The future of europe?/Islam threads (Merged)

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

In my veiw it's not religion, it's revolution, and when you want a revolution who do you recruit? The poor and those unhappy with their lot in life. They see themselves going nowhere in there own countries which have little to no industry and live hand to mouth. Why are muslims flocking to european countries? To improve their lot in life. What they find is low paying or no jobs at all and are treated as second class citizens. It isn't hard for these immams(?) to feed on this misery.

Sounds like you enjoyed Syrianna.

When will this old myth stop?

It's Not the Economy, Stupid: What the West Needs to Know about the Rise of Radical Islam (article from 1995!)

God and Mammon: Does Poverty Cause Militant Islam?

Saudi Columnists: Urbanization and Development in Southern Saudi Arabia, Not Poverty, Led to September 11

Arab Columnists: Terrorists are Motivated by Cultural and Religious Factors, Not Poverty

Terrorists' backgrounds defy conventional wisdom

Does poverty breed jihad?

Poverty and terror: two questions for Alain Gresh

Researchers probe motives of suicide bombers

Affluent Genocide

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Sounds like you enjoyed Syrianna.

When will this old myth stop?

This myth will not stop. It is a myth propagated by socialists or left-leaning "philosophers". Bradclark1 does have a good point about revolution and poorer people likely to instigate it as they feel they have little or nothing to lose. But this just doesn't apply to the fanatacism of Islamic Fundamentalism. They're not driven by poverty.

Lefty's and socialist types push this nonsense to try and coerce us to change our ways. For example Patty Murray (D-Washington) stated a couple of years back that the reason many in the Arab world love and honor Osama is because he is building daycare centers. Almost implying that socialism would save the day. What a nut. Oh Patty, if we only changed our government into one that has universal healthcare, universal preschool, universal welfare, universal nose-wiping, etc. and provided the same to the Arab world, maybe they wouldn't hate us. Yeah...right.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

In my veiw it's not religion, it's revolution, and when you want a revolution who do you recruit? The poor and those unhappy with their lot in life. They see themselves going nowhere in there own countries which have little to no industry and live hand to mouth. Why are muslims flocking to european countries? To improve their lot in life. What they find is low paying or no jobs at all and are treated as second class citizens. It isn't hard for these immams(?) to feed on this misery.
My view on these so called religious leaders is that a lot are nothing but wannabe mafia style boss's that use religion as a front to gain personal wealth and power. It's a huge scam and it's showing itself to be building in momentum.

Interesting theory, but perhaps I think it interesting mainly because it is a much more complete and well reasoned explanation than that offered by the "Islam=terrorism" club

Also since poverty, marginalization, stigmatization certainly do correlate with other forms of "deviant" (in the sense of being outside the norm) behaviour that Western society has gotten used to, I would be very surprised if there was absolutely no correlation between these factors and those individuals who commit terrorist acts. In fact, if we look outside the "West" to Israel there is indeed correlation in that the Palestinians seem to fit all 3 criteria. But still that is only correlation and not causation. :hmm:

Editted to add (before I get jumped on here by the usual suspects):

By "seems" I meant "seems to me". I've never been to Israel and my knowledge of the situation there is limited to the odd newspaper/magazine article that inevitably gets printed after the latest attack/retaliation.

Also, even if there is any correlation (to any degree) with any of the 3 factors thae it doesn't mean that factor(s) is any way a cause of the terrorism in that region. Nor does it equate to assigning blame or taking any sides in that equation.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by CCIP

I'd feel sorry for the loss of an elightened Western culture, with its high humanistic ideals and an emphasis on reason. But I wouldn't feel sorry in the slightest for the loss of a Western culture that's rapidly descending back into the middle ages.

I think we're ultimately in disagreement as to what Western values are. No wonder there's no visible response in the society as yet.

I'll again quote Jihad Watch's Hugh Fitzgerald, which is somewhat relevant to your post:

Why do you say this? Why do you think this, exhibiting such hopelessness? Where is it written that Infidels must continue to admit Muslims into their midst? Is there a divine right for anyone to move anywhere? On what theory do you base this suicidal notion?

