The Hazards of Belief

silverharp

robindch wrote: »

Europe is not in a depression, long-term or otherwise.

its something

smacl

So significantly improved from recent years then

silverharp

smacl wrote: »

So significantly improved from recent years then

whats an intern again?, they didn't have that back in my day I should get "laughing man" to do one about young people working for nothing :pac:

smacl

silverharp wrote: »

whats an intern again?, they didn't have that back in my day I should get "laughing man" to do one about young people working for nothing :pac:

Back in my day, most people emigrated to get work, last recession many did too. A common joke was to ask the last person leaving to please turn out the lights.

silverharp wrote: »

All Im saying is that Europe or Ireland needs to be picky, letting a million Chinese or people from India into Europe is a different proposition to letting a million Muslims many of which are poorly educated with numbers of people that are illiterate, combined with a religion which is pro segregation

Being a Muslim does not equate to being poor or uneducated, any more than being Chinese equates to being literate or hard working. You're using a clear association fallacy that just doesn't stack up. Islam does have lots of nasties associated with it, particularly in relation to gender bias, but then so does Catholicism albeit to a much less extent in this day and age. If you're looking to set immigration policy on the basis of skills that are beneficial to society that's one thing, but doing it on the basis of religion or ethnicity seems well dodgy. Maybe just run with "No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish".

silverharp

smacl wrote: »

Back in my day, most people emigrated to get work, last recession many did too. A common joke was to ask the last person leaving to please turn out the lights.

sure and Ireland was a basket case, the rest of Europe was happy out

smacl wrote: »

Being a Muslim does not equate to being poor or uneducated, any more than being Chinese equates to being literate or hard working. You're using a clear association fallacy that just doesn't stack up. Islam does have lots of nasties associated with it, particularly in relation to gender bias, but then so does Catholicism albeit to a much less extent in this day and age. If you're looking to set immigration policy on the basis of skills that are beneficial to society that's one thing, but doing it on the basis of religion or ethnicity seems well dodgy. Maybe just run with "No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish".

statistically it means that they will perform worse as a group than migrants from say india or china and that these problems don't go away with second generation. Where is there an Irish "Molenbeek" in England?
If you think to single out Muslims is dodgy then Im happy with a point based model based on educational attainment and it might avoid ghettos and extremism in the future. I just see it as avoiding structural problems in the future or in the present ie someone coming here should be no more likely to go on welfare or be involved in crime based on the national average , by all accounts Sweden has failed "my test" where almost half the unemployed in Sweden are not native Swedes, so in some way this has lowered or will lower the quality of life in some way there for everyone

smacl

silverharp wrote: »

sure and Ireland was a basket case, the rest of Europe was happy out

But as with your internships, none of this was a result of immigration so is entirely moot.

Where is there an Irish "Molenbeek" in England?

Not entirely sure what you're asking there, but if it was somewhere the provos could lie low after a bombing, I'm guessing Brixton. Historically, there were a lot of Irish ghettos in the UK, and we suffered significant discrimination. These days, many Irish in the UK are high earning professionals, and are well on the way to colonising Islington.

If you think to single out Muslims is dodgy then Im happy with a point based model based on educational attainment and it might avoid ghettos and extremism in the future. I just see it as avoiding structural problems in the future or in the present ie someone coming here should be no more likely to go on welfare or be involved in crime based on the national average , by all accounts Sweden has failed "my test" where almost half the unemployed in Sweden are not native Swedes, so in some way this has lowered or will lower the quality of life in some way there for everyone

I think we allow immigration for various reasons. One such case is allowing entrance to a certain number of refugees from a war on humanitarian grounds, which is rather different from allowing economic immigrants and hence deserves different rules. Very difficult to know how to handle many thousands of people who are quite literally going to die on your doorstep if you don't look after them, and you have nowhere to repatriate them to. Adding the prospect that a tiny proportion may well be murderous terrorists out to cause mayhem given half a chance doesn't help matters. You also have to ask are we in any way complicit in creating the war that led them to their current destitute state? In my opinion the whole thing stinks, and don't know any easy answers. Like yourself, I've no interest in seeing the rise of Islam in Europe at any level, and feel we are only now escaping religious repression of our own and the last thing we need is a new source of zealots. At the same time, we have a responsibility to those that arrive on our shores in need of help, and think we could absorb a fair number of people locally here and in Europe without it impinging significantly on the culture or economy.

