Written by angel. on 09.12.2014 at 16:50

Like I must say that metalheads are bunch of brain dead church burners alcoholic junkies filled with hatred and they are the people who are raised on extremist ideas so they get involved in violent actions of attacking their fans, stealing money from the friends and they promote attacking ( based on two or three events that happened here and there), raping and gangbang-ing women as it is all written in the lyrics of different bands, sang and praised by them, metalheads are just into death, violence, destruction, vandalism, backwardness and aggression.

That is an accurate description of the metal community. None of those things happen right? All those metalheads have it wrong, right? Alright, I say it again, show me the outrage of the metal community when something like that happens? You're not going to, because it is accepted, allowed and even supported because deep down they know that once they constitute a majority they will dictate the rules.
Metalheads will only generate more death and destruction.

Another red herring. Logical fallacy. Go figure that someone would use that on this topic. You are still answering the questions, and you have nothing to argue with when you know that Deadone and I are right. Kind of sad. All the evidence and examples and not a single good enough of a response and counterargument. Liberal "logic" and Muslim "logic" really have a lot in common.

Written by Rasputin on 09.12.2014 at 18:42

Another red herring. Logical fallacy. Go figure that someone would use that on this topic. You are still answering the questions, and you have nothing to argue with when you know that Deadone and I are right. Kind of sad. All the evidence and examples and not a single good enough of a response and counterargument. Liberal "logic" and Muslim "logic" really have a lot in common.

Well, your approach where Muslims seem to be the Great Satan is quite valid (sometimes) if you only take the extremist/radical side of it. And I don't think anyone here would disagree of the problem it might represent. But I don't think this point of view can be applied so vaguely on everything related to the theme as you do unless you want a close-minded black/white setting, that I find extremely flawed and boring to sustain.

Obviously,any ideology taken to the extreme represents a threat to anyone that does not adhere but like with any other extremist movement, the numbers are quite thin and based on mostly isolated cases. We might perceive it differently through the illusion of mass media and sensationalism that easily fouls the ignorant because it sells, giving it more credit than it deserves but it's something you can't help. I mean, if you stop thinking that examples X or Y are a generality and hang around any Muslim country where you don't risk to bump into people screaming "Allahu Akbar" every 2 seconds, it might change your mind.

Bouncing on what Vombatus wisely said. As a confirmed female atheist who has lived almost all her life in a Muslim country, I have many grievances and complaints with Islam I would have loved to debate on. But the climate here (in this thread) is so outrageously racist - because let's be honest, when you have a couple of guys who don't want to make the difference between ethnicity and religion no matter what the statistics say, and proudly maintain they hate all things Islam, that's out-right racist - my debating of the problems related to Islam would only feel like I am fuelling the hate of some of the people I think are no better than the terrorists they keep seeing everywhere and complaining about. Rasputin and dead one can't reasonably be expecting a debate if it is a wall of intolerance, hate, cynicism and sarcasm they put in front of you.

I find it amusing and a little perplexing that Rasputin can use the label "liberal" as a pejorative. Who in their right mind would not want to identify as a liberal? It is pretty much synonymous for "civilized". And furthermore, even from your relativistic clash-of-cultures point of view, you can't coherently demand that we protect our culture from foreign attack if you do not subscribe to liberalism - the Western civilization you are so eager to preserve from the Muslim threat is predominantly "liberal" in its core values.

There is nothing to respond to, Rasputin. You haven't actually provided any detailed, nuanced arguments supported by evidence that we might refute. You wield such broad, generalising and hateful accusations that the only thing we can respond to is your attitude. I have never seen a statement in the media nor have I heard from a Muslim that honor killings or gang-rape is a good thing. You must know that all this bullshit is frequently condemned by Muslim communities and Muslim human rights activists; are you just goading us to find links so that you can dismiss them as "not sincere"? And I am not sure what you hope to point out by listing illegal activities; they're illegal here and they will continue to be illegal, and there is no credible democratic movement pushing towards their legalisation in the West. Nor have you provided any substantial, credible statistical evidence to show violent crime or other undesirable behaviour is significantly more frequent among Muslims than non-Muslims (accounting for other variables, such as immigrant vs native, and economic class). If you do find some clear correlations, it remains for you to explain them as somehow inherent to Islam.

