• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Almost Half of France Sees Muslims as a Threat to National Identity

You made a claim that I am still waiting for examples of, you are also ignorant of the Ottoman empire at the very least - an empire that stretched into Europe and which when it failed led back to nations being ruled by non-muslims. I at the very least studied history.



LOL what does that have to do with anything?



You're doing an Auvergne and putting words into my mouth that I haven't said.

Now, go read some history before spouting any more lies about me.

The appeasement of Hitler has a lot to do with the appeasement of Islam. One accomplished nothing, the other will accomplish nothing.

When the Ottoman Empire failed only Turkey was under Muslim rule in Europe. After WWI it tried secular rule but we see what has happened since.

Also I have not said you said anything that you did not. I am sure you can give me an example, right?
 
The appeasement of Hitler has a lot to do with the appeasement of Islam. One accomplished nothing, the other will accomplish nothing.

When the Ottoman Empire failed only Turkey was under Muslim rule in Europe. After WWI it tried secular rule but we see what has happened since.

Also I have not said you said anything that you did not. I am sure you can give me an example, right?

I get it, you're one of these post-fact people aren't you? You fail to give me facts and instead rattle on about all sorts of further rubbish and have the cheek to ask me to answer one of your questions. Maybe you're post-post-fact?

I already did and have been waiting for your answers; till then, I ain't answering squat from you.
 
I get it, you're one of these post-fact people aren't you? You fail to give me facts and instead rattle on about all sorts of further rubbish and have the cheek to ask me to answer one of your questions. Maybe you're post-post-fact?

I already did and have been waiting for your answers; till then, I ain't answering squat from you.

I certainly do have the cheek, and you have no answers. I suggest you get over yourself, get your head out of revisionist history books, and take a good look at Europe today and the cancer called Islam.
 
I certainly do have the cheek, and you have no answers.

~ I already did and have been waiting for your answers; till then, I ain't answering squat from you.

I suggest you get over yourself, get your head out of revisionist history books, and take a good look at Europe today and the cancer called Islam.

At least I was awake in history class. It's patently obvious in your post-fact view of the world that simply repeating a lie is good enough for you.
 
At least I was awake in history class. It's patently obvious in your post-fact view of the world that simply repeating a lie is good enough for you.

What is the lie? Islam was not Europes enemy? Sharia law is cruel and violent and the farthest thing from equal justice than any legal system in the world. Muslims are not assimilating in host countries?

There are no lies there, just fact. Jihad has claimed 270 million lives and counting. That you think any history book can justify that is a total lack of respect for the human condition.
 
First of all your history demonizes Christians and gives Islam a pass like the religion has something positive and virtuous about it. It doesn't. I am sure you can enlighten us as to the positives in Islam. Never have gotten an answer and do not expect one now.

Secondly it is a fact the duality in Islam is oppressive to any non-Muslim. That alone discourages other religions from practicing or getting new members because of that oppression. Intolerance and violence doom any country as the Muslim population grows. Sweden is a prime example. France and the UK not far behind.

Third your replies say nothing about the scourge the doctrine of Islam is. That you will not admit what Islam says and does is backwards and cruel and aimed at domination is just willful ignorance.
Reminds me, can you elaborate on Turkey as an example of a country where coexistence with islam led to civil war or do you have any other countries in your factbook?

Having lived in a half muslim country I can say you are spouting rubbish. Having experience of islam in other African countries I can also say they were pretty tolerant of difference including homosexuality and extra marital affairs.
Reply/Rebuttal II to Infinite Chaos' Cherry Picked only-Africa Deflection.
He Disingenuously never answered the Overall point made by Coldjoint.

9 of 10 Worst Countries for Persecution of Christians Have 50% or Greater Muslim Populations
9 of 10 Worst Countries for Persecution of Christians Have 50% or Greater Muslim Populations
By Lauretta Brown | January 8, 2015

Nine of the 10 countries with the worst records for persecution of Christians have populations that are at least 50% Muslim, according to the assessment of persecution in the Open Doors USA's World Watch List (WWL) 2015 and population information published by the State Department and the CIA. The WWL is an “annual survey of religious liberty conditions for Christians around the world" that was released Wednesday.

Communist North Korea topped the list for the 13th consecutive year for the regime’s extreme persecution of Christians.

But the other 9 countries among the 10 worst had Muslim populations of 50% or greater and were cited for “Islamic extremism” as a main cause for the persecution of Christians.

“Approximately 100 million Christians are persecuted worldwide, making them one of the most persecuted religious groups in the world,” said an Open Doors statement announcing the report. Islamic extremism is the main source of persecution in 40 of the 50 countries on the 2015 World Watch List.”

