on the other hand, the most desperate illiterate Mexican can simply jump a fence and he's in.

No good example. In Africa it is common practice that a whole village, or even several vil-lages, put all their families’ money together to enable one of them to make his way ti Europe. The majorities of the African boat people landing at Spanish and Italian coats fit for this description.