What do you think? A number of thousands of people arrive on your shores in a sinking boat with no other home to go to, no food, and and nowhere to stay. What do you do with them exactly?

Hotblack Desiato

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

My God , posts attacking Christianity gets lots of thanks.
Posts critical of Islam gets 0 thanks.

False premise. Look at the "funny, haha side of religion" thread, and this recent post in particular:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100641031&postcount=4508

Hotblack Desiato

smacl wrote: »

But would the west be encountering terrorism on its own soil if it hadn't bombed the living daylights out of various foreign powers ostensibly for the good of the indigenous people, but as more likely to protect its own oil interests?

Of course.

recedite

smacl wrote: »

..this is exactly the type of polarisation the actual terrorists look for...

smacl wrote: »

My firm belief, as is the belief of many, is that ISIS is working hard to inspire increased xenophobia against the larger Muslim population in order to swell its own power base, and fragment the enemy.

Where do you get this nonsense from? So every time there is an Islamic inspired atrocity, Europeans should go out and embrace Muslims even more? Give them more concessions? Tell the young women of Germany to stop wearing short skirts and stop going out unescorted at night?
Islamic terrorism is perpetrated against the west, its secular values, and everything it stands for. They don't want to polarise western society, they want it either destroyed or Islamicised.

smacl

recedite wrote: »

Where do you get this nonsense from?

Harvard, for The Law of Group Polarization and the TRI for Perspectives in Terrorism. Basically, after any ISIS attack we see increased anti-Islamic sentiment which is typically directed at local Muslim communities. As a result, Muslims who played no part in the attack feel discriminated against, and are more sympathetic to extremist views. Thus you get polarisation resulting from terrorism, where both sides are pushed further towards extreme positions as a result. This well documented as a terrorist strategy and not exactly rocket science.

So every time there is an Islamic inspired atrocity, Europeans should go out and embrace Muslims even more? Give them more concessions? Tell the young women of Germany to stop wearing short skirts and stop going out unescorted at night?
Islamic terrorism is perpetrated against the west, its secular values, and everything it stands for. They don't want to polarise western society, they want it either destroyed or Islamicised.

Any you call me out for spouting nonsense, c'mon now. In my opinion, the broader Muslim clerical hierarchy needs to make its position known as being one that entirely vilifies and condemns ISIS as a terrorist group who represent no-one only themselves. There have been some moves, as per this and this, but from my understanding these have primarily come from countries where Islam is a minority religion and is feeling under pressure. Marginalising large existing Muslim communities in countries such as France and Germany is just going to lead to increased tension, and assuming ethnic cleansing isn't exactly on the table either, better integrations seems like the only option.

Hotblack Desiato

robindch wrote: »

Last night, Gay Byrne revisited the unutterably sad case of Ann Lovett.

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/gay-byrne-says-death-schoolgirl-8584598

Anybody see this?

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Should have it recorded but the saorview box has a mind of its own most of the time

It's on RTE player now anyway (although not showing up in latest episodes, for some reason)

http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/last-orders-with-gay-byrne-30004163/10608046/

Typically, the saorview box did record it, the problem was the recording stopped after two minutes :mad:

Tried watching it on the RTE player last night and it just kept buffering the whole time, unwatchable. I've got fibre broadband so that's not it... wonder if there'll be a repeat.

smacl

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Tried watching it on the RTE player last night and it just kept buffering the whole time, unwatchable. I've got fibre broadband so that's not it... wonder if there'll be a repeat.