Religion tends to be a conservative, stabilising element in a sufficiently homogenous society, and it is a reflection of the general state of its culture. Usually, institutions and doctrines that change slowly are a good thing, since they help preserve what works and protect history, people, social organisation and material objects from the whimsical trends of short-sighted humans. That means, of course, that they tend to lag behind "progress" and appear stifling to proponents of radical change. You can hardly blame Islam if it hasn't kept up with the rapid upheavals of Western society in the last two hundred years - why would it have? If anything, you should blame the historical anomaly that is Western modernisation and secularisation for creating the perceived problem. Never before has anything like it happened, and it is unreasonable and naive to expect a foreign religion to turn itself upside down for your benefit.

Thank you ^

Written by deadone on 10.12.2014 at 01:08

It's not racism. I'm as scared of white Muslims as I am of Arab ones. Indeed a couple of North American Muslim white and black converts have conducted terror attacks recently in the name of religion.

I'm only scared of them cause they're coming to my country in droves and are requesting and indeed practicing Sharia and some of them have definitely been involved in terrorism plots and acts and a number of them have gone to fight in Syria/Iraq and might come back wanting to continue spreading jihad here.

Their culture and religion is completely at odds with mine and that of most Australians and they go out of their way to show it. They are openly hostile to the government and don't approve of government raids on terror suspects. They try to blackmail the governments into doing what they want them to do with threats of disengagement from the rest of Australian society.

I don't want to live under Sharia law, I don't want my culture obliterated by these people and I don't want to be worried about some nutter blowing me up or running me over in the name of some fictional god. I certainly don't want my daughter growing up in a world where these are even more likely than now due to massive Islamic population growth in Australia.

If it was radical Christians or radical Jews or radical Buddhists doing the same, I'd have the same issues. Luckily Christian zealotry is rare in Australia and the Orthodox Jew and Buddhist communities are respectful of Australian laws and custom.

Thinking that the Sharia might become a threat in the western world is simply fucking beyond me. In a configuration like some regions in the middle east, sure, they have all the ingredients required for the ultimate shitstorm (as we see with ISIS). Otherwise ? No way man.

Just look at their techniques to achieve their goals that you mention: blackmail governments, plot terrorist attacks, brainwash, and blablabla. Such behaviour can not expect to be approved by a society,exept for a few fanatics. If there was a political party that somehow would acquire the legitimacy to apply such doctrines in our lives, well yes. Fortunately, that is not going to happen.

Anyway, what would be the solution to this ? Ban Islam ? Giving them a reason to justify their actions ? Or simply do as we usual which would be to punishing any attempt to breach the rules/laws/norms of our societies with some crappy judiciary system ?

Written by deadone on 10.12.2014 at 01:23

Religion is a disease that keeps people subjugated and that prevents progress.

It became obsolete about 200 years ago but some people don't want to let go.

I feel sincerely sorry for you and hope that you reach emotional maturity and intellectual integrity some day. Just because you (and me) are in the minority of irreligious unfortunates whose quality of life isn't significantly improved by personal conviction doesn't mean you should twist reality to justify your stance.

You don't seem to understand what the Western culture and civilization you're so eager to protect means. Yes, I may very well agree that some values espoused by some Muslims are completely at odds with mine. Yes, I have no doubt that my opinions would not be welcome in some Islamic countries. And no, that should have no bearing on how we treat Muslims in our society. That's precisely what our supposed superiority is about: we do try to respect freedom of religion and free mobility as much as possible, we do try to treat everyone as equal before the law, we do not hold people's backgrounds against them. You cannot rationally and coherently defend Western values against foreign influence by draconian immigration and freedom-of-religion policies, because the Western values themselves are what enable the foreign influence in the first place. That would make you as much, if not more, an enemy of our culture who ought to be suppressed. But I know your views from the immigration topic already, I guess.

That does not mean special privileges against the law for Muslims, of course. I don't know where you got that impression. "Honour killings" or whatever are a crime like any other, and never have I heard public opinion or the justice system trying to exempt Muslims from laws regarding murder. I am all for deportation immigrants without citizenship if they commit crimes, all for the standard penalties assigned to citizens if they do have citizenship, and I am sure most "liberal" people feel this way. We do not need to pamper them especially because they have such a hard time; but we do treat them as equal before the law and we have no business interfering with their private practice as long as it is legal. Just like nobody gets to interfere with my practices and beliefs, at odds with some national identity as they may be.

