Migration Megathread

Dannyriver

Eric Cartman wrote: »

You would imagine by that logic that Jamaicans and Indians should be blowing up england en masse, or south africans. Or how about the terrorist problem the US have with the Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese ? , why is it that only countries with a majority islamic faith are insistent on this international revenge.

I thought we were talking about terrorists ....Which 'countries of majority islamic faith are insistent on International revenge'

Eric Cartman

Dannyriver wrote: »

I thought we were talking about terrorists ....Which 'countries of majority islamic faith are insistent on International revenge'

youre just being pedantic, you know i didn't mean everyone from those places, but its always a first or second gen migrant from one of those islamic countries. If it was 'revenge' for what happened to their countries then surely there would be evidence of many of these other countries radicalising and committing terrorist acts in the US and UK.

Dannyriver

Eric Cartman wrote: »

youre just being pedantic, you know i didn't mean everyone from those places, but its always a first or second gen migrant from one of those islamic countries. If it was 'revenge' for what happened to their countries then surely there would be evidence of many of these other countries radicalising and committing terrorist acts in the US and UK.

Im not talking about revenge, the US led coalition forces have a huge vested interest in majority Muslim countries in the middle east due to vital economic interests, its common knowledge for instance that they interfere continuously in the internal workings of these countries. Of course there ll be extremists who'll fight back. Do you think if western powers got out of the middle east that terrorism from Muslim extremists would still continue?

Eric Cartman

Dannyriver wrote: »

Im not talking about revenge, the US led coalition forces have a huge vested interest in majority Muslim countries in the middle east due to vital economic interests, its common knowledge for instance that they interfere continuously in the internal workings of these countries. Of course there ll be extremists who'll fight back. Do you think if western powers got out of the middle east that terrorism from Muslim extremists would still continue?

Absolutely yes.

I think a lot of it is fuelled from radical hate preachers and the mosques are where this is occuring, an interpretation (some of it correct, some twisted) of the qur'an by radical imams is to blame. Leaving the US aside, you have attacks on german christmas markets, malmo sweden has become crime riddled, some boroughs of east london have signs up saying 'sharia controlled zone' . This isnt to do with interference by the US in arab lands.

Dannyriver

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Absolutely yes.

So correct me if I'm wrong you don t see a connection between what the west has done in the middle east since world war 2 and the problems with extremist terrorism?

Ultimate Seduction

They kill in the name of the Religion not in revenge.

Eric Cartman

Dannyriver wrote: »

So correct me if I'm wrong you don t see a connection between what the west has done in the middle east since world war 2 and the problems with extremist terrorism?

I see a connection and fully believe that it has been a contributing factor, but I think the cat is out of the bag now, it may have begun as revenge for US interests in those countries but the target list has expanded to all 'christian' countries, the 'legitimate' reasons long forgotten by most. I don't think for one second that if all the americans left the middle east that it would stop a hate preacher in tower hamlets radicalising a bunch of 16 year old boys and telling them its ok to throw acid in the face of women or blow up a church.

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

and ofcourse it wasn't anyone, but there are outlets that called them 'easter worshippers' that are happy to call them 'muslims' when they are the victims. Media outlets have style guides and so those type of things should be consistent. In this case it feels like some either believed that them being christians was irrelevant or wilfully excluded it.

I heard reports they believed it was Jihadis too. I sensed no cover up in any way you describe. Sri Lanka has had bitter fighting.

Ultimate Seduction wrote: »

They kill in the name of the Religion not in revenge.

Not quite. They kill claiming the west is at war with Muslims. Sadly pretty much every nation uses patriotism or religion to lull people into killing when it's rarely anything to do with either patriotism or religion, (protecting country/freedom to worship) IMO.

Ultimate Seduction

Ultimate Seduction wrote: »

They kill in the name of the Religion not in revenge.

