Sweden Riots

SnakePlissken

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

SnakePlissken wrote: »

So now you're arguing with the Oxford English Dictionary... I can't... you're on a windup surely? There's only one race? Fcuk me.


RACE

NOUN

Each of the major divisions of humankind, having distinct physical characteristics.

‘people of all races, colours, and creeds’

Homo sapiens. If you can get me the official name of another race, I'll concede this point.

It's important we acknowledge what the good dr is attempting here.

In every thread pertaining to Islam it has been demonstrated all too easily by the same few posters to pull the race card in order to stem debate.

When asked, if this were true, and if critics of Islam were simply racists, why then are there no threads critical of Hindus, Buddhists, ot Taoists?

Now they've become frustrated, denied of the ability to draw the race card, they can no longer debate in a logical manner. So what to do?

Simple, as demonstrated above, if pulling the race card no longer works... change the accepted meaning of the word "RACE".

Roger Hassenforder

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Homo sapiens. If you can get me the official name of another race, I'll concede this point.

You keep referring to species

blinding

Why do Muslims move to non Muslim countries when it is obvious that they want to live in Muslim Countries .

If I moved to a predominately Muslim Country and would not accept their Culture , Laws , Social Norms and stirred up trouble . How would I get on ?

Roger Hassenforder

Perhaps if the good doctor could advise why they dont shake hands in some Islamic* countries...
Why the custom,? male to male is fine, but not male to female...

(*I say Islamic, because ive often shaken hands with Muslims (both) male and female with no apparent issues). So it doesn't seem to be a Muslim thing?

blinding

Bootlegger wrote: »

You wouldn't have western liberals bending over backwards to justify your ****ty behaviour, that's for sure.

They’d tell me to integrate and get on with it or move to a Country where I would fit it and integrate .

Danzy

The last Police Commissioner, Dan Eliasson begged society and the State to help the police as there are large and growing areas where the rule of law cannot be enforced.

Sweden is largely a safe country but in places where Swedish values and outlook hold dominance.

In areas with more diverse views, they are rapidly becoming dangerous hellholes.

Add in the severe pressure on the Social model they have placed on it in the last decade by bringing in so many then, when that starts to crack it will cause a major crisis.

600k refugees in the last 5 years, in a country of ten million. How was that ever going to work but especially in a State with a Social model, in a cut throat free market one, like 1900s America, it may have had a chance but even then.

They did it to themselves.

For some reason most of the modern Left adopt a ultra far right economic view on migration. They label it solidarity, etc etc but economically it is a policy that was the preserve of extreme Libertarians like the Koch brothers.

It is a position incompatible with the State have any control, support or provide direction in society. It is far beyond Thatcherism, yet it is the left who are most vocal for it.

Danzy

jmreire wrote: »

When in Muslim company, be it in their own Country, or your's, when greeting a Muslim woman, you wait for her to offer her hand first. If she doesn't, then don't offer her your's. Some of them will shake hands with you, and some will not. But thats the way it works.

No, offer the hand, irregardless, same as I do to all people, well in my own country anyway.

In theirs I would respect their norms, even If i see them as ultra reactionary.

enricoh

The UK is home to 25000 islamic jihadists. Never mind them not integrating or torching cars in riots, these guys are itching to attack the country that took them in.
No doubt this is in the pipeline for Sweden.
But hey folks our resident ostrich with his head in the sand fuzzenstein knows the name of the lad that does his kebabs n he's sound so it's all good!

rossie1977

tabby aspreme wrote: »

What would happen a westerner in Saudi if they were seen in a public place eating and drinking during Ramadan

Thats a law though not a custom. It's a crime for anyone to consume food in public during the daytime during Ramadan.

I was in UAE last year during Ramadan and they do have areas sectioned off in hotels, shopping centres etc for non-muslims to eat/drink during the day.

Danzy

rossie1977 wrote: »

Thats a law though not a custom. It's a crime for anyone to consume food in public during the daytime during Ramadan.

I was in UAE last year during Ramadan and they do have areas sectioned off in hotels, shopping centres etc for non-muslims to eat/drink during the day.