Somalia, which ranks Second on the list, has a “large majority” of Sunni Muslims, according to the State Department. The CIA World Factbook list Sunni Islam as the "official" religion of the country, and the Pew Research Center estimates a 99.8% Muslim population.

Iraq and Syria are third and fourth on the list with Muslim populations of 99% and 87% respectively, according to the CIA’s World Factbook. “Violence against Christians by the Islamic State and other Islamic terrorist groups increased in countries like Iraq and Syria. More than 70% of Christians have fled Iraq since 2003, and more than 700,000 Christians have left Syria since the civil war began in 2011,” according to Open Doors.

Afghanistan, which is fifth on the persecution list, has an 80% Muslim majority, according to the CIA. Sudan, according to the CIA is Sunni Muslim with a "small Christian minority. The United Nations Development Programme estimates the Muslim population at 97%. Iran (which is 99.4%) and Pakistan (96.4%..) are seventh and eighth on the list.

The final two countries among the 10 worst for persecuting Christians each have Muslim populations of 50%. In Eritrea 50% of the population is Sunni Muslim, 30% is Orthodox Christian, and 13% is Roman Catholic, according to the State Department. Nigeria is 50% Muslim, 40% Christian, and 10% “indigenous beliefs,” according to the CIA.." [......]
And there are only 57 members of the OIC/Organization of Islamic Countries.

So in addition to Sudan (IN Africa) which my last post Included, we have Somalia, Nigeria, and Eritrea in the Top 10 Alone. (!)
Many more African Countries are on the List, just not in the Top 10. Getting security alert message on 'open doors' itself so secondary source was used.
 
Last edited:
What are the Muslims doing to help themselves?

They were allowed to move to France and were given financial assistance which was a pretty sweet deal

And I don't know how much of an excuse being colonized is worth today

Not much in my opinion

What do any of the "victims" the Left fights for do for themselves? They whine a lot, I know that.
 
What do any of the "victims" the Left fights for do for themselves? They whine a lot, I know that.

Hate angry old Whites.
 
What is the lie? ~

I'll answer that when you get the cojones to answer my question.

Reply/Rebuttal II to Infinite Chaos' Cherry Picked only-Africa Deflection.
He Disingenuously never answered the Overall point made by Coldjoint.

What's disingenuous about post 134 or are you part of the "post fact" thing too?
 
I'll answer that when you get the cojones to answer my question.



What's disingenuous about post 134 or are you part of the "post fact" thing too?

Your answer is not necessary. Anyone who relies in history and learns nothing from it is hardly up to answering anything. The fact is your opinion of Islam is rapidly disappearing as more people realize their leaders are emasculated dickheads who insist they know more than the people exposed to Muslim intolerance.

That is kind of the impression you leave thinking that Islam is any different than Hitler and wont choke the life out of those who oppose it given the chance.
 
Because you would feel honour bound to answer me.



At least I was awake. You didn't even know about the Ottoman empire and its conquests and losses.



Now, why din't you tell me what my opinion of islam is and link to which post you found this?

Your opinion of Islam is that of an apologist who doesn't have the brains or the guts to face reality. It screams out in every snaky disingenuous post of yours.

The Ottoman Empire was responsible for the deaths of millions who did nothing but worship in a different way. That intolerance will never change where Islam is concerned.
 
Your opinion of Islam is that of an apologist who doesn't have the brains or the guts to face reality. It screams out in every snaky disingenuous post of yours.

The Ottoman Empire was responsible for the deaths of millions who did nothing but worship in a different way. That intolerance will never change where Islam is concerned.

So no quotes or direct links, just ad hominem. Coward.
 
So no quotes or direct links, just ad hominem. Coward.

No need for either. Is there anyone here that does not see that in your posts, I doubt it. And I would not call anyone a coward if I were you.
 
No need for either. Is there anyone here that does not see that in your posts, I doubt it. And I would not call anyone a coward if I were you.

I call it as I see it, you just proved it by failing to find anything yet again.
 
Not at all: the fertility rate of natives is 1.9. Our pro-maternity policies date from the ww2, far before the immigration era. We do not need immigrants.

Not entirely true. Firstly, according to the guardian:

Since the early 2000s France has consistently topped European rankings. After two decades of decline, in the 1970s-80s, the fertility rate started picking up again in the late 1990s.



Secondly, and more importantly, immigration is still to be credited with the advantageous maternity policies of pre- and post-WWII France, as early industrialization of France and the wars of the late 19th century and early 20th century precipitated and aggravated population decline in comparison with other European countries:

France has a long history of immigration. Immigrants were brought in as early as the 18th and 19th century because the process of industrialisation in conjunction with the fall in the birth rate had resulted in a labour shortage. In this sense, France was an exception in Western Europe during this period. Most other industrialised states, including Germany, had higher birth rates and were primarily countries of emigration. The shortages on the French labour market were aggravated still further as a result of the decline in population brought about by the wars of 1870-71 and 1914-1918

Source

Can people freely say what they think on minority issues without being ostracized? Can they freely say they do not want to live or work with black men? Can they freely say they think that violence against Afro-Americans is justified by their criminality? Can their children in universities freely expose their points of view?