Interesting, but do they actually? For decades the British claimed the conflict in the North, and Ireland generally before it, was "religious". As far as I, and everybody I know, is concerned it has always been a colonial conflict, no matter how many times outsiders have conveniently claimed it to be beyond political solution by defining it as "religious".

Similarly, to what extent are these "Islamic fundamentalists" motivated by religious belief, and to what extent are they motivated by the desire for a scapegoat for the massive socio-economic inequalities, repression and backwardness of their societies? Undoubtedly, there will be the Paisleys of Islam, but are the majority of them in that category?

Eric Cartman

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I heard reports they believed it was Jihadis too. I sensed no cover up in any way you describe. Sri Lanka has had bitter fighting.



Not quite. They kill claiming the west is at war with Muslims. Sadly pretty much every nation uses patriotism or religion to lull people into killing when it's rarely anything to do with either patriotism or religion, (protecting country/freedom to worship) IMO.

Im not proclaiming a cover up by any stretch , Im saying that some media outlets when talking about islam , if theyre the victims make it headline worthy relevant, if theyre the perpetrators theyll use words like 'asian' , whereas with this story, the christians being victims was downplayed to 'easter worshipers' It changes the context of the story from an attack motivated by hate and intollerance to just some people killed just some people for some unknown reason, they might tread into it further on in the article, but in todays low attention span world, many would come away from reading it without knowing its a targetted attack on people of the christian faith on one of the most significant days in the christian calander.

splashuum

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

splashuum wrote: »

After the horrific attacks on Christians today, given the mass Muslim migration we have seen, should we be worried that that an Islamic attack of this magnitude could hit Europe sooner rather than later?

No

Why not? Have you any reason to give?

James Brown

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im not proclaiming a cover up by any stretch , Im saying that some media outlets when talking about islam , if theyre the victims make it headline worthy relevant, if theyre the perpetrators theyll use words like 'asian' , whereas with this story, the christians being victims was downplayed to 'easter worshipers' It changes the context of the story from an attack motivated by hate and intollerance to just some people killed just some people for some unknown reason, they might tread into it further on in the article, but in todays low attention span world, many would come away from reading it without knowing its a targetted attack on people of the christian faith on one of the most significant days in the christian calander.

That amounts to a suggestion of cover up IMO. Reporting on an event or criminal act should not mention the religion or occupation of those involved unless relevant. Trying to keep some kind of score on what amount of Muslims commit crimes is pointless unless the religion of the person is relevant to the act IMO. I'm not even sure putting Asian is relevant TBH. We have preconceptions built in sadly but journalism should be above it. For example, 'Junky hit by car', well he probably jumped in front of it etc.

Eric Cartman

Matt Barrett wrote: »

That amounts to a suggestion of cover up IMO. Reporting on an event or criminal act should not mention the religion or occupation of those involved unless relevant. Trying to keep some kind of score on what amount of Muslims commit crimes is pointless unless the religion of the person is relevant to the act IMO. I'm not even sure putting Asian is relevant TBH. We have preconceptions built in sadly but journalism should be above it. For example, 'Junky hit by car', well he probably jumped in front of it etc.

and Junky hit by car i think is relevant. Telling us that it was an islamic terrorist attack is relevant. We need to know which groups are committing the attacks so we can work at solving the issue, also gives a huge key to their motivations.

Kermit.de.frog

The heart of the problems lie in the Middle East and parts of North Africa. That is where we can only hope the answers are to come from.

We are dealing with a factory pumping out whole populations indoctrinated by a book the whole purpose of which is to keep societies backward and retard human progress. These people are then filtered through to the west.

The left will talk about multiculturalism and how it's great to have all this diversity.

Visit large parts of cities in the UK like Birmingham and Manchester, East London - you don't see diversity in these places, what you have is thin slivers of actual diversity but also what you see is entire communities taken over by Islam essentially. Anyone who has seen these places knows the disasterous effects in terms of unemployment, dereliction and the sense that you are certainly not in England anymore, it's deeply uncomfortable - it's like somewhere lifted from Iran or Pakistan. It's a surreal atmosphere.