There are all kinds of things to say about immigration to the Western world. But there should be no argument at all that no people and no polity is required to admit those who are, or claim to be, the adherents of a belief-system that clearly tells them, teaches them, inculcates in them the belief, that they must be hostile, even murderously so, to all who do not share their belief-system. This is not imaginary. This is not fantasy. This can easily be seen in the texts of Islam. It can be seen on every Muslim website. It can be seen in the testimony of every defector from Islam. It can be seen in the testimony of non-Muslims who have had to endure life in Muslim states. It can be seen by studying the history of Jihad-conquest and the subjugation of non-Muslims, from Spain to East Asia, over 1350 years. No right, no right at all, to continue to settle within the Lands of the Infidels. No right at all to continue to create an atmosphere far more unpleasant, expensive, and dangerous to Infidels, than it would be without a large-scale Muslim presence.

Don't accept things as you think they must be. We are not required, not obligated, to sacrifice our lands and happiness for some abstract principle, or out of fear of offending -- offending whom? People who divide the world uncompromisingly between Believer and Infidel? What if we offend them? Will they work to undo us, work for the day when Islam will everywhere dominate, even more relentlessly?

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by scandium

Interesting theory, but perhaps I think it interesting mainly because it is a much more complete and well reasoned explanation than that offered by the "Islam=terrorism" club

From the footnotes of the Canadian National Post article Sykbird and I posted yesterday:

What follows are selected Koranic references to fighting and killing infidels.

- Baqara (2):190 - "And fight (qaatiloo) in the way of Allah those who fight you."

- Baqara (2):193 - "Fight them (qaatiloohum), till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah's"

- Baqara (2):244 - "So fight (qaatiloo) in the way of Allah, and know that Allah is all-hearing, all-knowing."

- Nisaa' (4):76 - "Those who are believers fight (yuqaatiloona) in the way of Allah, and the unbelievers fight in the idols' way. So fight (qaatiloo) the friends of Satan; surely the guile of Satan is ever feeble."

- al-Anfaal (8):39 - "Fight them (qaatiloohum), till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah's entirely."

- al-Taubah (9):12 - "But if they break their oaths after their covenant and thrust at your religion, then fight (qaatiloo) the leaders of unbelief."

- al-Taubah (9):29 - "Fight (qaatiloo) those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and his messenger have forbidden -- such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled."

- al-Taubah (9):123 - "O believers, fight (qaatiloo) the unbelievers (kuffaar) who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness (ghilza)."

- Baqara (2):191 - "And slay them (aqtuloohum) wherever you come upon them"

- Baqara (2):191 - "But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then if they fight you, slay them (aqtuloohum) -- such is the recompense of unbelievers."

- Nisaa' (4):89 - "then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them (aqtuloohum) wherever you find them"

- Nisaa' (4):91 - "If they withdraw not from you, and offer you peace, and restrain their hands, take them, and slay them (aqtuloohum) wherever you come on them; against them we have given you a clear authority."

- al-Taubah (9):5 - "Then when the sacred months are drawn away, slay (aqtuloo) the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush."

- Nisaa' (4):74 - "So let them fight (yuqaatil) in the way of Allah who sell the present life for the world to come; and whosoever fights (yuqaatil) in the way of Allah and is slain, or conquers, we shall bring him a mighty wage."

- Muhammad (47):4 - "When you meet the unbelievers, smite (darba) their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads."

Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.


And this doesn't even touch all the other Islamic writings advocating the conquest of the infidel world, dar al-hab.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

What follows are selected Koranic references to fighting and killing infidels.

- Baqara (2):190 - "And fight (qaatiloo) in the way of Allah those who fight you."

- Baqara (2):193 - "Fight them (qaatiloohum), till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah's"

- Baqara (2):244 - "So fight (qaatiloo) in the way of Allah, and know that Allah is all-hearing, all-knowing."

- Nisaa' (4):76 - "Those who are believers fight (yuqaatiloona) in the way of Allah, and the unbelievers fight in the idols' way. So fight (qaatiloo) the friends of Satan; surely the guile of Satan is ever feeble."

- al-Anfaal (8):39 - "Fight them (qaatiloohum), till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah's entirely."

- al-Taubah (9):12 - "But if they break their oaths after their covenant and thrust at your religion, then fight (qaatiloo) the leaders of unbelief."

- al-Taubah (9):29 - "Fight (qaatiloo) those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and his messenger have forbidden -- such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled."

- al-Taubah (9):123 - "O believers, fight (qaatiloo) the unbelievers (kuffaar) who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness (ghilza)."