Just checked it now and seems fine, albeit with lots of unskippable adds. Not a huge fan of Gaybo so will leave it at that.

silverharp

smacl wrote: »

Not entirely sure what you're asking there, but if it was somewhere the provos could lie low after a bombing, I'm guessing Brixton. Historically, there were a lot of Irish ghettos in the UK, and we suffered significant discrimination. These days, many Irish in the UK are high earning professionals, and are well on the way to colonising Islington.

but there you go within 20 or 30 years the irish had spread out and the irish that followed in the 80's and 90's had wanted to do their own thing. Letting potentially millions of muslims in now will just reinforce the ghetto culture and be more fuel for Islam in europe

smacl wrote: »

I think we allow immigration for various reasons. One such case is allowing entrance to a certain number of refugees from a war on humanitarian grounds, which is rather different from allowing economic immigrants and hence deserves different rules. Very difficult to know how to handle many thousands of people who are quite literally going to die on your doorstep if you don't look after them, and you have nowhere to repatriate them to. Adding the prospect that a tiny proportion may well be murderous terrorists out to cause mayhem given half a chance doesn't help matters. You also have to ask are we in any way complicit in creating the war that led them to their current destitute state? In my opinion the whole thing stinks, and don't know any easy answers. Like yourself, I've no interest in seeing the rise of Islam in Europe at any level, and feel we are only now escaping religious repression of our own and the last thing we need is a new source of zealots. At the same time, we have a responsibility to those that arrive on our shores in need of help, and think we could absorb a fair number of people locally here and in Europe without it impinging significantly on the culture or economy.

What do you think? A number of thousands of people arrive on your shores in a sinking boat with no other home to go to, no food, and and nowhere to stay. What do you do with them exactly?

It would be much easier and cheaper to deal with these people by setting up safe zones in Syria or Libya etc. and manage it from there. There are some horrendous costs for countries like Sweden and Germany and in the bigger scheme of things an unmanaged movement of people and a welfare system is incompatible. I'd love to know what all the open borders anarchists have in mind? :pac:

smacl

silverharp wrote: »

but there you go within 20 or 30 years the irish had spread out and the irish that followed in the 80's and 90's had wanted to do their own thing. Letting potentially millions of muslims in now will just reinforce the ghetto culture and be more fuel for Islam in europe

Not sure how the second half of what you're saying follows the first. Because the Irish in the UK are by an large integrated into the middle classes, Muslim immigrants won't be? Reads as a non sequitur to me.

It would be much easier and cheaper to deal with these people by setting up safe zones in Syria or Libya etc. and manage it from there. There are some horrendous costs for countries like Sweden and Germany and in the bigger scheme of things an unmanaged movement of people and a welfare system is incompatible. I'd love to know what all the open borders anarchists have in mind? :pac:

I agree entirely. Free and unlimited immigration into Europe for anyone that shows up on the border is neither desirable nor sustainable, but that still does not answer the question of what to do with the boat loads of people that do arrive from a war zone without a home to which you can repatriate them? The problem herein lies in the fact that for all of the many similar large scale humanitarian crises, the victims have never had the wherewithal to make it too our collective door step, so we could chuck a few bob to a charity and turn a blind eye happy in the knowledge that we'd helped out in some way. The problem as I see it with this crisis, is that we don't have the luxury of being able to ignore it as someone else's problem. I think if there were safe places that these people could go to in Syria or Libya, with some chance of setting up a new life, they wouldn't be coming to Europe in the first place. For unwanted economic immigrants, send them packing. For refugees arriving on our doorstep with no hope of survival without help, I'd ask is it incumbent on us to provide that help? My gut reaction is that it is, so the question becomes how?

Hotblack Desiato

There already are safe places in Turkey, but that's not good enough for them.

smacl

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

There already are safe places in Turkey, but that's not good enough for them.