His point still stands though, you referred to something else.

In a public area, to eat and drink is a dangerous business and you'd hope for the law to be the first to get to you.

blinding

Why can’y Muslims just get along with everyone else ?

The_Kew_Tour

Sweden looked like a Hell zone last week. How anyone can defend it is mind boggling

Franz Von Peppercorn

Danzy wrote: »

The last Police Commissioner, Dan Eliasson begged society and the State to help the police as there are large and growing areas where the rule of law cannot be enforced.

Sweden is largely a safe country but in places where Swedish values and outlook hold dominance.

In areas with more diverse views, they are rapidly becoming dangerous hellholes.

Add in the severe pressure on the Social model they have placed on it in the last decade by bringing in so many then, when that starts to crack it will cause a major crisis.

600k refugees in the last 5 years, in a country of ten million. How was that ever going to work but especially in a State with a Social model, in a cut throat free market one, like 1900s America, it may have had a chance but even then.

They did it to themselves.

For some reason most of the modern Left adopt a ultra far right economic view on migration. They label it solidarity, etc etc but economically it is a policy that was the preserve of extreme Libertarians like the Koch brothers.

It is a position incompatible with the State have any control, support or provide direction in society. It is far beyond Thatcherism, yet it is the left who are most vocal for it.

The old labour left was hostile to illegal immigration.

Caser Chavez was a union leader in the US. Born of an immigrant family in poverty as a hired hand on a farm, he set up a Union and became a fierce defender of rights of American workers, and legal immigrants. But he opposed illegal immigration as an attack on wages.

Here’s a right wing hatchet job on him from the American spectator.

https://spectator.org/59956_cesar-chavez-anti-immigration-his-union-core/

The fact is that capital always wants no borders, for both capital and labour, and thus produces whatever ideologies the masses need to hear to hide the materialist plunder. In the 19C the surplus population was in Europe so capital needed white migration (ie colonialism). This was sold as a civilizing mission, and the people who opposed the migration were savage, backwards, nationalist and didn’t really have a culture to defend anyway.

In the 21st C the white population isn’t replacing itself, so capital needs migration to white countries. This is sold as an anti racist civilised mission, and the people who oppose it are savage nationalists who don’t really have a culture anyway. (What is white culture? Does Europe really exist? What did white culture ever produce?).

As always the reaction is nationalism.

Danzy

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The old labour left was hostile to illegal immigration.

Caser Chavez was a union leader in the US. Born of an immigrant family in poverty as a hired hand on a farm, he set up a Union and became a fierce defender of rights of American workers, and legal immigrants. But he opposed illegal immigration as an attack on wages.

Here’s a right wing hatchet job on him from the American spectator.

https://spectator.org/59956_cesar-chavez-anti-immigration-his-union-core/

The fact is that capital always wants no borders, for both capital and labour and produces whatever ideologies the masses need to hear to hide the materialist plunder. In the 19C the surplus population was in Europe so capital needed white migration (ie colonialism). This was sold as a civilizing mission, and the people who opposed the migration were savage, backwards, nationalist and didn’t really have a culture to defend anyway.

In the 21st C the white population isn’t replacing itself, so capital needs migration to white countries. This is sold as an anti racist civilised mission, and the people who oppose it are savage nationalists who don’t really have a culture anyway. (What is white culture? Does Europe really exist? What did white culture ever produce?).

As always the reaction is nationalism.

In previous generations, the Left, or its manifestation of the time was largely made up of the Working Class or Peasantry.

For the last few decades, the Left has been dominated by the well to do and especially so in the radical activist Left.

So it is probably not surprising that it has convinced itself that a position which is radical capitalist in effect can be called Internationalist or solidarity etc.

They are products of their class and neoliberalism, while they rebel against it.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Danzy wrote: »

In previous generations, the Left, or its manifestation of the time was largely made up of the Working Class or Peasantry.

For the last few decades, the Left has been dominated by the well to do and especially so in the radical activist Left.

So it is probably not surprising that it has convinced itself that a position which is radical capitalist in effect can be called Internationalist or solidarity etc.

They are products of their class and neoliberalism, while they rebel against it.