- Baqara (2):191 - "And slay them (aqtuloohum) wherever you come upon them"

- Baqara (2):191 - "But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then if they fight you, slay them (aqtuloohum) -- such is the recompense of unbelievers."

- Nisaa' (4):89 - "then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them (aqtuloohum) wherever you find them"

- Nisaa' (4):91 - "If they withdraw not from you, and offer you peace, and restrain their hands, take them, and slay them (aqtuloohum) wherever you come on them; against them we have given you a clear authority."

- al-Taubah (9):5 - "Then when the sacred months are drawn away, slay (aqtuloo) the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush."

- Nisaa' (4):74 - "So let them fight (yuqaatil) in the way of Allah who sell the present life for the world to come; and whosoever fights (yuqaatil) in the way of Allah and is slain, or conquers, we shall bring him a mighty wage."

- Muhammad (47):4 - "When you meet the unbelievers, smite (darba) their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads."

Alright, this is certainly every bit as relevant as any other factor (more relevant in the sense that you would have 100% correlation between Islamic terrorists and these passages, although this is a little circular). But to look at the correlation from the other direction: how many of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims are linked (directly or through financial ties etc) to acts of Islamic terrorism?

Again that's where causation comes into play in that why does only a minority of those who commit acts of terror have this view in their religion while so many more of them do not commit acts of terror? Because there are other factors that are at play that are beyond these passages - I have no idea what they are, only that these passages themselves are not sufficient.

I suppose this goes back to another point I made in the other thread: these passages are ideas; why do some (a minority) feel compelled to act on them while so many more do not?

[joea]

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by scandium

Alright, this is certainly every bit as relevant as any other factor (more relevant in the sense that you would have 100% correlation between Islamic terrorists and these passages, although this is a little circular). But to look at the correlation from the other direction: how many of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims are linked (directly or through financial ties etc) to acts of Islamic terrorism?

Again that's where causation comes into play in that why does only a minority of those who commit acts of terror have this view in their religion while so many more of them do not commit acts of terror? Because there are other factors that are at play that are beyond these passages - I have no idea what they are, only that these passages themselves are not sufficient.

I suppose this goes back to another point I made in the other thread: these passages are ideas; why do some (a minority) feel compelled to act on them while so many more do not?

No. The simple question is: why do the many not actively engage to hinder those that commit such violance in their name?

Poor little Muslims, so weak and vulnerable. Over one billion Muslims out there - and they cannot ban the handful of hate-preachers, and some hundred terrorists that abuse their oh so precious religion.

O, wait. they even don't try. they even resist to any attempt of infidels trying to do the job in their place. Hm. Strange. But probably I just understand it wrong. It cannot be, what shall not be. The majority is not compelled to these ideas, as we just have red. They just do not care, for that they cannot be hold responsible.

EU some weeks ago: palestinian people shall no longer be held responsible for the policy of Hamas, therefore the cash ban has been stopped. What: the people that elected Hamas are not responsible for hamas being in government? I thought that is the principle of democracy - that governments shall represent their people? - The same kind of heavily flawed thinking.

Great going. Holding the church responsible where it has acted violantly on the basis of some old testament's violant scpriture, in violation of the teachings of Jesus. But when Islamic scriptures are quoted of same bloodthirsty and brutal content - it is waved through.

Thank God all this is just about ideas, so it does not really matter. that cake is delicious. What do you think, will the weather improve? I really think we had a little bit to less sunshine so far. Please remind me to water the flowers before we leave for the party tonight.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by joea

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by scandium

Alright, this is certainly every bit as relevant as any other factor (more relevant in the sense that you would have 100% correlation between Islamic terrorists and these passages, although this is a little circular).

There is nothing circular here. Islam teaches that the Quran is the absolute word of an omnipitent G-d and Mohamed is his prophet. If someone believes in that and is dedicated to Islam's writing and teachings, they will carry out what they rationally understand to be their duties and obligations.

But to look at the correlation from the other direction: how many of the world's 1.2 billion Muslims are linked (directly or through financial ties etc) to acts of Islamic terrorism?