And Turkey is using the fact that it is taking on so many refugees as a bargaining chip to allow free movement of Turkish citizens in Europe, so not exactly slowing down Islamification. Specifically, Turkey is using this prior to letting in refugees who have landed on European shores. Personally, I reckon Turkey is a total mess at the moment, and would not be so keen on them joining Europe. YMMV.

PopePalpatine

Two cases of paralysis have been attributed to polio in north-eastern Nigeria. If that area sounds familiar, that's because Boko Haram are in charge of large parts of that area, and they don't like vaccines.

recedite

smacl wrote: »

Harvard, for The Law of Group Polarization and the TRI for Perspectives in Terrorism.

Your links do not back up your assertions. "Group polarisation" refers to the "echo chamber" effect. For example the the self-reinforcing belief expressed in the media that Brexit would never happen, or that Donald Trump was never a contender.
It has nothing to do with the following...

smacl wrote: »

Basically, after any ISIS attack we see increased anti-Islamic sentiment which is typically directed at local Muslim communities.

Even though that is true. But that is only a form of collateral damage inflicted on the Muslim community by the radicals, while attacking their primary target which is secular western society.
Similar to when the provos allowed the Birmingham 6 to get arrested and jailed. That was not their intention. It just happened as an unintended consequence, and they didn't care too much about it one way or the other. Collateral damage.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

For example the the self-reinforcing belief expressed in the media that Brexit would never happen [...]

Not sure what media you were consuming, but the majority of the opinion pieces I read were fearful of the possible outcome - anybody remember "Project Fear"? And I don't recall a single factual article suggesting that the result was a foregone thing.

You might be mixing up the approach to news by reputable providers with the approach to news from outlets like Brietbart etc.

PopePalpatine

Anjem Choudhary has been convicted after being caught pledging allegiance to Daesh.

Yep, this guy:

silverharp

Im not sure if this is a hazard of belief or hazard of student debt ;-)


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/student-loan-debt-may-halt-new-york-womans-dream-to-become-a-nun/

NEW YORK -- A young woman wants to be a nun, but has been told she can't until she pays off her debts.

As CBS New York reported, a fashion designer by day, 28-year-old Alida Taylor said her calling to become a nun was not always clear.

After graduating from the University of Louisiana with a degree in fashion, Taylor landed a job with a Broadway costume designer in New York City.

"When I moved to the city I had all these desires. I wanted to have a career, a family, and marriage, but your heart begins to shift," she said.

It shifted towards God. Taylor hopes to join the Sisters of Life Convent on the Upper West Side in September, but she's been told she has to pay off her student debt first.

"That financial debt, having that be resolved allows her to freely enter into her vocation," Sr. Mariae Agnus Dei of the Sisters of Life said.

recedite

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Anjem Choudhary has been convicted after being caught pledging allegiance to Daesh.

A catholic can live a life of sin but still get into paradise by repenting just before he dies. For muslims its not so simple. The surest way to paradise is through jihad. Kill an infidel, and he takes your place in hell, while you go straight to paradise, where the pretty little houris await.
Choudhary, being a bit of a coward, did not go to fight himself, but his Al Muhajiroun network was probably the biggest IS recruiter in Europe and apparently sent around 300 others to fight for the Caliphate. So he can rest assured that his own form of jihad has been "successful" if that's the word.

silverharp

:pac:


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/train-derailment-at-paddington-may-have-been-result-of-driver-fasting-for-ramadan-a3324216.html

Train derailment at Paddington 'may have been caused by driver fasting for Ramadan'

Rail safety chiefs have investigated whether a train derailment at Paddington station was caused because the driver had been fasting for Ramadan.

The low-speed derailment, which took place on Thursday June 16 after the driver passed a signal on red, blocked the lines resulting in huge delays for commuters at the height of the home-bound rush-hour.

