- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 15,483
- Reaction score
- 8,227
- Location
- North Texas
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Making perfectly clear the intention of the edition, the edition features articles titled ‘Does Europe Want to Commit Suicide?’ and ‘The Hell of Europe’. The news-stand blurb declares: “In the new issue of the weekly Network, a report about what the media and Brussels elite are hiding from the citizens of the European Union”.
Opening the cover article, Aleksandra Rybinska writes: “The people of old Europe after the events of New Year’s Eve in Cologne painfully realised the problems arising from the massive influx of immigrants. The first signs that things were going wrong, however, were there a lot earlier. They were still ignored or were minimised in significance in the name of tolerance and political correctness”.
Outlining the fundamental differences between eastern Islam and western Christianity — “culture, architecture, music, gastronomy, dress” — the editorial explains these two worlds have been at war “over the last 14 centuries” and the world is now witnessing a colossal “clash of two civilisations in the countries of old Europe”. This clash is brought by Muslims who come to Europe and “carry conflict with the Western world as part of the collective consciousness”, as the journalist marks the inevitability of conflict between native Europeans and their new guests.
Someone should be along soon to remind you that so long as it is the right people being harmed and in small enough numbers it is acceptable what any minority does.
Nothing to see here... move along.
You have an eye for minutiae and an evil mind!
It is just happening too frequently. We see too much liberal support for an ideology that by its very nature stands in opposition to all things liberal.
I think it should be noted that someone like myself supports one's right to hold whatever hateful, vile ideology you wish to believe in, but do not support the ideology itself.
Until that ideology causes a problem... which is what we are potentially talking about here. Multiculturalism only works when all cultures in the mix have a respect for all others, until then you have a social cohesion problem.
A lot of ideologies are counterproductive to a healthy, diverse society. Too me, it just feels authoritarian to arbitrarily decide which ideologies are accepted and which ones cannot be. Let's say if Islamic Terrorism was demonstrably the biggest threat to the public and banned Islam. Then what happens to second most ideology, do we tolerate it, or ban that ideology as well?
So you are making an argument that if a culture causes a problem, but not too much of a problem, then there is no issue? So exactly where is the line on potentially causing a problem or not?
I'm just rather curious to where you draw the line in the sand for ideologies like Islam. Potentially all ideologies can be violent (Islam more so than others) but if say America made efforts to eliminate Islam in America couldn't we do the same for Communism, race Supremcy groups, and so on? The point where a society makes an effort to practice thought policing is the point they're no longer a free society.
That is the same question I am asking you.
Let me change the context. Why fight social conservatism when it is based in Christianity but give a pass to social conservatism when it is based on Islam?
The populations are xenophobic
Someone should be along soon to remind you that so long as it is the right people being harmed and in small enough numbers it is acceptable what any minority does.
Nothing to see here... move along.
So being pissed off about Muslims causing spikes in crime is "Xenophobia"?
:lamo:lamo
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?