I've already responded on another thread with excerpts from essays by Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald:

Let us assume that the estimate, given by one , that 10-15% of Muslims are terrorists or potential terrorists. One does not know how this figure is arrived at. Ali Sina and other defectors from Islam, whom I trust, consider it to have the percentages backwards, for they suggest that 85-90% of Muslims might become potential terrorists, or supporters of similar acts, or would be ready to harm non-Muslims in other ways, in the conduct of Jihad. Who knows, really -- and how could we ever be certain? But even the gleeful behavior of masses of Muslims all over the world, after 9/11, or the numbers of people naming their sons "Osama," or the kinds of things routinely said and applauded at meetings of Muslim nations, or the kinds of demands made on Infidel societies by Muslims now living in their midst, or the behavior of Muslim pressure groups to limit the power of Infidels to undertake reasonable security measures (including, precisely, profiling to target not a race, or an ethnic group, but the adherents or potential adherents of the ideology of Islam), and the enormous efforts to conduct Da'wa by every conceivable and sly means, including the rewriting of textbooks to transform the history of Infidel lands, and to target the most vulnerable members of society(prisoners, immigrants, schoolchildren) for the conduct of Da'wa -- all of this should give any Infidel who has studied the theory and practice of Islam, considerable pause.

But suppose that the lowest estimate -- 10% of all Muslims -- were in fact somehow true? No, let us make that figure 5% -- only 5% are potential terrorists. Then what? If one out of 20 Muslims allowed into the Western world holds to these ideas, where are we then? Or what if one of the other 19 picks them up from that one? We have no way of insuring that every single Muslim will forever and ever be immune to such appeals.

That being the case, it is a matter of obvious prudence for Western governments to study carefully the question of Muslims migration to the Western world. Even if the figure of “only” 10% is accurate, we would be mad to continue to allow in and give citizenship to such a pool of people without a moment’s hesitation or examination or consideration. Infidel governments should not allow their policies to be dictated by fear of offending, or by believing their own absurdities -- no one should continue to mouth the kind of absurdities about the religion of "peace" and "tolerance" that we have had to endure in the past.

Prudence demands that risks be minimized. And time is running out.

From Pseudo-symmetries and moral equivalences



It's a "war on terror," and those "terrorists" are a "handful of extremists." No, they're slightly more than a "handful of extremists." Now they're ten percent, and now potentially 50 percent, or if we are to believe the ex-Muslims, the keen apostates, more like 80% or more of those who take Qur'an and Hadith seriously support acts of terror. And then, of course, we are not entitled, are we, to even discuss Da'wa and the demographic conquest of Western Europe -- even if such matters are discussed openly, with great anticipation and pleasure, at Muslim websites. That would not be possible.

Who's crazy? Who's schizophrenic? Is it Moussaoui? Is it Al-Sharbi? Or is it those Infidels who are still unwilling to look at the teachings of Islam -- the Infidels who are still too paralyzed with fear of what they might find out and who thus remain incapable of even beginning to study the texts of Islam, and to discover what caused the 1350-year history of Islamic conquest and subjugation and then codified oppression of Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Buddhists, and indeed everyone under their control who was not a Muslim.

Who is crazy? Is it Al-Sharbi, or those who are discussing his case who will tell us that he's just "one more nut case, like Moussaoui"?

From Who's crazy?

Back to your post:

Again that's where causation comes into play in that why does only a minority of those who commit acts of terror have this view in their religion while so many more of them do not commit acts of terror? Because there are other factors that are at play that are beyond these passages - I have no idea what they are, only that these passages themselves are not sufficient.

Even the Quran itself recognized that many/most/lotsof its adherents who not achieve what Islam views as such a high level of dedication and self sacrifice to Allah:

" Do ye make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Sacred Mosque, equal to (the pious service of) those who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and strive with might and main in the cause of Allah jihad fi sabil Allah? They are not comparable in the sight of Allah: and Allah guides not those who do wrong."
Quran 9:19

There are many ways to be a good Muslim, even a great one. But nothing beats a Mujahid. And Mujahids are Islam's cream of the crop, not its bottom of the barrel.

Go and study Islam, for heaven's (or Canada's) sake!

I suppose this goes back to another point I made in the other thread: these passages are ideas;

Hogwash, gibberish and nonsense! To Muslims, these are the commandments of Allah. You need not understand them. They are to be carried out.

why do some (a minority) feel compelled to act on them while so many more do not?

It is against human instinct to bring children into this world and then strap and explosive belt around them and kiss them goodbye. Try it.