Written by deadone on 10.12.2014 at 02:33

Actually it's already a major source of conflict between the Muslim community and the wider Australian community and government.

There have been serious pushes by "moderate" Muslims for them to be exempt from Australian family law and to have Sharia adopted as an alternative for Muslims.

The big problem is that sharia is already practiced. There was 250 child marriages in the Australian muslim community and that was stated to be the tip of the iceberg. These are official under Islamic law as they were presided over by official imams.

A few Imams have been caught promoting "light hitting" of women - in English of all things

The NSW muslim community has threatened to disengage from government sponsored community relationship building programs several times for following reasons:

1. To promote sacking of a leading Jewish community leader who supported Israel's Gaza issue.
2. To reinstate a newspaper journalist who was pro-Palestinian (he got sacked for saying "fuck you" to some readers).
3. To protest new anti-terror laws.

This is just what I am aware of.

In essence they're sayin: "If you don't play our way, we will not be part of the community").

No other groups do this. Even the Aboriginals who have much to hate about Western obliteration of their culture don't do this kind of blackmail.

There have been protests against terror laws, against arrest of terror suspects.

Mainstream Muslim leaders have spoken out against these laws

Demographics say otherwise. Firstly from a global perspective the Muslim population will grow from about 25% of population in 2014 to 40% by 2100 based on conservative estimates.

Secondly, Islamic migration to West has been snowballing - hence some community backlash in recent years in Europe and Australia.

Thirdly, studies by people far more respected by me, have shown Muslim migrants and their children don't just maintain high birth rates, they in fact maintain higher levels of religiousness than other migrant groups. Indeed second generation ones are often more conservative/fundamentalist than their parents.

Hence you have a growing and aggressive minority population. At some point governments will start compromising to either appease them or keep in terms of votes. And eventually the scales will tip to their side.

This is happening now in Western Europe and will only get worse given current demographic trends. In my local town, we had no Muslims 5 years ago and there's now so many that there are signs popping up in Arabic everywhere. One suburb has been ghettoified in those 5 years and another one is heading there. And they've become quite the regulars at the local magistrate court where my wife works for basically adhering to their religion - domestic violence.

Well, maybe Australia is about to become the next Islamic State but from my experience I have seen no "moderate" Muslims reclaim the Sharia or anything remotely similar. Sure I can make a endless list of examples taken from the news where we see a group of guys plotting a terrorist attack, a family forcing their underage daughter to marry an old man and all that.... I simply doubt it is the general tendency, hence only a minority are the more extremists. And I lived in a Muslim country as well as several "western" countries with very large communities (more than Australia) apart from having lots of acquaintances that consider themselves Muslims, which should kind of give me a decent sample to form a rational opinion. Granted we see signs of their culture/traditions/whatever popping around, but is it really that horrible as long as they don't force anyone and eradicate everything else ? If they do put them back in their place, but judging a whole community by the actions of a minority...

And maybe I'm wrong, but by reading your posts I have the impression you have a hard time discerning what is purely due to religious factors and the rest. Like the things you say about Palestine or the anti-terrorist laws... A shitload of people have the same discourse, people who have nothing to do with the religion. So maybe you are making a hasty amalgam to suit your opinion ?

Must agree on your point about demography. Tis' true that second generation are more attached to cultural origins than their predecessors, religion being one of points. But when you see countries that have well established second generations or even third and no significant increase of Sharia-shoving-down-the-throat attitude, I am again skeptic about this argument.

Written by IronAngel on 10.12.2014 at 11:00

That would make you as much, if not more, an enemy of our culture who ought to be suppressed. But I know your views from the immigration topic already, I guess.

There are no set of written-in-stone "Western values". All of them have been argued for, each in their own time and context for a certain end, in a fitting political system that rests on many assumptions and arguments. Maybe the ends have been forgotten and replaced by sheer dogmatism.
Not always have people taken freedom of speech for instance, as a given or even a good idea - they had to be argued for by reason.

Raymond Geuss makes a similar point in "Human Rights: A Very Bad Idea". He attacks mostly libertarians, but it applies to anyone who takes out the tramp-card named "x right" in any other context than legal. It breaks the political process of actually answering the meaningful questions that they came to answer in very the first place. Answers which need not apply to every context and time (i.e. the questions of politics; how ought we organize a society?).

