Study: Germans see Islam as a threat

[LegionnairE]

Luckily for us the muslims have reformed by leaps and bounds while the barbarian europeans still live trapped in a medieval thinking

We've our share of problems, but not like how they think. The fact that muslims in Europe do stupid things to defend their identity fvcks with Europeans' perception of the world. This applies for the general population.

Nazism on the rise, hence burning Turks' houses.

 

[flamer84]

We've our share of problems, but not like how they think. The fact that muslims in Europe do stupid things to defend their identity fvcks with Europeans' perception of the world. This applies for the general population.

Nazism on the rise, hence burning Turks' houses.

That may be so but i still fail to see europeans as mentally enslaved to the catholic church 15th century mentality,heck most germans aren't even catholics,nevermind the inner religious strife they had over the centuries pitting protestants vs catholics.I was merely intrigued by your earlier comment describing Europe living in a medieval crusader mentality,which was,let's face it,ridiculous.

 

[LegionnairE]

That may be so but i still fail to see europeans as mentally enslaved to the catholic church 15th century mentality,heck most germans aren't even catholics,nevermind the inner religious strife they had over the centuries pitting protestants vs catholics.I was merely intrigued by your earlier comment describing Europe living in a medieval crusader mentality,which was,let's face it,ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous, Turks are muslims now but we still have residual shamanic traditions. Most people aren't even aware.

This is the case with Northern Europe, they may be following protestant religion but 15th century catholic values still exists deep down there somewhere. People aren't conscious about it that's all.

 

[flamer84]

It's not ridiculous, Turks are muslims now but we still have residual shamanic traditions. Most people aren't even aware.

This is the case with Northern Europe, they may be following protestant religion but 15th century catholic values still exists deep down there somewhere. People aren't conscious about it that's all.

Neah,they're scared that their way of life(secular,modern that is) is under threat.Beeing uninformed plays its part to,they don't diferentiate between turks who mostly are moderate muslims if not secular and others.

 

[Vinod2070]

OK, we are seeing many comments about "Western Muslims" and their touching belief in "liberal democracy" and "secularism". Let's subject it to a few tests:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/social...ms-want-sharia-law-their-countries-study.html

If majority Muslims want Shariah law in their own countries, what makes them suddenly so different when they go to the West?
Or does it?

Islamist extremists radicalizing Canadians at ‘a large number of venues,’ secret report reveals | Canada | News | National Post

Muslim gang-rapes across Europe under-reported in press

ICM Poll: 20% of British Muslims sympathize with 7/7 bombers
Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK - Telegraph

NOP Research: 1 in 4 British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified
Many British Muslims Put Islam First - CBS News
WebCite query result

People-Press: 31% of Turks support suicide attacks against Westerners in Iraq.
A Year After Iraq War | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

16% of young Muslims in Belgium state terrorism is "acceptable".
Zestien procent moslimjongens vindt terrorisme aanvaardbaar - HLN.be

South Asians of Pakistani Origin target underage White girls for sex


In the UK there’s a terrible problem of South Asian’s of Pakistani origin targeting underage female white children for sex. Particularly children in the care system where they are most vulnerable.

The problem has been reported a few times but it gets silenced. But from the reports that have emerged, and the cases that have come to court, the most shocking aspect of this is not just about the racial dimension, but the fact that these children get passed around from man to man—not in the way a pedophile network might do this, where the pedophiles are all social outsiders who find eachother to share in their perversion. No….these Pakistani gangs pass these children through their *family* networks. Cousins, uncles, fathers, brothers, friends of the family.

From the perspective of inter-group attitudes, this makes it incalculably worse than ordinary pedophillia. Passing white children around for sex within a family and friends structure means that the concept of treating our children like meat is culturally normal and mainstream for them. They are pedophiles to our children but not their own children. They are pedophiles that treat our children like meat, and they don’t even see it as pedophilla because our children aren’t even qualified as children in their eyes.

The news media and politicians and courts won’t call it pedophillia and won’t talk about the awful implications that follow from a people who will do this to us and not even be ashamed of it within their own families and friends. They don’t call it pedophilia because it is so widespread and so roped into their mainstream, that they don’t want to ostracise the people responsible.

Our news media and our politicians are putting concerns for those pedophile criminals that treat our children like meat, actually ahead of children. It chokes me.



“‘No one wants to stand up and say that Pakistani guys in some parts of the country are recruiting young white girls and passing them around their relatives for sex, but we need to stop being worried about the racial complication.’”

