Europe submits voluntarily

[Jokodo]

Just like when Irish and German immigrants started to arrive en masse in the US, famine broke out in New England and the Midwest became politically fractured into a multitude of city-states

The difference is that the European migration is an unprecedented tidal wave rather than a flow.

Factually incorrect.

 

[angelo]

The difference is that the European migration is an unprecedented tidal wave rather than a flow.

Nah... this is the norm. Migration is usually in massive floods over short periods of time. Just what we're seeing now. What it also means is that we know exactly how societies cope. They cope fine. What we're seeing now is a piss in the sea compared to how people moved around surrounding WW2. And back then life was a lot harder than now. If we managed then, we'll manage just fine now.

The main difference was integration/assimilation. All European migration to the new and not so new world assimilated. Muslims will not do so. The proof is before your eyes with some suburbs of Western Europe being up to 80% moslems.
In the late 40's to mid 60's there were some mainly near city suburbs, with high numbers of migrants. All these suburbs with high number of Italians, Greeks, Slavs etc, all dissipated by the 80-90's to mainstream integrated suburbs all over metro areas and towns.

 

[Jokodo]

Nah... this is the norm. Migration is usually in massive floods over short periods of time. Just what we're seeing now. What it also means is that we know exactly how societies cope. They cope fine. What we're seeing now is a piss in the sea compared to how people moved around surrounding WW2. And back then life was a lot harder than now. If we managed then, we'll manage just fine now.

The main difference was integration/assimilation. All European migration to the new and not so new world assimilated. Muslims will not do so. The proof is before your eyes with some suburbs of Western Europe being up to 80% moslems.

False, as demonstrated below.

In the late 40's to mid 60's there were some mainly near city suburbs, with high numbers of migrants. All these suburbs with high number of Italians, Greeks, Slavs etc, all dissipated by the 80-90's to mainstream integrated suburbs all over metro areas and towns.

Where are you talking about? USA? Funny thing is, large scale immigration from these areas started in the second half of the 19th century. So when you say that those demographics were still concentrated in certain districts in the 1940s-60s, that's about 80 years after the beginning of that immigration wave. That they were all but dissipated in "mainstream integrated suburbs" by the year 120 doesn't mean anything when large-scale Muslim immigration to Western Europe is less than 60 years old.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Nah... this is the norm. Migration is usually in massive floods over short periods of time. Just what we're seeing now. What it also means is that we know exactly how societies cope. They cope fine. What we're seeing now is a piss in the sea compared to how people moved around surrounding WW2. And back then life was a lot harder than now. If we managed then, we'll manage just fine now.

The main difference was integration/assimilation. All European migration to the new and not so new world assimilated. Muslims will not do so. The proof is before your eyes with some suburbs of Western Europe being up to 80% moslems.
In the late 40's to mid 60's there were some mainly near city suburbs, with high numbers of migrants. All these suburbs with high number of Italians, Greeks, Slavs etc, all dissipated by the 80-90's to mainstream integrated suburbs all over metro areas and towns.

he he... so your proof is religion? The Italians and Greeks who came to Sweden were predominantly Christian. They're still Christian. There's still active Greek Christian churches in Stockholm. There are Catholic churches. This is an atheistic country. 90% are atheists. Doesn't that prove that Greeks and Italians don't assimilate either?

Here's what I think. I think your definition of integration and assimilation is bullshit. I think you have shaped your definition around trying to make out Muslim immigrants as a special category.

Also there's Islam and Islam. Regardless of the alarmist headlines Islam is liberalising quickly now. Not just among Muslims living in the west. But internationally. Islam is getting softer and softer and it's going fast. It's no coincidence that women just got the vote in Saudi Arabia. The kind of Muslims who join Al Qaeda and ISIS is a reactionary minority. It's like you're completely blind to what is happening in the Islamic world. And of course the speed of the liberalisation is greater among Muslims in the west. As well as Muslim atheism. There's a fast growing group of Muslim identified atheists in the west.

The west underwent a similar situation in the end of the 19'th century and beginning of the 20'th. The so called "Evangelical movement". It spawned extremist organisations like Jehovas Witnesses and the flood of bizarre now defunct extremist Christian sects which apexed in the 70'ies. What's happening now to the Islamic world is completely analogues. The difference lies in that the Muslims today don't rule a majority of the planets surface is massive oppressive and racist colonial empires. Let's be grateful for that.

 

[angelo]

How many Muslims are intermarrying? Ask a so called moslem what he/she thinks of Jews, or for that matter, xtians and other infidels!
They will only start vto assimilate when they are willing to separate state from their barbaric religion.

 

[DrZoidberg]

How many Muslims are intermarrying? Ask a so called moslem what he/she thinks of Jews, or for that matter, xtians and other infidels!

What the fuck are you on about? Who cares about marrying? The 20'th century wants their relationship statuses back. In Sweden we have boyfriends and girlfriends. Moslems sleep around just like any other group. Both men and women. With people from all over. There's no difference between them and the Swedes. Some may need to lie to their parents. But in practice there's no difference. I've had my fair share of Syrians and Iranians. I haven't experienced any cultural difficulties with getting laid with those girls.

They will only start vto assimilate when they are willing to separate state from their barbaric religion.

I have no clue what this even means. Since when does the state decide who we marry? How is this even relevant to this topic?

 

[TSwizzle]

Nothing to worry about, I'm sure this will have nothing to do with islam;

A knifeman slashed a man at a busy London tube station and allegedly shouted 'this is for Syria' before being Tasered by police in what has been described by Scotland Yard as a terrorism attack.

News

At least Scotland Yard have the bottle to call it terrorism.

