![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Lucky Jack
![]() |
![]() Quote:
![]() All of the above would be fine if people were robots, but we both know better than that. Besides, we also know the dangers of a completely subservient population who will comply with any rule or law that their government imposes on them without protest. Now neither of us conflict on our belief that there should be no problem for 'Mrs Burqa' to be searched by a woman police officer, as mentioned by example in mapucs post, however where we clash is codifying this in Islamic law. Truth be told there would most likely be a high number of Salafists and Wahabists who would object to anyone but the husband of Mrs Burqa seeing her without the clothing on, but that's because there are conservatives and puritanists on both sides of the divide here, and quite honestly the last thing we in Europe should think of doing is pushing more people towards hardline Salafists, Wahabists and even Khawarijs. I think you expect Islam to do in a few weeks what it took Christianity a few hundred years and God alone knows how many wars to do. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
CINC Pacific Fleet
![]() |
![]()
Some years ago I read a Danish or was it a Swedish article about Nigeria planning on banning people wearing Niqab in public areas, It had something to do with several suicide bombings where the perpetrator had such clothes on them when they blew them self up and thereby killing many innocent.
Markus |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Soaring
|
![]() Quote:
I am free of the illusion to expect Islam doing something to change itself. It won't, and it excels in that. Because as far as Western territories are concerned, thanks to endless Western relativisation and reality denying, it does not have to change. Since over two generations huge numbers, and ever growing numbers, of Muslim colonists are present in Europe. And things grew worse and worse and worse and worse with them. Other migrants groups usually do not give us troubles. Only these. Whereever you look, the integration of Muslim influx-communities has failed. In Britain. In France. In Netherlands. In Germany. In Sweden. Everywhere. And that has something to do with Islamic self-understanding, and oriental patriarchalism. The question is not how much time we should give Islam. The question is how little time we have left to remain who we are and what we are. Altready now we are no longer the full owners of our house anymore. Already now we accept compromsies that we shouldn't, not at all. Foreigner comes to us - he follows our rules, our laws, and respects our values. What time is needed to understand that, eh? If you are guest in somebody elses house, you do not just go to the refrigerator and take and eat what you want - you ask, and you say "please". You do not demand, and you do not command, and you do not claim property rights. As long as you do not think that it is your house. You break a law? Needs none of your usual rhetoric strikes, Oberon, killerrobots and other pointless exaggerations: you break the law, you bear the consequences, like any other citizen must and should. If foreigners have a problem with that, they have to leave. What is so difficult in that? Its the most reasonable thing one could think. If that means trouble for them, then that may serve as an example for others to better respect our right to set the rules, and their need to integrate. They cam eto us, we did not come to them. If somebody comes here and misb ehaves or refuses to integrate, I send him bakc, and if he gets greeted in his real home by torture ore persuction or whatver, I do not care, I simply refuse to care - he should have thought about that before abusing the hospitality of mine. I don't care. These people do not interest me one bit. They could drop dead right now, right in place - I don't care. I'm sick of being expected and demanded to always care for them. They are not mine, their demands and wishes must not be my command and not my responsibility, I do not belong to them, I am not their servant. Its one and a half millenia that Muhammad haunted planet Earth. And since then, Islamic world got its head stuck in the azz of history, 15 centuries deep. No, the chiurches did not hold out their tyranny that long, and did not resist to the "onslaught" of reason and liberalism and humanism. It does not cpomoare, althogznb this copmarison always is tried again and again in an attenpt to relatise and make the West feel guilty and responsible for Islamic world'S ways and goings. Was Napoleon'S expeditionary corps in Egypt responsible for the primitive, impotent world they found and that had wasted the past many centuries before in stagnation all due to Islamic dogma that had brought all former Arab superiority in invention and knowledge to a grindign halt? Hardly. Blame that on Muhammad - and on him alone. More time you want to give it for reform. Good luck with that. Beg your children (or children to be) for pardon. I rather expect a cactus starting to speak, than seeing Islam stopping to be Islam. Ands that is what "reformation" would need to be about.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 08-19-16 at 06:20 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Lucky Jack
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |||
SUBSIM Newsman
|
![]() ![]() Angela Merkel seemed tired when she attended an election campaign last night. Quote:
Quote:
Since we are on German soil, in part,so I post this. Quote:
![]() Note: 01:06, Fri, Aug 19, 2016 | UPDATED: 15:57, Fri, Aug 19, 2016
__________________
Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie ![]() Last edited by Gerald; 08-19-16 at 07:18 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Lucky Jack
![]() |
![]()
You certainly know how to play to the audience.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Soaring
|
![]() Quote:
![]() ![]() Miracle oh miracle. Time of wonders. Wir schaffen das! Also, polls and their authors sk with great amazement and perplexity why it comes that so many of these migrants share "homophobic" views, are antisemites, do not comply with values as expressed by Western law codes or the constitution, prefer opinions expressing that they are in favour of supressing women, and often voice opinions that pout them - so claim the media - in the same boat like right wing extremists or rightwing populists. Why are these people from a totally different, foreign culture with totally different value system and moral ethics so totally different than us Germans? Why can't they be just like we are? The answer is simple, stupid: because Germany is not everywhere, even if that hurts megalomaniac German feelings. LOL Germany - land of the dreaming clueless. ![]() I start to take grim enjoyment from seeing Germany destroying itself. Its a form of justice, a causal link of cause and effect. And how could causality not be just? I have nothing at risk myself: no kids, no family. Why should I care? Maybe I have a better - one - life by leaning back and enjoying the show instead of trying to fight a battle that cannot be won.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Lucky Jack