With that you have the associated Islamic courts and the even more bizarre Muslim "patrols" lately in London...local self appointed religious police that go around at night making sure no one is offending the prophet essentially.

What's this all going to be like at the current rate in say, 50 years time?

I think the west has to tighten up it's immigration processes but also start putting enormous pressure on these societies to start reforming.

Is that possible? I don't know but something has to start changing and that answer is in the Middle East.

MrFresh

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

The heart of the problems lie in the Middle East and parts of North Africa. That is where we can only hope the answers are to come from.

We are dealing with a factory pumping out whole populations indoctrinated by a book the whole purpose of which is to keep societies backward and retard human progress. These people are then filtered through to the west.

The left will talk about multiculturalism and how it's great to have all this diversity.

Visit large parts of cities in the UK like Birmingham and Manchester, East London - you don't see diversity in these places, what you have is thin slivers of actual diversity but also what you see is entire communities taken over by Islam essentially. Anyone who has seen these places knows the disasterous effects in terms of unemployment, dereliction and the sense that you are certainly not in England anymore, it's deeply uncomfortable - it's like somewhere lifted from Iran or Pakistan. It's a surreal atmosphere.

With that you have the associated Islamic courts and the even more bizarre Muslim "patrols" lately in London...local self appointed religious police that go around at night making sure no one is offending the prophet essentially.

What's this all going to be like at the current rate in say, 50 years time?

I think the west has to tighten up it's immigration processes but also start putting enormous pressure on these societies to start reforming.

Is that possible? I don't know but something has to start changing and that answer is in the Middle East.

You think that's bad? When I was a wee lad the nuns use to go around the disco making sure the girls weren't kissing anyone. Look, I get that you are uncomfortable and feel out of your element when you encounter other cultures, and you obviously aren't alone, but that's exactly why we need a bit of diversity. Being out of your comfort zone and being exposed to other cultures isn't actually a bad thing.

Kermit.de.frog

MrFresh wrote: »

You think that's bad? When I was a wee lad the nuns use to go around the disco making sure the girls weren't kissing anyone. Look, I get that you are uncomfortable and feel out of your element when you encounter other cultures, and you obviously aren't alone, but that's exactly why we need a bit of diversity. Being out of your comfort zone and being exposed to other cultures isn't actually a bad thing.

I think you have totally and intentionally misread what I typed.

Sand

The comparison between the reporting on Christchurch and these attacks is fairly telling. On one hand, the ethnic identity and stated aims of the attacker are stressed and the widest responsibility for the attack is established. On the other, the ethnic identity and stated aims of the attacker(s) is diminished, and we are repeatedly reminded that an entire group cannot be held responsible.

As for Islamic terrorism being rooted in western actions in the middle east, I find the logic problematic. In the current time, Europe has a homegrown Islamic insurgency with young men who are nominally British, French, Belgian, Dutch and German carrying out horrific atrocities on their fellow British, French, Belgian, Swedish and German countrymen. I don't see how it can be claimed that Muslims are just as British (for example) as any indigenous British person, yet so different in their priorities as to be motivated to murder their fellow countrymen by what happens in a foreign country. Either they are or they aren't.

MrFresh wrote: »

You think that's bad? When I was a wee lad the nuns use to go around the disco making sure the girls weren't kissing anyone. Look, I get that you are uncomfortable and feel out of your element when you encounter other cultures, and you obviously aren't alone, but that's exactly why we need a bit of diversity. Being out of your comfort zone and being exposed to other cultures isn't actually a bad thing.

That view is so uncomplicated by reality as to be almost childlike. Being exposed to other cultures was actually a bad thing for Louisa Vesterager Jespersen and Maren Ueland.

Deleted User wrote: »

Interesting, but do they actually? For decades the British claimed the conflict in the North, and Ireland generally before it, was "religious". As far as I, and everybody I know, is concerned it has always been a colonial conflict, no matter how many times outsiders have conveniently claimed it to be beyond political solution by defining it as "religious".