As the train came off the tracks, it hit a huge mast carrying overhead cables bringing them down and closing Paddington for the rest of the evening.

There were no passengers on board and the driver was unhurt but some lines did not open until the following Sunday.

recedite

Its impossible to prove how much sleep a person is getting, but if this guy was routinely having his dinner at 2.30am I would seriously doubt that he was getting the 7 hours sleep as claimed.

And all because a religious/cultural ritual has been inappropriately transported from a hot middle eastern country where it is perfectly feasible to sleep during the day and socialise after dark, to a northern latitude where it hardly gets dark at all during midsummer.

silverharp

recedite wrote: »

Its impossible to prove how much sleep a person is getting, but if this guy was routinely having his dinner at 2.30am I would seriously doubt that he was getting the 7 hours sleep as claimed.

And all because a religious/cultural ritual has been inappropriately transported from a hot middle eastern country where it is perfectly feasible to sleep during the day and socialise after dark, to a northern latitude where it hardly gets dark at all during midsummer.

it is worrying , doctor, pilot , taxi driver and plenty others. Maybe they should ask permission from their employer if they want to do a Ramadan fast?

looksee

silverharp wrote: »

it is worrying , doctor, pilot , taxi driver and plenty others. Maybe they should ask permission from their employer if they want to do a Ramadan fast?

While I agree to some extent, it is difficult to know what can be done about it. We already have hospital doctors working ridiculous hours, as dictated by their employers. Is there legislation preventing someone turning up for work after a night with a new baby, or someone with a hangover? Probably there is for pilots, but there are many other situations where you just have to hope that the person with responsibility for your life is fully alert and well.

silverharp

looksee wrote: »

While I agree to some extent, it is difficult to know what can be done about it. We already have hospital doctors working ridiculous hours, as dictated by their employers. Is there legislation preventing someone turning up for work after a night with a new baby, or someone with a hangover? Probably there is for pilots, but there are many other situations where you just have to hope that the person with responsibility for your life is fully alert and well.

nobody objects to a company having a no drug rule. It would seem reasonable where your job could kill someone that there is a no fasting rule whether its for religious reasons or diet fad. Also there have been car accidents attributed to Ramadan fasting so it might be worth considering in terms of driving and insurance rules.

mikhail

silverharp wrote: »

it is worrying , doctor, pilot , taxi driver and plenty others. Maybe they should ask permission from their employer if they want to do a Ramadan fast?

As far as I know, Muslims are not obliged to fast during Ramadan if they are in such a position. That said, they're not a single monoloithic group, and these things vary between factions.

bnt

In his latest podcast, What do Jihadists really want?, Sam Harris reads directly from the ISIS magazine Dabiq, and what it says in there is horrifying without any need to exaggerate or editorialise. I haven't read the magazine myself, but you can download a PDF copy if you look for it. I think I'll skip it, since (SH says) it contains some horrifying pictures, including a decapitation with "nothing left to the imagination". The words are sufficient to paint a picture. As he points out, the way the magazine is so well written and produced says that it isn't the work of idiots, but there are some very smart and competent people in ISIS who really believe in their mission. :eek:

Michael OBrien

bnt wrote: »

In his latest podcast, What do Jihadists really want?, Sam Harris reads directly from the ISIS magazine Dabiq, and what it says in there is horrifying without any need to exaggerate or editorialise. I haven't read the magazine myself, but you can download a PDF copy if you look for it. I think I'll skip it, since (SH says) it contains some horrifying pictures, including a decapitation with "nothing left to the imagination". The words are sufficient to paint a picture. As he points out, the way the magazine is so well written and produced says that it isn't the work of idiots, but there are some very smart and competent people in ISIS who really believe in their mission. :eek:

I read that segment by Sam. The overarching motives of ISIS match very closely to the literal Islamic doctrines indeed. None of it is surprising. They have been telling the west their motives from the beginning. The west have been lying to themselves about it, at least in public.