The new left tend to be pro American imperialists too., driven by a hatred of putin. Even with trump in power there’s no condemnation of American belligerence.

When I was growing up the workers party and other groups were continuously attacking American imperialism, now there’s crickets from the left even when the US and it’s theocratic allies in Saudi kill children in Yemen. Compare to the propaganda re Syria and barrel bombs. Not a protest anywhere.

I am suspicious about some Muslim immigration* though i hold no hatred to the religion in general. I am sympathetic to the Palestinians and the general population whose lives have been destroyed by American interventions in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen etc. The good doctor here was, as I recall, hugely in favour of US missiles landing on Syrian soil which means that he is a fan of Muslims in Europe, and a fan of them dead in the Middle East.

* like the story i read about a yazidi held as a sex slave by Isis who escaped to Germany only to meet her captives there. Maybe Isis shouldn’t have been allowed in?

https://www.rt.com/news/436308-yazidi-captive-germany-isis/

WinnyThePoo

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Sweden looked like a Hell zone last week. How anyone can defend it is mind boggling

The whole of Sweden?

The_Kew_Tour

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

The whole of Sweden?

The Major cities.

Where majority of people live.

jmreire

Danzy wrote: »

No, offer the hand, irregardless, same as I do to all people, well in my own country anyway.

In theirs I would respect their norms, even If i see them as ultra reactionary.

Danzy, Of course people from the this part of the world, will offer their hand when meeting anyone. It's standard accepted practice, and the chances of it being refused are practically non-existent.
However if you offer a Muslim woman your hand for a handshake, and she refuse's it, don't ever offer the same woman your hand again, it will not be appreciated. Depending on which branch of Islam she is from, she is not even allowed to be in close proximity to non-family males, let alone shake hands with an unbeliever. And this applies, no matter which Country you are in.

Danzy

jmreire wrote: »

Danzy, Of course people from the this part of the world, will offer their hand when meeting anyone. It's standard accepted practice, and the chances of it being refused are practically non-existent.
However if you offer a Muslim woman your hand for a handshake, and she refuse's it, don't ever offer the same woman your hand again, it will not be appreciated. Depending on which branch of Islam she is from, she is not even allowed to be in close proximity to non-family males, let alone shake hands with an unbeliever. And this applies, no matter which Country you are in.

I would offer my hand, every time I met her, same as I do others.

No Pasaran to that BS.

Danzy

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

T

* like the story i read about a yazidi held as a sex slave by Isis who escaped to Germany only to meet her captives there. Maybe Isis shouldn’t have been allowed in?

https://www.rt.com/news/436308-yazidi-captive-germany-isis/

Sympathy was very limited for her on the German Left. If she called for the ISIS man to be deported it would turn to outright hostility.

It is hard to underestimate how broken the vast majority of the Left today have become and it is a real disaster for all of us.

Graces7

Bootlegger wrote: »

While I think that belief is ridiculous, if I am in her country, I will respect it.

If she's in my country I will offer my hand and expect her to shake it.

Why? That is extremely rude to a guest

jmreire

Bootlegger wrote: »

While I think that belief is ridiculous, if I am in her country, I will respect it.

If she's in my country I will offer my hand and expect her to shake it.

Sure you will... and if she refuses it, as I have already explained, don't offer it again.. Having said that, once it's clear to you NOT to offer your hand to her again, it's possible to meet her every day of the week, and a friendly smile and greeting will get you the same in return. Try to see it from her Muslim background. Interaction between the sexes in Islam is strictly controlled. What do you think that all these "Honour" killings and acid mutilations are about? And who do you think carries them out??? To a practising Muslim, there is only one thing, and that's Islam. EVERYTHING is measured and acted on in that context. Its the most important thing in their life.

Kivaro

jmreire wrote: »

Sure you will... and if she refuses it, as I have already explained, don't offer it again.. Having said that, once it's clear to you NOT to offer your hand to her again, it's possible to meet her every day of the week, and a friendly smile and greeting will get you the same in return. Try to see it from her Muslim background. Interaction between the sexes in Islam is strictly controlled. What do you think that all these "Honour" killings and acid mutilations are about? And who do you think carries them out??? To a practising Muslim, there is only one thing, and that's Islam. EVERYTHING is measured and acted on in that context. Its the most important thing in their life.