Similarly, to what extent are these "Islamic fundamentalists" motivated by religious belief, and to what extent are they motivated by the desire for a scapegoat for the massive socio-economic inequalities, repression and backwardness of their societies? Undoubtedly, there will be the Paisleys of Islam, but are the majority of them in that category?

It may not have been religious in nature, but it was (and is) certainly an ethnic conflict. Mere political differences doesn't explain the savagery and sheer hatred inherent to various atrocities which were carried out by both sides.

Ultimate Seduction

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1120394483445710848?s=19

Ultimate Seduction

Anyone who's not happy about the murders is "right wing" ?

MrFresh

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I think you have totally and intentionally misread what I typed.

No, I think I read it just fine. You made a good point about change in the Middle East at the start and end but in the middle you went on a good old fearmongering rant which is what I addressed.

Midlife

I see were back to bashing 2.5 billion people for the actions of a few. Good old conformation bias keeping this thread going.

Muslims are not violent. People can be.

If sustained migration and some attacks are enough to have clowns beamoaning the 'loss of our identity' or 'the end of ourselves and civilisation as we know it', try imagining what the far right here would be doing if the middle East for the last 40 years had been overthrowing Western Governments, invading countries based on lies, propping up puppet states, all the while cashing in on our most valuable natural resource.

If you genuinely have a problem with Islam and the actions of Islamic countries and people, think of the argument you'd have against the West if you came from the middle East.

Sit back and look at the narrative they have in terms of a war on culture and race and tell me that Western Christians, if they had experienced the lives of Iraqis or Afghanis or Saudis or Syrians or Iranians, would ALL be full of peace and forgiveness and we wouldn't have any terror cells killing in the name of their civilisation/religion.

Islam doesn't own terror attacks the same way Christians and Westerners don't own the actions that happened in Christchurch. It's just violent men on the fringes of society finding a reason to committ acts of terror. Young Islamic men have a far better narrative so they get more of them.

Help!!!!

MrFresh wrote: »

You think that's bad? When I was a wee lad the nuns use to go around the disco making sure the girls weren't kissing anyone. Look, I get that you are uncomfortable and feel out of your element when you encounter other cultures, and you obviously aren't alone, but that's exactly why we need a bit of diversity. Being out of your comfort zone and being exposed to other cultures isn't actually a bad thing.

Theres plenty of cultures & religions in Ireland & Europe who live peacefully & dont have members running off to fight for foreign terrorist organisations
Over 100 left to fight for ISIS while theres a load more still here, Ireland has the 2nd highest jihadi rate per capita
Do you really think Ireland will be immune to the 'culturally enrichment' the likes of Germany,France,Sweden,Belgium.Denmark etc have witnessed?
You continue to make out people are racist/bigots when they have genuine concerns about who is coming into the country.
Have you ever lived outside of Ireland?

Midlife

Help!!!! wrote: »

Theres plenty of cultures & religions in Ireland & Europe who live peacefully & dont have members running off to fight for foreign terrorist organisations
Over 100 left to fight for ISIS while theres a load more still here, Ireland has the 2nd highest jihadi rate per capita
Do you really think Ireland will be immune to the 'culturally enrichment' the likes of Germany,France,Sweden,Belgium.Denmark etc have witnessed?
You continue to make out people are racist/bigots when they have genuine concerns about who is coming into the country.
Have you ever lived outside of Ireland?

What other foreign terror organisations are there like ISIS?

Are you saying ISIS only formed because of Islam?

Help!!!!

Midlife wrote: »

I see were back to bashing 2.5 billion people for the actions of a few. Good old conformation bias keeping this thread going.

Muslims are not violent. People can be.

If sustained migration and some attacks are enough to have clowns beamoaning the 'loss of our identity' or 'the end of ourselves and civilisation as we know it', try imagining what the far right here would be doing if the middle East for the last 40 years had been overthrowing Western Governments, invading countries based on lies, propping up puppet states, all the while cashing in on our most valuable natural resource.

