Islamification of Europe must be stopped !!!NOW!!!

[Junius]

Even if people find the existing laws insufficient or not to their tastes, that does not give them the right to come up with and enforce their own private laws which are contradictory and sometimes even break the laws of the state in which they live. A society, at it's most basic level, is a group of people bound by the same laws. If one subgroup within that society decides to have their own laws that breeds fear, hatred and resentment, in both groups (in this case Europeans and Muslims). That will just lead to an increase in religiously motivated attacks, again by both groups, and will ultimately destabilise the existing society, which cannot be let happen.

[motiv-8]

Apparently you haven't been following the discussion, or the events in Britain for that matter.

That's quite a large straw man you're trying to burn, there. Surely you have enough fuel?

[Junius]

Apparently you haven't been following the discussion, or the events in Britain for that matter.

That's quite a large straw man you're trying to burn, there. Surely you have enough fuel?

How so? This debate has moved onto the issue of Sharia law. I am giving my own views on that. I don't see how voicing them is a 'straw man', but maybe you could enlighten me?

[Каие]

Almost everything he says is absolute horse crap.

The insinuation that Europe will be taken over by Muslims in 40 years is simply absurd. In the UK back in the 50's they said by 2000 blacks will be a majority. They are less than 2%. In the 80's they said Muslims will be a majority by 2020, it's almost 2010 and the population of Muslims in proportion has remained static despite ''more immigration''.

Also his painting of stoning and all the other barbaric nonsense in his tirade as genuinely Islamic reeks of ignorance, fully explained by his use of Iran and Saudi Arabia as the model Islamic models. Even a junior in Islamic theological study knows it's all relative.

He's simply feeding on people's ignorance to make himself famous. Has no one noticed he used to rant about Christianity to be the ''internet Dawkins'' but no one took notice. Then he started on Islam, slowly at first, and people started to listen. At first I agreed with some of what he said, I could relate to a bit but as his popularity amongst the bigots rises giving him a fan following and circle jerk club, he's intensified his attacks. In order to do this, he's had to abandon all scholarly research and rationality, as is usually the case with fanatics and extremists.

Now he's in the same club as the Islamist radicals themselves. Just exaggerated lies and ranting with no rationality, and no wanton need to research credible sources.

[Serious Spamurai]

I love the sense of urgency in the thread title.

[EireEmerald]

Thanks for being a sheep! Now go follow your leader.

I already have a leader.

[rusina]

Yeah, you've convinced me. Let's destroy our values and ban free religion.

That's what muslims (not all, but some) are trying to do.

[Dr. Croccer]

That's what muslims (not all, but some) are trying to do.

That's what some Christians and some Jews are trying to do as well.

[Tigrul]

That's what some Christians and some Jews are trying to do as well.

Precisely!

In my own country, the orthodox christians, some of them at least, have reached the point where they are protesting in order to get a priest and a few nuns out of jail. These are in jail because they caused the murder of a schizophrenic nun due to what they considered to be "exorcism". Now a lot of orthodox christians have signed a petition and are willing to go to the streets to release these convicted murderers because, so far as some of these people see it, the church faces were only performing god's work. They are arguing that it's the demons that possesed the poor woman that got her killed, not the priest and nun performing the "exorcism".

I can tell you that so far as my own country goes, I fear more what groups gathered out of the religious majority of the country might do in spite of the constitution and against internationally accepted rights and freedoms, than what muslims might do.

If you really want to see how discrimination against non-orhtodox christians goes in a country part of the EU and supposedly respecting the values of the EU, looks like, learn Romanian and have fun for a month experiencing the Romanian mass-media. And since easter is coming fast, the best displays of intolerance towards non-christians will probably be seen soon.

Fortunately, many orthodox christians don't think like those retards I've talked about who are asking the president to gratiate convicted murderers. Unfortunately, those decent orthodox christians in my country are silent compared to the num-nuts and I'd guess that this holds true for muslims as well.

[rusina]

That's what some Christians and some Jews are trying to do as well.

But because of them, our goverment is not limiting freedom of speech.

[Каие]

That's what muslims (not all, but some) are trying to do.

That's what Christians (some not all) want to do, do we stigmatise the world's 2 billion very different Christians?

[Manco]

But because of them, our goverment is not limiting freedom of speech.

That's not because of those Christians and Jews, if anything they'd like to abolish some of our liberties.

[Erlinggra]

When told that there was, he responded with "well Jyllandsposten is a small paper" (meaning in Scandinavia).