Mass immigration is not a personal issue - it is social and personal. It will change your demographics and culture. It will change how you live. It is an issue to be analyzed and dealt with rather than appeal to existing legalities which may not be relevant/need of change, not swept under the rug.

I agree to an extent, but that is not an argument you could appeal to from the perspective dead one seems to have; of essential "cultures" that do or don't mix well, and that deserve to be preserved.

I do disagree that values, ideals and rights should not be appealed to - that is how human communication and argumentation works. You cannot analyze or deal with anything without taking something (a lot, really) as given. This does not mean inability to be critical, since we can isolate and exchange individual blocks from the basis of our (personal and social) epistemology and morality, but there's no high ground of pure reason you could take. And whether or not our values are entirely arbitrary, some of them must appear and be accepted as fundamental.

There is plenty of dogmatism and twisting (or evolution) of original ideas into something else. Freedom of religion, for one, has turned in the public interpretation into a tool to castrate religion, rather than the shield that's supposed to protect and guarantee free practice of one's own religion. But really, there is very little to be re-examined in this specific case: you could, I suppose, question whether it's really a good idea to allow Muslims the same international mobility as other people, or you could suggest some special legislation be made to target their religion specifically. But I can't see you coming up with a realistic, ethical and consistent proposal that would pass any close scrutiny. We want the right to move to whatever country we please, after work or better education (I certainly intend to take my PhD in the UK if I get the funding) and we expect the freedom to practice our own beliefs and habits when we do. (I did just buy a tweed jacket, but that's the extent of my intended assimilation.) And as long as we're not willing to give up that freedom, we can't really help but extend it to others, too.

The liberal principles that are the historical basis of our society are, to this day, quite viable and acceptable. Yes, you could play the Devil's advocate and criticize them from some extra-cultural imaginary zone, or from the perspective of some other culture. But ethically (insofar as civilized people in our world have assumed shared ethics), reasonably (insofar as educated people in our world share a consensus on principles of reason) and practically, there is very little to recommend an alternative. Liberalism has been well argued for and has not faced a viable competitor in centuries. An imagined threat of Muslim invasion is probably not going to change that.

Even if you dismiss all this: these are the values I have accepted, values I am pretty sure the vast majority will accept when they are spelled out to them clearly and without disingenuous smoke-screens, and my statement stands: dead one is an enemy of the (perhaps arbitrary and relative) worldview and culture I represent and thus, were we to live in the same society and rational discourse did not persuade him, I would hypothetically have to assimilate him by force or send him packing. Except I wouldn't, because it's unreasonable to expect everyone to agree as long as personal safety and freedom isn't unduly threatened by the diversity. And that what makes liberalism infinitely superior to other alternatives.

I am not sure what exactly the political questions we disagree on are, though. I am not interested in pampering Muslim immigrants any more than other people. I support consistent and quite extensive freedoms to everyone equally, tempered with a conscious effort to empathise with others and try to find a way to give them what they want within reason and at little cost to others. You could call that "liberal" but to me that's just the core of psychologically mature human ethics. You might as well call it magnanimity and ancient Greeks would approve, you could frame it as loving your neighbour and conservative Christians throughout history would cheer. At heart, that's what it means to be a good person. (Yeah; I just indirectly called anyone who disagrees a bad person, but that's what moral disagreement ultimately boils down to. We just have to find a happy medium to include as many people as possible among the good guys without compromising the intuitive core of it.) Any political decisions arising out of ignorance, prejudice, false generalisations or a refusal to exercise empathy and challenge yourself is to be opposed. Even if, at the end of the day, me and Rasputin ended up supporting the same bill regarding, say, social support for unemployed immigrants, we would still be opposed and he would still be wrong.

Good job Deadone, you really nailed it. I agree with everything you said. I just think the end might come quicker, because the liberalism of the West is what will be it's undoing. And Iron Angel, the difference that I make, is that liberalism in USA is devoid of reason and logic, and is going towards destroying any values left. It is going to the point of a free for all mentality, which will not produce anything positive in the long run. I am labeled as a conservative by most people, because I do not support homosexuality, feminism, Islam and other hot button topics, and I don't care how people label me.

I think I posted on the other page a very well fleshed out point by point description of why Muslims can't be trusted, and how easily this "peaceful" notion can switch, if Imam or any other religious figure interprets it. You cannot have a peaceful religion whose main goal is to create the greater Islamic state (which encompasses the entire world). No land that was under the rule of Islam can ever be released, which means, any territory to inhabit will be forever the part of the greater Islamic state. I keep telling you to read the book and do your research. Islam is the greatest threat to freedom, logic, reason and technology and as long as you allow for it to spread by your lack of knowledge and constant repetition of how Deadone and I have it wrong, you are only placing a noose over your head.