What you're essentially saying there is that people cannot be openly racist with impunity. It's disconcerting that you're espousing that with a straight face as an argument in your favor.
 
What do any of the "victims" the Left fights for do for themselves? They whine a lot, I know that.

liberals in europe and America have sent the message to the worlds poor that we will take care of them.

But that is a promise that bleeding heart progressives cannot keep
 
Secondly, and more importantly, immigration is still to be credited with the advantageous maternity policies of pre- and post-WWII France, as early industrialization of France and the wars of the late 19th century and early 20th century precipitated and aggravated population decline in comparison with other European countries
Unless I incorrectly understand the expression "to be credited with", it rather looks like immigration and pro-maternity policies had the same cause: the need for births, especially following the ww1 where half of our male population was killed. I cannot see how immigration could have caused pro-maternity policies, especially at the low immigration levels we then had.

Moreover you commented the immigration levels but, mind you, when it comes to policies there is a clear discontinuity at the point where Pétain introduced the pro-maternity welfare and tax breaks. It truly is the birth of our pro-maternity policies, later completed by measures to help working mothers. I am not aware of any historian with a different analysis.

What you're essentially saying there is that people cannot be openly racist with impunity. It's disconcerting that you're espousing that with a straight face as an argument in your favor.
Everyone is "racist". It is time we stop considering that it is a binary partition, with virtuous non-racist people on one side, and spawns of Satan on the other. Self-segregation is on the rise everywhere because everyone does discriminate. Yet the majority of American white people now claim this is a post-racial society because no one dares to speak the truth, producing the illusion of a racist society free of racism.

It is precisely because the word "racist" bears such an emotional load that you deem necessary to make it socially intolerable, with the regrettable consequences that people can no longer express the slightest nuances or criticism by fear of being instantly classified as the man to avoid at any cost, urged to leave their job, end their career, drop out of the company they built or the studies they pursue, and please go away and live in a desert or suicide yourself because omg how can you dare to say that police violence against Afro-Americans may be tied to Afro-American criminality?!

The ostracization of racism makes racism pervasive and invisible, and it created a social repression that affects absolutely every citizen. Absolutely everyone has at one point or another refrained himself to speak by fear of being seen as "racist". I think this is a sick societal model. It may have had its merits at some point, to erase the colonial and slavery images, but it is obvious that this model is exhausted and things are now headed towards segregation precisely because Afro-Americans have been empowered.


A post-racial society will be a society where the pervasiveness of "racism" will be acknowledged, where the immutability of human nature will be understood along with the conflictual, dangerous and instable nature of most of identity cohabitations, and that self-segregation and secession will be the inevitable consequences.
 
liberals in europe and America have sent the message to the worlds poor that we will take care of them.

But that is a promise that bleeding heart progressives cannot keep

Well it works to some extent until you run out of other people's money. Problem is, these people are still poor and unproductive at the end. Liberals just don't get that.
 
Well it works to some extent until you run out of other people's money. Problem is, these people are still poor and unproductive at the end. Liberals just don't get that.

The ultimate result of bleeding heart liberalism is that 99% of the world is equally poor
 
I call it as I see it, you just proved it by failing to find anything yet again.

I call it as I see it too. I have nothing to prove. The changing attitude towards Islam and its impact on French society say it all. That you insist it is not by blaming everything but Islam is old news, as Islam has pushed the citizens too far.
 
I call it as I see it too. I have nothing to prove. The changing attitude towards Islam and its impact on French society say it all. That you insist it is not by blaming everything but Islam is old news, as Islam has pushed the citizens too far.

This is just another admission you make empty accusations and simply add further hyperbole to cover your inadequate argument or position.
 
This is just another admission you make empty accusations and simply add further hyperbole to cover your inadequate argument or position.

Nothing inadequate about the turmoil and terror that Islam has bought to Europe. Ask the families of the victims, or the parents of sexually exploited girls, or the people that live near a Muslim ghetto.

It is all out there and you just keep denying it.
 
Nothing inadequate about the turmoil and terror that Islam has bought to Europe. Ask the families of the victims, or the parents of sexually exploited girls, or the people that live near a Muslim ghetto.

Blah blah blah (nothing to do with previous posts yet again.)

Just going to copy and paste that to save bothering to reply you any further when you quote me.
 
Back
Top Bottom