If you genuinely have a problem with Islam and the actions of Islamic countries and people, think of the argument you'd have against the West if you came from the middle East.

Sit back and look at the narrative they have in terms of a war on culture and race and tell me that Western Christians, if they had experienced the lives of Iraqis or Afghanis or Saudis or Syrians or Iranians, would ALL be full of peace and forgiveness and we wouldn't have any terror cells killing in the name of their civilisation/religion.

You seem to forget that a lot more of the people in those countries you point out were killed by there own people whether by dictators or my another sect.
Christians in those countries have almost been wiped out. Week after week theres an attack on Christians
If you actually know anything about Islam you would know that its been spread through war. Dont forget their prophet to them, is the 'perfect man' so fighting & killing in the name of Islam comes easy. Islamic scriptures call on Muslims to kill the Kuffar.
Imams in mosques all over the world preach the destruction of the west & many more want the west to be a caliphate
So no you cannot blame the west for all the problems in those countries

Midlife

Sorry, should have probably not mentioned Iranians there as they haven't been involved in much but now Trump is declaring them terrorists, backing Saudi wars against them in Yemen, sanctioning anyone who buys oil from them and ripping up Nuclear deals with them. The narrative would be 'this is what happens when you negotiate with Westerners'. I find it ironic that those who feel under threat in this thread would be arguing equally as fervently in the other direction.

Midlife

Help!!!! wrote: »

You seem to forget that a lot more of the people in those countries you point out were killed by there own people whether by dictators or my another sect.
Christians in those countries have almost been wiped out. Week after week theres an attack on Christians
If you actually know anything about Islam you would know that its been spread through war. Dont forget their prophet to them, is the 'perfect man' so fighting & killing in the name of Islam comes easy. Islamic scriptures call on Muslims to kill the Kuffar.
Imams in mosques all over the world preach the destruction of the west & many more want the west to be a caliphate
So no you cannot blame the west for all the problems in those countries

I'm not blaming the West for all the problems, you're not reading my post and that's a massive strawman.

Also, if you want an adult response, don't say things like

Help!!!! wrote: »

If you actually know anything

Help!!!!

Midlife wrote: »

What other foreign terror organisations are there like ISIS?

Are you saying ISIS only formed because of Islam?

Well there are 148 Islamic terror organisations around the world

ISIS wanted to establish a caliphate so yeah it has to do with Islam

Midlife

Help!!!! wrote: »

Well there are 148 Islamic terror organisations around the world

ISIS wanted to establish a caliphate so yeah it has to do with Islam

To repeat my question

Are you saying ISIS was only formed because of Islam?

MrFresh

Help!!!! wrote: »

Theres plenty of cultures & religions in Ireland & Europe who live peacefully & dont have members running off to fight for foreign terrorist organisations
Over 100 left to fight for ISIS while theres a load more still here, Ireland has the 2nd highest jihadi rate per capita
Do you really think Ireland will be immune to the 'culturally enrichment' the likes of Germany,France,Sweden,Belgium.Denmark etc have witnessed?
You continue to make out people are racist/bigots when they have genuine concerns about who is coming into the country.
Have you ever lived outside of Ireland?

But in reality,

This however still puts the figure at 0.07% of the overall number of Muslims in Ireland.

Help!!!!

Midlife wrote: »

I'm not blaming the West for all the problems, you're not reading my post and that's a massive strawman.

Also, if you want an adult response, don't say things like

OK so take away the terrorism part of Islam
50% approx of British Muslims think homosexuality should be illegal
Here in Ireland we have slowly gotten free of religious institutions & have moved forwards with regards the LGBTQ society now we are bringing in people who are fervently into their religion who are less tolerant. Then theres how they are taught to view women from the west or women who do not dress modestly.
If there was no problems in other countries I would have no problems but I lived in London long enough to see the change in the last couple of decades