All part of the vibrant diversity promised.

 

[angelo]

What the fuck are you on about? Who cares about marrying? The 20'th century wants their relationship statuses back. In Sweden we have boyfriends and girlfriends. Moslems sleep around just like any other group. Both men and women. With people from all over. There's no difference between them and the Swedes. Some may need to lie to their parents. But in practice there's no difference. I've had my fair share of Syrians and Iranians. I haven't experienced any cultural difficulties with getting laid with those girls.

They will only start vto assimilate when they are willing to separate state from their barbaric religion.

I have no clue what this even means. Since when does the state decide who we marry? How is this even relevant to this topic?

No, perhaps no problem laying an Iranian or other Middle Eastern girl. Try marrying one with her family's blessing, especially if a Jew!

 

[DrZoidberg]

What the fuck are you on about? Who cares about marrying? The 20'th century wants their relationship statuses back. In Sweden we have boyfriends and girlfriends. Moslems sleep around just like any other group. Both men and women. With people from all over. There's no difference between them and the Swedes. Some may need to lie to their parents. But in practice there's no difference. I've had my fair share of Syrians and Iranians. I haven't experienced any cultural difficulties with getting laid with those girls.



I have no clue what this even means. Since when does the state decide who we marry? How is this even relevant to this topic?

No, perhaps no problem laying an Iranian or other Middle Eastern girl. Try marrying one with her family's blessing, especially if a Jew!

My ex wife is a Jew. Hungarian/Israeli. Her family was fine with it.

I think you're just being silly now. I think you're treating exceptions as the norm.

I had a boss who married into a Muslim family. He had to "convert". Ie just say he had become a Muslim. Apart from the wedding he never went to mosque once. He didn't even bother with getting circumcised. Her family was devout Muslims. They're still living in Indonesia.

 

[angelo]

That would be an exception. There are always exceptions to most things.

 

[DrZoidberg]

That would be an exception. There are always exceptions to most things.

What are your arguments? You seem to base your opinion entirely on hunches and ideas I only see in sensationalist press.

 

[bilby]

No, perhaps no problem laying an Iranian or other Middle Eastern girl. Try marrying one with her family's blessing, especially if a Jew!

My ex wife is a Jew. Hungarian/Israeli. Her family was fine with it.

I think you're just being silly now. I think you're treating exceptions as the norm.

I had a boss who married into a Muslim family. He had to "convert". Ie just say he had become a Muslim. Apart from the wedding he never went to mosque once. He didn't even bother with getting circumcised. Her family was devout Muslims. They're still living in Indonesia.

My family are third generation atheists; When my brother decided to marry into a catholic family, he had to 'convert' too. I seriously doubt that he has become a sincere believer in Christ, or in the authority of the pope.

Religions require silly things. That's par for the course, and is in no way unique to Islam.

 

[angelo]

There's one huge difference between "religions". Most religions, xtianity included, separate church from state. At least they do today. Islam is more than a religion, its a way of life for the followers of this death cult. Every good little moslem places the laws of their allah before those of state. Islam before government. No other religion does that except fringe religious cults which number in the dozen in any one locality.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

There's one huge difference between "religions". Most religions, xtianity included, separate church from state. At least they do today. Islam is more than a religion, its a way of life for the followers of this death cult. Every good little moslem places the laws of their allah before those of state. Islam before government. No other religion does that except fringe religious cults which number in the dozen in any one locality.

Or Christianity in the Dark Ages. There's nothing inherent in Islam which would keep it from similarly changing. It's the worst thing in the world currently, to be sure, but it's a product of the societies it's part of, they're not the product of it.

 

[angelo]

Moslems need a reformation like xtianity had one centuries ago, urgently. But don't hold your breath it will come anytime soon.

 

[DrZoidberg]

There's one huge difference between "religions". Most religions, xtianity included, separate church from state. At least they do today. Islam is more than a religion, its a way of life for the followers of this death cult. Every good little moslem places the laws of their allah before those of state. Islam before government. No other religion does that except fringe religious cults which number in the dozen in any one locality.

Wrong. Super wrong. Prior to the European Enlightenment which religion you belonged to signalled which king you had your allegiance to. Religion was synonymous with politics. Wtf do you think all the religious wars were about? That was why they were persecuted by the Romans and continued to be until the emperor converted. That was the only reason. It's the same pattern all over the world. Church-state separation is really quite a new phenomenon
Just the last couple of hundred years

 

[DrZoidberg]

Moslems need a reformation like xtianity had one centuries ago, urgently. But don't hold your breath it will come anytime soon.

?!? It's going on right now. Wtf do you think Islamic fundalism is about? It's a group of people trying to stop the liberalisation of Islam. The quicker it liberalises the more extreme it's extremists will be. I think we're nearing the end now. Another decade and fundamentalism will be fringe activity. I mean so much fringe they won't be able to do anything. I suspect ISIS is the last desperate attempt. I think the backlash after ISIS is gone will be so great it'll be the end of it.

Karen Armstrong in the Battle for God explains it very pedagogicaly. Lots of examples. I recommend reading it.

 

[angelo]

Armstrong wrote that book long before 9/11, and Osama bin Laden. Let's not forget Karen was a nun.

 

[angelo]

She looked at islamic countries with Rose coloured glasses.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Armstrong wrote that book long before 9/11, and Osama bin Laden. Let's not forget Karen was a nun.

Ehe? She predicted just the sort of things that is 9/11 and ISIS. Ie an escalation of the extremism and violence. An escalation before it's collapse. The closer to the collapse the more extreme.

So your point is what? How wrong she is because she was correct?