Then in the next paragraph a confirmation of the fact our own media and police and politicians are avoiding calling these people pedophiles. Despite the fact the girls are underage, deliberately targeted, and the subject to the worst form of pedophilia which is to be passed around like meat.

“The offenders were not viewed as paedophiles but had picked the girls ‘because of their malleability’.”

I’m sorry, but if some guy views child pornography he’ll go to prison and be stigmatized for the rest of his life. But if a gang of Asian men go to a children’s home and rope children into drink and drugs before subjecfting them to abuse that will probably destroy their lives, this is not pedophilia according to the media. These men should be spared that stigma.

Here’s a BBC documentary (apparently available only in the U.K.) that came out a few days ago on the matter.

And this "no go zones" and targeting of native women because they are just "open meat" is repeated in country after country, from Belgium to Netherlands to Sweden...

And the apologists and denialists just want you to ignore it all!

While making demands, not on their own Islamic societies to come up the bare minimum democratic standards in theory if not in practice, but maximalist demands on those who already give them much more than any Islamic country would.

And then they try to show themselves as some kind of victims!

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

O

While making demands, not on their own Islamic societies to come up the bare minimum democratic standards in theory if not in practice, but maximalist demands on those who already give them much more than any Islamic country would.

And then they try to show themselves as some kind of victims![/B]

Crux of the matter as far as europeans see it,i think.Double standards,suspect loyalty to their new nation.

 

[Vinod2070]

Let's take the people making the claims here that somehow "Western Muslims" suddenly become champions of "pluralism" and "liberal democracy" as soon as they land in the West.

Do they demand that Saudis and other Arabs and Islamic countries provide religious freedom to non Muslims as much they make demands on the non Muslim countries?

Do they ever make noises about the millions of 8-10 year old girls being forced into burqa as they worry about the 300 odd women supposedly effected by the French burqa ban? Is it really about "freedom of choice" for them?

Do they complain about Western press but never about the stuff being taught as official curriculum in Islamic countries that teaches hate and violent Jihad against all non Muslims to impressionable minds as a matter of fact. That calls people "apes and pigs" and "enemies of Islam and Muslims", "cowards" and so on?

Perish the thought!

Do they also make accusations of "islamophobia" against all and sundry? Do they want to reduce the national capability of resistance against the Islamist extremists by making these noises?

An example: Hassan Nidal could carry out the killings despite being recognized as a Islamic fanatic early on.

Reason: The Islamophobia shouting brigade induced "political correctness".

The Army promoted Hassan despite reports from his colleagues that he made repeated comments sympathizing with Islamic extremists in general and Osama bin Laden in particular.
Some troops may have been reluctant to express concern about Hassan’s remarks for fear of being accused of having a bias against Muslims, said Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C.

“Service men and women are discouraged from pointing out things that they see … that should raise red flags,” Duncan said “They are scared they will be labeled an Islamophobe.”

Duncan said he does not understand why some officials labeled Hasan’s shooting an incident of workplace violence rather than terrorism.

Hasan is accused of using two handguns and shouting “Allahu Akbar” as he shot 13 people at Fort Hood on Nov. 5, 2009. He is facing a court-martial that could result in the death penalty.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2012/09/military-fort-hood-warnings-ignored-nidal-hasan-091412w

Army Maj. Nidal Hasan was exactly the kind of man many people knew him to be. And that’s why they continually promoted him and sent him some place else. Because nobody, apparently, was willing to intervene despite many warning signs about his behavior.

Those are the findings from the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. They found that the massacre allegedly carried out by Nidal Hasan could have have been prevented.

Had just one person acted on the information many different people had, the tragedy that occurred at Fort Hood on November 5, 2009 may have been prevented.

“The officers who kept Hasan in the military and moved him steadily along knew full well of his problematic behavior,” the report found. “As the officer who assigned Hasan to Fort Hood (and later decided to deploy Hasan to Afghanistan) admitted to an officer at Fort Hood, ‘you’re getting our worst.’ “

Even the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) knew about Hasan, because he came to their attention due to his constant emailing back and forth with radical Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. But did the FBI tell the Army? Apparently not:

The FBI conducted an “all too cursory” investigation into Hasan’s activities and left unresolved a disputed assessment between Joint Terrorism Task Forces in San Diego and in Washington, D.C., over the potential threat that he may have posed. The report found repeated delays in the FBI inquiry into Hasan that ended when an analyst mistakenly relied on Hasan’s “sanitized officer evaluation reports” to concluded that he posed no danger.