People are waking up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFhAM54OB8k

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120519/tyranny-silence-how-one-cartoon-ignited-global-debate

http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2014/12/maldives-and-islamic-state.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/08/what-it-s-like-to-be-an-atheist-in-palestine.html

http://www.islam-watch.org/authors/138-jake-neuman/1585-not-in-my-name-a-campaign-of-disinformation-and-deception.html

http://cphpost.dk/news/extremists-using-immigrant-gangs-to-intimidate.11923.html

http://www.newenglishreview.org/Nicolai_Sennels/Muslims_and_Westerners%3A__The_Psychological_Differences/

Weekly contribution of "peace"

2014.12.10 (Kano, Nigeria) - Two female suicide bombers hit a loading area at a textile market, scattering the remains of seven innocents.
2014.12.10 (Tayeglow, Somalia) - Two women are beheaded by al-Shabaab.
2014.12.09 (Maramag, Philippines) - Bangsamoro Islamists are blamed for a bombing that kills ten people on a bus.
2014.12.09 (Faisalabad, Pakistan) - 'Soldiers of Allah' shoot a member of an polio vaccination team to death.
2014.12.08 (Sulouk, Syria) - A man is beheaded in front of children for 'blasphemy'.
2014.12.08 (Damistan, Bahrain) - A local cop is killed by Hezbollah-linked radicals.

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/12/pakistan_family_honor_killing.html
http://www.ncr-iran.org/en/news/human-rights/17654-iran-christians-arrested-for-playing-religious-music
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/world/british-principal-who-resigned-believes-he-was-seen-as-a-threat.html
http://www.dw.de/saudi-religious-police-crack-down-on-bloggers/a-18113104

What else do you want and need? You have thousands upon thousands of examples. You will not believe it until its too late. I ask again, for the third time, how do you explain "peaceful" Muslims that came to France, Sweden, Netherlands, Britain and other places to all of a sudden go ape shit, and start behaving like most radicals? How do you explain that? Coincidence? Deadone and I keep telling you, the Muslims come in small numbers first, and they are tolerant and peaceful, then when they get the numbers they need, they start to push their agenda. Sharia is being pushed in every Muslim community, and where do you think it will end up by the end?

FRANCE
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/french-city-with-40-muslim-population-is-the-most-dangerous-city-in-europe/
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3305/france-no-go-zones

Sweden
http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/02/swedish-police-release-extensive-report-detailing-control-of-55-no-go-zones-by-muslim-criminal-gangs/
Norway
http://muslimstatistics.wordpress.com/2014/01/29/norway-deports-record-number-of-muslims-to-reduce-crime-31-increase/
England
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2640/britain-muslim-honor-crimes

Wake up people before it is too late

I think the more important question is how or why your embassies in firsthand and actually your governement did not distinguish these zealous, probably criminal ( according to constitutions) who they may interrupt the peaceful life a citizen in the time of applying fro entrance to your countries ? \

Norwegian government deported some P.h.D Iranian students, Iranian students must be monitored under the requests of the Ministry of Education and Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, the same thing was suggested to Finnish state, and Germany in first place does not let the students to enter that easy, every year deals of young people are rejected to start their studies somewhere in Europe after spending their best years of life in the way of just providing documents and spending the hard earned money in [ruthless] embassies, they're somehow murdered by bureaucracy and living in suspense and being accused of something they're not while they're just some regular people trying to get better education and living, my hands and legs shake every time I think about the appointments in embassy because of all those behaviors that makes me feel I'm nut serial killer that every wrong word may just lead to rejection and subsequently I have wasted my time and money...

Of course I fully understand that every country must take care of their residents and such, but what is this sort of behaving without-guilt-people and then YOU deadone complaining of those barbaric people around you, you describe it in a way that I sometimes imagine while you're writing these things here you're running away with your kids in your arms and muslims running after you with their swords and bombs trying to convert your to Sharia law.

Really, what is this with this contradiction ? How did these barbaric people that you describe ended up in your country ? How in first place the embassies of your country gave them the entrance permissions when they're really this horrible as you describe, I can't understand.