![]() |
![]() Quote:
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Soaring
|
![]()
When implying the law procedures should be changed for them in that way so that they find them less upsetting. Its not important whether they are upsetting by their standards. The question only is if they are upsetting by our standards, which they are not. No special deals for anyone, same standards for all.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Chief of the Boat
|
![]() Quote:
The link below will explain two of them: http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/T...s_use_by_Sikhs |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Soaring
|
![]()
I do not care whether a Sikh wants to crack his skull open, he does damage only to himself, and I leave everyone the right to commit suicide or to take risks or to do somethign that I consider to be stupid - as long as he risks only himself, nobody else, and is not going his ways at anyone other's cost. So I would object to a law saying that a Sikh with a turban may only be searched by the police if for example the head of his family agrees to it, or his father, or a priest. He is not to be searched for no reason, I mean - the purpose when you do that is of public interest, often security, or crime-related investigations. For the same reason I find it unacceptable if Sikh boys are allowed to carry a knife at school while others are not allowed that becasue they are not Sikh. The abn on knifes must be vlaid for everybody. If S'ikhs see our laws colliding with their eligon, they have to make a choice: either our laws and staying here, or their elgion and having to leave. I cannot even understand why this is even being debated! Also, a religious background shall not be a valid excuse for bending laws or amending laws, tuning them in a way religion finds agreeable. Religion has to follow the law - not the other way around. At least if the description of a "secular" state should have any meaning.
In case of the burkha issue, it also is that state authorities should not do anything that indicates agreement with or even just pragmatic tolerating of claims for possession of women by men: no matter whether it is some Imam, father, brother - and this possessing of females and them getting pushed into a state of being owned, is what burkhas are really about. In Islamic culture, women should be locked away and hidden from public life, and the burkha is the way to make them mobile by making the prison of home around them mobile as well. The prison moves with them. As I said above, due to that article by Birgit Kelle I do no longer think we should enforce a ban of the burkha except in some circumstances, but that we should go deeper and look at what really happens wo women at home, behind locked doors, and what their role is in a clan'S understanding or the understanding of Islamic ideology and scripture. The burkha should be tolerated - but not greeted or welcomned, and we must not be forced to maintain social itneracitons with families where men hold women as lifestock, we must be allowed to ignore them without beigj called "racist" for that. But this we should tolerate in silence only as lonhg as the burkha or headscarf orf whatevber it is is worn by ADULT females - but we should ban even headscarfs worn by little girls, because it is a perversion. The covering of hair and skin is meant to not arouse "men" (if you dare to call male apes as men who already are in danger to be provoked to sexually assault a female already because they see some hair of hers...), and if we demand this even from little girls, we sexualise even the smallest of girls and agree that they are sexual objects that need to be stopped form provoking all men around. This is a perversion of the most upsetting kind. We have laws that - hopefully - protect little girls from getting raped by some pedophile dirtbag. We should not tolerate perverted means and habits that turn all reason and logic into absurdity and turn men into possible "victims" of little girls sexually provoking them. Forcing little girls already to wear a smybol of sexual - and pedophile!! - discrimination and supression of females by patriarchalic orthodoxy is not different form having them walking down the street in satin stockings, blakc negliges and silk lingerie - both ways turn them into sexual objects, both turns them into a sexual threat to adult men form which certain bigott carricatures of weak "manlings" with no power to resist their drives need to be protected. The potential victim of abuse and supression - girls, women - get implied to be the perpetrator and the active villain committing the crime. How could it get any more absurd - and cynical? The hypocrisy practiced by Muslim culture here, is stinking to heaven. Now the law on girls in Turkey, you have read about it in the news. Such hypocrisy stinks to heaven. A turkish newspaper today had the headline of that Sweden - a loud critic of that law - is the global capital of rape. Actually, Sweden has seen a steep climb, an explosion of rape crimes in past years indeed. What the Erdoghanistas forgot to mention is that the absolutely overwhelming majority of this exposion of rapes is beign committed by Muslim migrant men the Swedes were naive enough to let in in huge numbers over the past years. Before thy had come, rape was a crime almost unknown in Sweden, it played no significant role in past crime statistics.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert. Last edited by Skybird; 08-20-16 at 11:30 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Lucky Jack
![]() |
![]() Quote:
All I said was that it would be helpful if an Imam or some such religious leader in a high position could make it clarified that if a female officer is present then a woman can remove her Burqa without getting into trouble with Allah. I did not say that procedures should change, nor did I say that the law should change. For this, I get two pages of lectures on the evils of Islam...as always. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Navy Seal
![]() Join Date: May 2007
Location: On a mighty quest for the Stick of Truth
Posts: 5,963
Downloads: 52
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
The only issue I have is the burkini.
![]()
__________________
![]() Tomorrow never comes |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|