Nidal Hasan Exactly the Man Many Knew Him to Be | World of Psychology

A Senate report on the Fort Hood shooting is sharply critical of the FBI’s failure to recognize warning signs that an Army psychiatrist had become an Islamist extremist and amounted to a “ticking time bomb.”

The report concluded that both the Defense Department and the FBI had sufficient information to detect that Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had been radicalized to violent extremism, but they failed to understand and act on it. It said the FBI’s top leaders must exercise more control over local field offices and put to better use the intelligence analysts who should have been able to connect the dots.

Hasan advanced to a two-year fellowship at USUHS [Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences]…Less than a month into the fellowship, in August 2007, Hasan gave another off-topic presentation on a violent Islamist extremist subject instead of on a health care subject. This time, Hasan’s presentation was so controversial that the instructor had to stop it after just two minutes when the class erupted in protest to Hasan’s views. The presentation was entitled, Is the War on Terror a War on Islam: An Islamic Perspective? Hasan’s proposal for this presentation promoted this troubling thesis: that U.S. military operations are a war against lslam rather than based on non-religious security considerations. Hasan’s presentation accorded with the narrative of violent Islamist extremism that the West is at war with Islam. Hasan’s paper was full of empathetic and supportive recitation of other violent Islamist extremist views, including defense of Osama bin Laden, slanted historical accounts blaming the United States for problems in the Middle East, and arguments that anger at the United States is justifiable…The instructor who stopped the presentation said that Hasan was sweating, quite nervous, and agitated after being confronted by the class.

Turns out Ft. Hood mass-murderer Major Nidal Hasan showed a few warning signs | The Daily Caller

The Islamophobe shouting Islamofascist brigade is like a fifth column that wants to weaken the host societies from within by eating away at it's capacity to strike effectively against the terrorists.

They have been quite successful so far. They already have blood on their hands.

 

[bangbros]

No, I want to be on the dark side. I enjoy being a big bad Muslim.

ya ur right and to me a bad muslim is a dead muslim...

 

[flamer84]

Crux of the matter as far as europeans see it,i think.Double standards,suspect loyalty to their new nation.

Nailed it! They don't hate muslims,they just love their current way of life.I'm speaking about the majority of europeans not about the random hard core nazi,for that kind of guy hate is his own personal religion.

 

[Vinod2070]

Just some instances of the respect for "pluralism" when the West is looking.

Only when it is looking.

They are very smart. And they think others are complete fools.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JkSofPyTXA

In summer 2001, while visiting the University of Maryland, I went to hear Qazi Husain Ahmad, emir of the Jamaat-i-Islami, lecture at the Brookings Institute in Washington DC. He spoke on Islam, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. What I heard both surprised and impressed me. Much of what Qazi Husain said was more or less along expected lines – Islam being misunderstood in the West, unfair US embargoes upon Pakistan after the nuclear tests, the unwarranted hostility towards the Taliban (although he disagreed with their rejection of education of girls), etc. But the rest was refreshingly new and remarkably enlightened.

In his opening remarks Qazi Husain praised the US for being a “pluralist” society where he could go to a mosque and freely proselytize, pointed proudly to his shalwar-kameez and declared he could dress as he pleased, and remarked that those of his family members who had migrated to the US felt quite at home. I had never heard him speak publicly in English earlier, nor had I expected such a sound appreciation from him of “pluralism” (a word that he repeated at least twice). In essence he had anticipated General Musharraf’s celebrated “enlightened moderation” by three years. His acceptance of the fact that different groups within a society could accept a plurality of beliefs and philosophies, and still live in harmony, was welcomed by all. I left with a new respect for his values and skills, as did many others in the audience.

It therefore saddened me to read Qazi Husain’s article in Dawn (10 June) wherein he espouses values that stand diametrically opposed to those he declared at Brookings. This article apparently negates his former stand on pluralism and tolerance. Instead, he now adopts a menacing tone towards Ismailis, referring to them thrice as a “religious minority” without conceding that they are a Muslim sect. He darkly hints that they may meet the fate of the Ahmadis in Pakistan, and claims that there are deep conspiracies to undermine Pakistan by attempting to change the school curriculum “by taking over the country’s education boards”.

Killing of innocents is wrong. Only Muslims are innocents. Kaafirs are guilty of not accepting Islam.

This is the inevitable rider!

After a bombing by AQ that killed many Muslims, they said that those Muslims should been in the mosque, it being a Friday. So it was kinda OK.

See them enjoying the protection of the first amendment.

Someone claimed that a event a 1000 miles away by an idiot should not effect someone else. Absolutely.