As Rasputin said, Deadone nailing anyone who's coming to his way on Islam.

Well, I'm living in Kashmir from past 2.5 years and I saw this tremendous speed of teenagers backing away from all the horrific issues happening around the world(ISIS, Syria, endless breach of conduct on Pakistan and Afghanistan borders, firing on LOC in India etc). It's pure hypocrisy and people doesn't get shamed saying this. What more importantly here is development, they want fucking safety and more importantly they want to be in corporate world in order to get run with the lifestyle of world. Yes, there're parts of Kashmir where hardcore Muslims still believe "we gonna save Kashmir from westernization, no foreigners are welcomed here, India is scum, Muslims reside here" and loads of annoying religious chants they always do. But, such loads are in minority.

Look, Kashmiris have an internal issues with India from quite a lot of time and by now every damn one knows what the fucking fuss is(hint: Kashmir is ours!!!!). Fuck it.

But, what Muslims have issues around the world is currently not the problem prevails here. They're getting sick living under these undeveloped rocks, getting bullied by Indian army, facing crisis post-flood havoc couple of months back, not getting proper pension, adequate state government ruling etc). Kashmiris want to come out and live freely. No matter if it takes them go to Nigeria and start their journey from zero and live an honest live. Look, I might be going bit off-topic here considering Kashmir as sole purpose of my opinions but then Kashmir has always been an important agenda in UN, so it gives an edge to talk about its people considering why everyone feels good to dismantle Islam.

People like me getting targeted here for no reasons is bogus. Only mainstream Indian news channels broadcast that crap for business sake to get some unwanted attention. But, you never know when these kashmiris might turn their backs and put you in danger. So I always keep myself in checks so that if anything remotely happens, I know what I've to do.

Written by deadone on 11.12.2014 at 06:13

Rasputin, alas all we get is "don't blame the majority."

Even though Muslim countries that have nominal laws demanding protection of minorities or women's rights struggle to keep the majority in check when it comes to upholding them.

In most instances they can't even get the laws through e.g. "moderate" Jordan was unable to pass laws banning honour killings. They weren't even able to pass laws to be able to effectively investigate honours killings due to fear of public reprisal. It's even worse in Pakistan where violent mobs kill and burn at the mere hint of "blasphemy."

And look at the often violent uproar from virtually the entire Islamic world (including those in the West) about those Danish Islamic cartoons. You don't get even a fraction of that uproar from Christians even though the Christian faith is constantly ridiculed virtually everywhere (including incidentally Metal music).


Now if Muslims chose to live this way in their countries, then that's their choice

(Just sucks to be woman, secular, homosexual or of another religion or wanting to not be muslim in those countries)

They should not be able to come to the West and try to live that way or try to force us to change to that way or give them special dispensation.


Alas France is already lost to Islam.



The great irony is that in order to be fully liberal, the West is going to lie down and let illiberal types do as they please "You have to let him marry a 9 year old, it's in his religion and we can't discriminate."

Indeed the claims from Australian muslim leaders is that by enforcing our laws we are discriminating against them. Well guess what Mohammad, you're not in Islamabad anymore.

Yeah, that is the only thing we get because they have nothing to refute any of our claims. Anyone with a shred of common sense can see what is going on and what will happen. Just recently they broke up 3 terrorist cells in Bosnia, and there are more and more of them every day. it does not take much to push someone to the radical notions of Islam, we see this time and time again. The Prison population is also one of the major recruiting grounds in the USA for instance, and I don't know how prisons are set up in most EU states or Australia, but it would not surprise me that it would be another great place to start.

That's just it, we can have anti-Christian everything, and the Christians will take it without resorting to violence and terrorism. You try that with Islam and Muslims, and you have a catastrophe on your hands, which further shows that it is not a religion that has ever evolved, and it will never evolve because how do you evolve and enhance something that is deemed "perfect?" You can't.

Yes, I am yet to see anyone logically explain what is going on in France, all of our Muslim apologist have not bothered to explain why it is so fucked up over there. You give Muslims a finger they want the entire arm. It's like I said before, we in the Western world are so gullible and trusting and also very lenient, forgiving and accepting that it will be our undoing. The majority of us would not have 1% of rights that Muslims enjoy in the West, but that's the thing, as you pointed out, they don't want to be the part of the West, they want to to make East out of West, and they are succeeding.