And when they are offered refuge in our country, when we house, feed and shelter them from whatever issues they are fleeing from, then they need to realise it is not the most importing thing in our lives ............. and they need to respect that.

Danzy

jmreire wrote: »

What do you think that all these "Honour" killings and acid mutilations are about? And who do you think carries them out???

Men who don't think women should shake hands with others and women who don't shake hands with others.

Given you last few postings, can you clarify that you are opposed to "honour" killings and see no justification at all for them.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The old labour left was hostile to illegal immigration.

Caser Chavez was a union leader in the US. Born of an immigrant family in poverty as a hired hand on a farm, he set up a Union and became a fierce defender of rights of American workers, and legal immigrants. But he opposed illegal immigration as an attack on wages.

Here’s a right wing hatchet job on him from the American spectator.

https://spectator.org/59956_cesar-chavez-anti-immigration-his-union-core/

The fact is that capital always wants no borders, for both capital and labour and produces whatever ideologies the masses need to hear to hide the materialist plunder. In the 19C the surplus population was in Europe so capital needed white migration (ie colonialism). This was sold as a civilizing mission, and the people who opposed the migration were savage, backwards, nationalist and didn’t really have a culture to defend anyway.

In the 21st C the white population isn’t replacing itself, so capital needs migration to white countries. This is sold as an anti racist civilised mission, and the people who oppose it are savage nationalists who don’t really have a culture anyway. (What is white culture? Does Europe really exist? What did white culture ever produce?).

As always the reaction is nationalism.

Well said!

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The new left tend to be pro American imperialists too., driven by a hatred of putin. Even with trump in power there’s no condemnation of American belligerence.

When I was growing up the workers party and other groups were continuously attacking American imperialism, now there’s crickets from the left even when the US and it’s theocratic allies in Saudi kill children in Yemen. Compare to the propaganda re Syria and barrel bombs. Not a protest anywhere.

I am suspicious about some Muslim immigration* though i hold no hatred to the religion in general. I am sympathetic to the Palestinians and the general population whose lives have been destroyed by American interventions in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen etc. The good doctor here was, as I recall, hugely in favour of US missiles landing on Syrian soil which means that he is a fan of Muslims in Europe, and a fan of them dead in the Middle East.

* like the story i read about a yazidi held as a sex slave by Isis who escaped to Germany only to meet her captives there. Maybe Isis shouldn’t have been allowed in?

https://www.rt.com/news/436308-yazidi-captive-germany-isis/

Of course ISIS shouldn't have been allowed in! Equally, of course that poor young girl should have been allowed in.


These are the kinds of cases that most middle of the road people are concerned about - yet we are the ones who are condemned as racists, uncaring, lacking in compassion, etc. etc.


If someone can explain to me what is compassionate about the poor girl travelling all that distance to escape persecution, only to meet - and be followed by - her persecutor where she should have been safe - I'm all ears!

biko

From this page three suspects have been named
Dahud Kavak
Alan Hussen
Mohannad Ali Easar (fled Sweden but was arrested in Turkey, see earlier in this thread)

jmreire

Danzy wrote: »

Men who don't think women should shake hands with others and women who don't shake hands with others.

Given you last few postings, can you clarify that you are opposed to "honour" killings and see no justification at all for them.

As I do not even agree with the death penalty , under no circumstances do I condone so called "Honour" Killings or mutilations

inforfun

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/18/muslim-couple-denied-swiss-citizenship-handshake-refusal/

malinheader

inforfun wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/18/muslim-couple-denied-swiss-citizenship-handshake-refusal/

Common sense starting to prevail. Pity its came to late.

Roger Hassenforder

jmreire wrote: »

To a practising Muslim, there is only one thing, and that's Islam. EVERYTHING is measured and acted on in that context. Its the most important thing in their life.

So really, they should stay where they're free to practise a pure and fundamental form of it, rather than being expected to integrate where it isn't.