But there are people who are turning on "their own country and countrymen" due to events thousands of miles away.

 

[gambit]

The bit about thought control was in reference to people claiming that Muslims who allegedly are not in sync with Western values should be deported.

Merely 'not in sync'? Is that how you want to sanitize it, to lump the Boston Marathon bombing and the murder of Theo van Gogh in the same level as intellectual disagreement?

There was a recent study which showed surprisingly large numbers of people in some Western countries who are disaffected with democracy and who are not convinced it is the best method of governance. Should we deport them too? Where to?

Source?

Still...

Deportation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Deportation is the expulsion of a person or group of people from a place or country.[1] Today the expulsion of foreign nationals is usually called deportation, whereas the expulsion of nationals is called banishment, exile, or penal transportation.

Perhaps we should deport foreign nationals and exile our own citizens those who trespass the civility line and into violence.

What about conservatives, of all stripes, who are not 'in sync with' liberal principles?

You are misconstruing the context of the word 'liberal' here. It DOES NOT mean a political bias, as in 'conservative' versus 'liberal'. It is about 'liberalism' and it mean the overall ideological and political institutional foundation upon which all ideological biases are able to present their differences without fear of state sponsored retribution. In that context, a political 'conservative' is just as 'liberal' as his political counterpart in government.

Bottom line, it is (unlawful) actions that matter, not beliefs.

Wrong. The real bottom line is that both beliefs and actions matter in equal importance. We have two arenas: intellectual and legal. People are not that blind to the former and this is where you do not want the same freedom for us. The Muslims do not want criticisms of Islam while they want the great latitude to do anything to other religious beliefs.

Libel is an action. If someone thinks that Obama steals money, he can think it all he wants. But if he makes a public statement to that effect, then it becomes libel and only then can that person be prosecuted.

There is no moral difference between libel and slander. For libel, the action is in putting one's thoughts into print instead of merely vocalizing the same thoughts. Printing and vocalizing are actions. The difference here is which we value more, which is print, and because we place a higher value in print, we sanction the punishment of printed falsehoods.

My point here is that prior to any actions, ideas are deserving of being held morally accountable in equal importance as actions being held legally accountable. This is not what the Muslims want for their religious ideas.

Of course they can, and no one here has denied that there are extremist elements in, and interpretations of, Islam -- like any other religion. We even concede that much of the problems keeping Muslims backward are due to such elements.

What we are saying is that such criticism should be measured and in context. When a Muslim asks for sharia law, it becomes front page news. When a Jewish or Christian person does similar, it does not. If you look at the history of political activism challenging the 'mainstream' culture, the Muslim plaintiffs are negligible compared to others. So this hyped up fear that Islam, and Muslim immigration, poses a threat to the local culture is overblown due to selective media focus.

The difference is that neither the Jewish nor Christians have the moral sanction of other Jews or Christians in other countries, at least nowhere the level that the Muslims have. Face it, Saudi Arabia export their version of Islam, Afghanistan and your Pakistan are quite safe havens for Islamic extremism. We do not see the Vatican or the Russian Orthodox Christian churches financially or otherwise support Christian extremists.

As for 'no go' areas, I already explained that such areas exist for many other economically disadvantaged minorities -- non Muslim, Christian minorities -- and have done so throughout the history of migrant groups. To suggest that this recent Muslim phenomenon is somehow unique, or that it reflects on mainstream Muslims, is disingenuous.

I go to Little Saigon in Bolsa Avenue in Los Angeles once in a while and nowhere in the history of America where enclaves of immigrant ethnicities espouses violence or even tacitly telling their host citizens that their enclaves does not belong to those countries.

 

[Vinod2070]

Merely 'not in sync'? Is that how you want to sanitize it, to lump the Boston Marathon bombing and the murder of Theo van Gogh in the same level as intellectual disagreement?

No.

Merely "allegedly not in sync"!

When times are normal, the Westerners are "sheeple" (by the same person) and enlist in the armed forces to kill Muslim civilians, are Islamophobe, kill their own people in conspiracies like 9/11 and so on...

When needed, they are to be softened up by appealing to their own man made laws which the Islamists otherwise hold in contempt.

But these Islamists do have an advantage. They have the leftists and the academics in their back pocket by their balls. They have significant sections in the West who don't want to rock the boat. Their cries of "Islamophobia" have weakened the world's capability of responding to the terrorist threat significantly, mostly because the leftists have bought completely into it.

There is a conspiracy of silence or worse that keeps the public ignorant of the real dangers.