@Mary

Good. We should have more stringent laws and regulations, and not let anyone in who could be a potential threat. It is due to the behavior, heinous acts, mob mentality and fundamentalism that the West is looking at Muslims like that, and to be honest, they should look at them under even more scrutiny. My personal belief is, if you don't want to become a productive member of the society that you chose to move to, and you want to force your own agenda and create a disaster, you deserve to be deported. If I or Deadone or anyone else for that matter, tried to do something similar in a Islamic country, we would be dead probably by now, if not imprisoned for a very long time. If the Muslims want to be looked at like everyone else, they should maybe try and be like everyone else, instead of forcing everyone else to be like them, but that will not happen, because that is not the way of Islam, and it is the wide held belief of a Muslim individual.

Written by deadone on 11.12.2014 at 06:13

The great irony is that in order to be fully liberal, the West is going to lie down and let illiberal types do as they please "You have to let him marry a 9 year old, it's in his religion and we can't discriminate."

Indeed the claims from Australian muslim leaders is that by enforcing our laws we are discriminating against them. Well guess what Mohammad, you're not in Islamabad anymore.

In western countries it is illegal to marry 9 years old. So as long as they maintain it that way I don't see any issue. And I've seen cases were parents have gone to court for these types of actions and similar, quite logical since it's against the legal system established.

So as long as there is no positive discrimination and no concession of laws that go against those already established, I don't see how can this be a problem. If some want their Sharia, well, just don't give out. And for now I haven't perceived any changes in the law to go down the extremist way, if anything it's the contrary (burka prohibition, limitation of mosques building, etc....). I think one does not have to be so alarmist, that is all.

"I suppose, question whether it's really a good idea to allow Muslims the same international mobility as other people, or you could suggest some special legislation be made to target their religion specifically."

This is not about a religion, or Islam per se.
The UK banns entry of certain individuals, there are immigration laws and the EU is a relatively new phenomena that is bounded to Europe. The idea that you can live separated from society, while the imaginative clockwork of democracy will "do its thing" without any active participation is an illusion.

Conflating classic liberalism with "maturity" is not a slick rhetorical move.
When I speak to people on immigration, most of them tend to have never visited, do not live or send their children to study in areas of immigration.
Like I said before - it will change the way you live and what your society is built out of. I think it is a good idea to let people decide how the world they live in would look for them and their children in the years to come, and not at the expense of people who don't have enough money to avoid it.

Written by deadone on 12.12.2014 at 01:12

Basically as a community the only thing they have contributed to Australia is strife, discord and increasingly violence.
Is this really ok to you?

If they truly only contribute to create strife, discord and violence, obviously I'm not ok with it.

My issue would be to treat all of them as the same, when they are not.

Written by deadone on 12.12.2014 at 01:32

Discounting the concept of Islam, multiculturalism usually fails and either one grup dominates the others and causes massive cultural damage (e.g. Russian dominance in USSR) or there is a state of perpetual cultural conflict as various levels (e.g. much of Africa). Where there is no dominant ethnic group conflict is often only held back by authoritarianism (e.g. Yugoslavia)

I don't have an issue with multiculturalism in the cultural sense. It's basically how I grow up.
Multiculturalism in the political sense, is broken. From bottom to top.

It is the negative of romantic nationalism, and from this perspective there's little difference the European far left (which is mainstream, especially third worldism) and right except the arbitrary application. I've never been a fan of continental European politics, usually preferred the British tradition.

The insanity of romantic European politics is showing its face again, with right wing parties in Europe talking about cultural and ethnic "purity" - very much thanks to the left who kept those categories as categories of knowledge (similar to racism and anti-racism discourse. "race" as a category of knowledge was dying, until it got recovered in the "white" vs "black" in the US).

You beat me to the punch, I was just about to post that story. How much blood must be shed, and how many people must be beheaded before people wake the fuck up.

You are right Deadone, get them out of every country before it is too late, and these takeovers become a part of the daily living. I don't want to see any place become the new Gaza strip.

Dear deadone, there is a funny idiom in Farsi as it says : "coloring a donkey" which completely defines the incident you posted above and the way it was reported. It's really funny, pay closer attention to the event : 1. The person enters the cafe ( only one person !) and commits hostage taking with weapons reportedly.
2. A cafe right in the middle of town
3. Then a big number of police rushes into the cafe
4. For what on Earth, someone commits such idiotic hostage
5. What was the exact purpose of it
6.The hostage taker couldn't even dream of growing magical wings and fly out of the cafe with the hostages
7. So what was the outcome of such action ? Just putting the hostage taker at risk of getting arrested and then harshest punishments ?
Come on wake up, you're watching the most perfect show evar written down for your simple minds. Go deeper down to the issues. There's much bigger plans for us.