Essentially, it is a question of dedication and devotion and doing what you understand is the right thing to do in spite of your greatest emotions. To be a Shahid is to be a witness for Allah. Indeed, shahid means witness.

[tycho102]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You know what? Slowly but surely I come to the conclusion that this Europe is really not worth to be defended anymore. It stinks like a rotten cadaver, and attracts all kinds of carrion eaters for that reason. It strangles itself, and with it's last breath it calls: "Hooray, we are fantastic!" Maybe it deserves nothing better, then. A victim of aggression that does not defend itself, is said to be prey.

Replace "Europe" with "France", and that's about the same conclusion at which I have arrived.

Addendum:
When the Illumaniti divest their wealth to other countries, to protect it from the conquerers, make sure that only French women can lay claim to it after liberation, and accept the first god damn claims that come through. Whatever French woman applies for the account, just hand her the money wrapped in fancy shoeboxes with a bow on the top. If it's a French man, sic the dogs on him and call the SWAT team.

[STEED]

I found this piece of news it's a bit old by a few days.

Jewish leaders buoyed by EU interfaith meeting
Joel clark / JTA, THE JERUSALEM POST Jun. 4, 2006

Jewish leaders said they were optimistic following a high-profile interfaith meeting held by the European Union last week.
The Tuesday meeting was attended by Jewish, Christian and Muslim leaders from across Europe, as well as Buddhist spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama.
Fifteen delegates were invited to Brussels to represent their faith communities in a discussion focused on the role religious communities should play in the promotion of freedom, democracy and human rights across Europe.
Organized by the EU Bureau of European Policy Advisers, the meeting was chaired by European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, together with Wolfgang Schussel, chancellor of Austria, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the EU.
The event follows a similar gathering of religious leaders at the European Commission, the EU's executive wing, in July 2005, but this was the first time that such an initiative has had the support of the EU presidency.
Europe's Jewish community was represented by Chief Rabbi Rene Gutman of Strasbourg and Bas-Rhin in France and Chief Rabbi Albert Guigui of Brussels, both members of the Conference of European Rabbis, the organization which coordinates Europe's chief rabbis.
Barroso hailed the meeting as a "very important moment," adding that dialogue between faiths was a "vital condition in understanding their differences." Delegates spent three hours discussing issues affecting their communities in front of senior members of the European Commission, including the employment, justice and education commissioners, as well as Barroso and Schussel.
The meeting was also attended by Iranian-born Shi'ite leader Ayatollah Seyyed Abbas Ghaemmaghami, who expressed a willingness to work with Jewish leaders on common issues such as ritual slaughter.
Guigui, also permanent representative of the Conference of European Rabbis to the European Union, was positive about the meeting.
"The fact that the European Union now has a clear structure for interfaith dialogue gives us great hope that we can continue these meetings into the future," he told JTA.
Guigui added that he and Gutman had raised several key issues affecting the European Jewish community, notably the rise of anti-Semitism across Europe.
"Anti-Semitism is a very deep problem for the Jewish communities of Europe and the president said that they are preparing an EU forum to fight that phenomenon," he said.
Imam Abduljalil Sajid, a representative of the UKbased Muslim Council for Religious and Racial Harmony, said the meeting had shown a lot of "hopes and aspirations" among faith leaders.
Although there was nothing new in the gathering of religious leaders, Sajid said, the presence of such influential European politicians made it a "historic event." "There's no alternative to dialogue, but what we need now is actions to follow it all up."
Philip Carmel, director of international relations at the Conference of European Rabbis, said the meeting had been a real landmark.
"Bringing together religious leaders from all the monotheistic faiths of Europe under the flag of the European Union is something that I regard as very positive," he said. "It gives a sign that the EU is committed to real interfaith dialogue and to integrating people of faith into the European discussion to build a better society."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

[joea]

Originally Posted by tycho102

Replace "Europe" with "France", and that's about the same conclusion at which I have arrived.

Addendum:
When the Illumaniti divest their wealth to other countries, to protect it from the conquerers, make sure that only French women can lay claim to it after liberation, and accept the first god damn claims that come through. Whatever French woman applies for the account, just hand her the money wrapped in fancy shoeboxes with a bow on the top. If it's a French man, sic the dogs on him and call the SWAT team.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by STEED

I found this piece of news it's a bit old by a few days.

A skit for the gullible.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

A skit for the gullible.

It struck me as bit in cuckoo land that bit of news.