Unfortunately it just so happens to be the opposite, given that it is the most popular (even more unfortunate) paper in Denmark,

You claiming Jyllandsposten is the largest paper in Denmark doesn't make it true though, it has 150 000 readers, Politikken has over 400 000 so that's just a plain lie.

Not to mention he said the seven other Scandinavian papers I pointed out "didn't count". Why they didn't count appears to be because they proved him wrong.

I never said No Scandinavian newspaper printed the cartoons and the once that did doesn't count. I will however point out when you lie about how many has printed them (two in Norway you claimed three) and I will also point out that when the news papers are small and do it as a publicity stunt, which was the case for most of the papers in Norway and Sweden.
When only 1/3 of the major newspapers dare to print a picture because it might cause offence something is clearly wrong. (or 0 like in the UK, but you keep ignoring that point)

[Каие]

When people see the word sharia they immidiately think:

Very incorrectly.

What I'm mostly concerned about is that special laws for Muslims in western Europe will not help in co-existance, it'll create parallel societies. There are more than enough outside the common society as it is, and making more (and pushing others into the new one as well) is not the answer.

Jews also have a little bit of ''special laws'' in terms of marriage, divorce and inheritance. It's nothing to do with creating parallel societies, although one could argue the rich and poor in Disraelan fashion have always been two parallel societies, the issue is that European inheritance and divorce laws suck balls, and some Muslims and Jews want out. This is largely innocent, and only maniup0lated by scaremongering fools who point it as a one step on the path to Sharia full with (no) 'stoning'. Besides it's not done through a special law, but through an existing law. Arbitration. This can be used by any single citizen to settle a dispute outside of a court to gain a mutual result. Muslims and Jews are merely allowed to use these Arbitration proceedings to handle inheritance, marriage and divorce matters.

[Manco]

You claiming Jyllandsposten is the largest paper in Denmark doesn't make it true though, it has 150 000 readers, Politikken has over 400 000 so that's just a plain lie.

You need to check your numbers, Jyllandsposten and Politiken respectively had a circulation of 130.000 and 110.000 rounded in 2008, in 2005 both had about 20.000 copies more in circulation.

(that's official numbers by the Dansk Oplagskontrol)

So either you're lying instead of Atterdag or you don't know the difference between circulation and reach/readership figures.

[Bill Kaulitz]

i am not worried about myself, i am worried about my future children and generations to come.

I share your sentiments.

[handsome pete]

we have to share each others burdens. that's why we should let them emigrate to our countries because ultimately our way of life will absorb theirs. if people want to get out of those cultures and have their children else where, so let them.

as the guy in the video says himself, much of the lessening brutality in the islamic world is no different to our own history and is probably following the same trend. with the advent of modernisation, the significance of christianity has lessened so why would you expect islam to be different (especially if you yourself are christian).

[Visna]

Very incorrectly.

I'm sorry, I don't understand. Are you saying that I'm wrong in my assumption? Or that "people" are wrong in the assumption that sharia = stones.

Jews also have a little bit of ''special laws'' in terms of marriage, divorce and inheritance. It's nothing to do with creating parallel societies, although one could argue the rich and poor in Disraelan fashion have always been two parallel societies, the issue is that European inheritance and divorce laws suck balls, and some Muslims and Jews want out. This is largely innocent, and only maniup0lated by scaremongering fools who point it as a one step on the path to Sharia full with (no) 'stoning'. Besides it's not done through a special law, but through an existing law. Arbitration. This can be used by any single citizen to settle a dispute outside of a court to gain a mutual result. Muslims and Jews are merely allowed to use these Arbitration proceedings to handle inheritance, marriage and divorce matters.

I'm against special conditions for Jews as well. When in Rome, do as the Romans and such. I don't see it as a road to government sanctioned stonings because "it's their culture" and all that nonsense. It's got more to do with a coherent (not sure if that's the right word) society, and I'm just afraid it can lead to further fragmentation.

[Каие]

I'm sorry, I don't understand. Are you saying that I'm wrong in my assumption? Or that "people" are wrong in the assumption that sharia = stones.

People are wrong in their assumptions that stoning = sharia.

I'm against special conditions for Jews as well.

That's my point. It's not special conditions for anyone. ANY citizen can use arbitration proceedings, any one, and many do.

When in Rome, do as the Romans and such.

Aye, Next time I'm in Rome I'll be killing 20,000 Christians.

It's got more to do with a coherent (not sure if that's the right word) society, and I'm just afraid it can lead to further fragmentation.

I don't agree. I don't see how allowing ALL citizens the right of arbitration can lead to federalism. Besides the UK has never had just one legal system. We have three.

[removeduser_487563287433]

That's what muslims (not all, but some) are trying to do.

So what? That's not the point.