Written by deadone on 15.12.2014 at 01:57

Well just to prove my point about worthless muslims contributing nothing but violence in Australia, another Islamic attack is happening just now.

These people need to be kicked out of the country. They are our enemies.

You maybe don't like religion, maybe 'Islam' especially, but not all Muslims (neither support) have taken hostages on a Monday morning (Sunday morning?).

Written by Bad English on 15.12.2014 at 17:44

It will be interesting read dead one comments today after events

No, it won't. We already know where that will be going.

@Mary

But of course, Muslims were in no way ever suicidal in their actions, right? No explosive vests or ramming themselves into buildings. No one says that these fuckers are smart, because Islam does not require for you to be smart, just obedient.

I am yet to see something positive coming from the Islamic community that is not a ploy, like some Muslims down there volunteering to be exchanged for hostages, a perfect example of protecting Islam by any means necessary to include their own lives since it is a great feat to "spend one day in battle for Allah, than all the years of peace" or some shit like that.

More friendly and tolerant Muslims coming near you. Invest in body bags and coffins since Allah is Merciful

So you must also hate Japanese for ALL their kamikazi actions.

Written by angel. on 15.12.2014 at 09:41

Dear deadone, there is a funny idiom in Farsi as it says : "coloring a donkey" which completely defines the incident you posted above and the way it was reported. It's really funny, pay closer attention to the event : 1. The person enters the cafe ( only one person !) and commits hostage taking with weapons reportedly.
2. A cafe right in the middle of town
3. Then a big number of police rushes into the cafe
4. For what on Earth, someone commits such idiotic hostage
5. What was the exact purpose of it
6.The hostage taker couldn't even dream of growing magical wings and fly out of the cafe with the hostages
7. So what was the outcome of such action ? Just putting the hostage taker at risk of getting arrested and then harshest punishments ?
Come on wake up, you're watching the most perfect show evar written down for your simple minds. Go deeper down to the issues. There's much bigger plans for us.

Sorry, but are you really suggesting this hostage taking was staged by non-Muslims to discret Muslims?

Yeah, right and 911 was also an inside job. Keep on dreaming.

If it's not white then it's black ! Thank you, once again I'm attached by you to something that I have nothing in common with it. It's fucking disappointing!

911 is competently different story and who really talked about it ! No ! Unlike you guys I am not into generalizing and instead I am into analyzing every event separately regardless of where I came from and what is trying to b shoved to my fucking head.

Yes ! Suggesting,it means it's possible, maybe and I'm simply asking questions to evaluate the authenticy of things we know

I feel for the people trying to escape there shitty countries with there shitty religions and start a new life, but then instantly being bundled in to a the "terrorist" category and told to fuck off.

I myself see religion as a way to live, usually a way to live better and improve your life, sometimes a supernatural being is used as a tool to help. Even though religion is the cause of a lot conflict and war, it actually helps a lot of people out and saves peoples lives. It's easy to pass off religion as a bad thing, especially when all you here about in the media is the bad and hypocritical things that happen, you never hear about the good things like when people turn around there fucked up lives from, drug abuse, anger problems, and so on. Whether it's bull shit or not what they believe, it helped them change there lives and become better people.
Religions not always a bad thing, just saying.

Written by Guest on 16.12.2014 at 08:51

I feel for the people trying to escape there shitty countries with there shitty religions and start a new life, but then instantly being bundled in to a the "terrorist" category and told to fuck off.

I myself see religion as a way to live, usually a way to live better and improve your life, sometimes a supernatural being is used as a tool to help. Even though religion is the cause of a lot conflict and war, it actually helps a lot of people out and saves peoples lives. It's easy to pass off religion as a bad thing, especially when all you here about in the media is the bad and hypocritical things that happen, you never hear about the good things like when people turn around there fucked up lives from, drug abuse, anger problems, and so on. Whether it's bull shit or not what they believe, it helped them change there lives and become better people.
Religions not always a bad thing, just saying.

Shh. That kind of sensible talk will get you in trouble 'round here.