 

[Developereo]

Merely 'not in sync'? Is that how you want to sanitize it, to lump the Boston Marathon bombing and the murder of Theo van Gogh in the same level as intellectual disagreement?

Political assassinations like Theo van Gogh's are not unique to Muslims.

As for terrorism, the mere fact that you have to keep resorting to it shows that your argument is not sustainable on everyday societal issues, which was the debate here.

Source?

The Australia study is here: Democracy in doubt | Institute of Public Affairs Australia

Only 39% of young people 18-29 believed that democracy was always the best option.

As for other countries, I heard it mentioned in a TV debate, but here's a study that shows about 22% in West Europe and 40% in East Europe do not subscribe to democracy as the best method of governance.

http://www.sydneydemocracyinitiativ...011/04/klingemann_dissatisfied_-democrats.pdf

Perhaps we should deport foreign nationals and exile our own citizens those who trespass the civility line and into violence.

Nice try but you just switched from 'incompatible thoughts' to 'violence' as the requirement for legal action -- implicitly agreeing with me that mere thought is not enough for expulsion.

You are misconstruing the context of the word 'liberal' here.

I am well aware of the meanings, which is why I kept talking about 'liberal democratic' principles as opposed to self-declared people of whatever ilk. The reference to 'conservatives' was merely to point out that many of the ideas they espouse run counter to those principles. Self-avowed 'liberals' do likewise in their zeal, sometimes.

Merely calling oneself a 'liberal' doesn't mean one's ideas conform to liberal democratic principles.

The real bottom line is that both beliefs and actions matter in equal importance.

The disparity in beliefs is not as clear cut as the hysterical media would have us believe. There is considerable overlap amongst social conservatives of all stripes, and there are other overlaps between various other communities, Muslim and non-Muslim.

The extremist Muslim element is over-hyped by the media beyond its actual representation in the wider population and, as has so often been pointed out, is decried just as much by mainstream Muslim leaders as anyone else.

I go to Little Saigon in Bolsa Avenue in Los Angeles once in a while and nowhere in the history of America where enclaves of immigrant ethnicities espouses violence or even tacitly telling their host citizens that their enclaves does not belong to those countries.

This might fly with people who don't know Los Angeles. I happened to live there for quite some time and knew Vietnamese, Latino and Skinhead gangbangers -- some of whom took me to their 'hoods', guarded by guys with uzis. Rest assured that there are certainly areas in Los Angeles where someone of the wrong ethnicity would not want to be stranded after dark.

I have zero doubt that such areas exist in other major cities.

Compared to these areas, the so-called Sharia zones are kindergarten.

 

[Vinod2070]

Political assassinations like Theo van Gogh's are not unique to Muslims.

It was a political assassination!!!

Bleeding heavily, the 47-year-old father of a 14-year-old boy had pleaded with the gunman: 'Don't do it! Don't do it! Mercy! Mercy!' A woman with a young child also screamed out to the assailant, begging him to stop. He listened to neither appeal, but instead produced a long sharpened knife and proceeded to slit van Gogh's throat so deeply that his head was almost severed. One witness described the young man as behaving with the methodical detachment of 'a butcher'. His final act was to affix a five-page letter to the corpse by plunging another knife into van Gogh's chest. It was addressed to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Dutch MP from Somalia who had collaborated with van Gogh on Submission, a film that suggested that the Koran sanctioned domestic violence.

It is beyond remarkable how things can be sanitized by using politically acceptable phrases.

BTW, this "methodical detachment of 'a butcher'" is a specialty of the Islamic terrorists. Many Pakistani soldiers have been subjected to the same ritual killing by the Talibunni terrorists.

The Mumbai "non state actors" being controlled from a Pakistani city based headquarters were similarly asked to "jibah" other civilians.

Probably another case of the euphemistically called "Political assassinations"!

 

[viper46]

If it is only media focus..then why are only people of one religious group blowing civilians up in god's name?Why aren't christians,hindus,buddhists,jews,sikhs,zoroastrians doing the same?Its not all media conspiracy...no matter how much u try to enforce denial.Another thing is there is no seperate jewish law or christian law that is being asked for btw as u claim,only sharia....and in many cases over people u don't beleive in the faith.

men do you know suicide bombing was started in srilanka, tamils did those attacks and those tamils were hindus in majority, so media of that time did not show and didnt impose hinduism as a suicide preaching religion, its not because media was humble toward hinduism its all about priorities. i heard and i believe ""when your time is good, your mistakes considered as joke but when your time is bad even your joke is considered as mistake"" no doubt we are passing thru hard time