Europe submits voluntarily

[angelo]

More like mission impossible! What on earth makes these bleeding hearts think Islam can be integrated with Western culture!

I left the UK a few years ago because there were too many Muslims and worked for many years in Abu Dhabi.
Anyway, if you get a chance, try and visit a Muslim country one day. Of course avoid places such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Belgium, Sudan and Syria.

Belgium is already Muslim? I thought that was still a decade or so into the immediate future! [emoji19]

 

[angelo]

See why some of us worry about Islam?

Yes; It's because you are biased.

https://hatepseudoscience.com/2016/04/12/understanding-bias-what-color-is-this-truck/

You see a statement like "23% said they would support there being areas of Britain in which Sharia law was introduced", and your brain goes 'WOW! 23% is a LOT!' - without for an instant considering that this implies that 77% said they would NOT support there being areas of Britain in which Sharia law was introduced - and 77% is a great deal more than 23%.

If 'only' 34% would tell the police if they thought someone they knew was getting involved with supporters of terrorism in Syria, that implies that if a radical has more than 3 mates, someone will likely tell the cops if they thought he was getting involved with supporters of terrorism in Syria. Bear in mind, most people (even white middle-class male adults) won't dob someone in to the cops on the mere suspicion that they plan to commit a violent crime; and the question is even less clear-cut than that, as it says 'involved with'; that does NOT necessarily imply supporting nor joining with, and might just mean 'reading the blogs of' or 'chatting online to' - so 34% is a pretty large number, given the question asked. Notice also that the question only says '... if they thought they knew...'. It's a question engineered to get a low response - and it STILL got 34% (more than one in three) saying they would report such activity to the cops.

I was going to ask "What proportion of the non-Muslim population do you think would report someone to the cops on mere suspicion that they were getting involved with violent criminals"? But then I remembered who I was talking to, so I will instead ask "What proportion of the population would a reasonable person think would report someone to the cops on mere suspicion that they were getting involved with violent criminals"?

These figures simply do not constitute a cause for concern - unless you start from the perspective that there MUST BE cause for concern, and are simply looking for an excuse to continue in that belief.

Hiding your head in the sand will not alter these figures. The same survey in ten years time would be interesting wouldn't it?

 

[bilby]

Yes; It's because you are biased.

https://hatepseudoscience.com/2016/04/12/understanding-bias-what-color-is-this-truck/

You see a statement like "23% said they would support there being areas of Britain in which Sharia law was introduced", and your brain goes 'WOW! 23% is a LOT!' - without for an instant considering that this implies that 77% said they would NOT support there being areas of Britain in which Sharia law was introduced - and 77% is a great deal more than 23%.

If 'only' 34% would tell the police if they thought someone they knew was getting involved with supporters of terrorism in Syria, that implies that if a radical has more than 3 mates, someone will likely tell the cops if they thought he was getting involved with supporters of terrorism in Syria. Bear in mind, most people (even white middle-class male adults) won't dob someone in to the cops on the mere suspicion that they plan to commit a violent crime; and the question is even less clear-cut than that, as it says 'involved with'; that does NOT necessarily imply supporting nor joining with, and might just mean 'reading the blogs of' or 'chatting online to' - so 34% is a pretty large number, given the question asked. Notice also that the question only says '... if they thought they knew...'. It's a question engineered to get a low response - and it STILL got 34% (more than one in three) saying they would report such activity to the cops.

I was going to ask "What proportion of the non-Muslim population do you think would report someone to the cops on mere suspicion that they were getting involved with violent criminals"? But then I remembered who I was talking to, so I will instead ask "What proportion of the population would a reasonable person think would report someone to the cops on mere suspicion that they were getting involved with violent criminals"?

These figures simply do not constitute a cause for concern - unless you start from the perspective that there MUST BE cause for concern, and are simply looking for an excuse to continue in that belief.

Hiding your head in the sand will not alter these figures. The same survey in ten years time would be interesting wouldn't it?

Probably not, no; because these figures don't need to alter, and they seem unlikely to alter significantly.

These figures are only scary to the stupid and the already fearful. Which is their entire purpose.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I left the UK a few years ago because there were too many Muslims and worked for many years in Abu Dhabi.
Anyway, if you get a chance, try and visit a Muslim country one day. Of course avoid places such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Belgium, Sudan and Syria.

Belgium is already Muslim? I thought that was still a decade or so into the immediate future! [emoji19]

You never know. If you are uncertain when you get there, you can now purchase prayer mats with a small compass sewn on so you know which way to face

 

[whichphilosophy]

See why some of us worry about Islam?

Yes; It's because you are biased.

https://hatepseudoscience.com/2016/04/12/understanding-bias-what-color-is-this-truck/

You see a statement like "23% said they would support there being areas of Britain in which Sharia law was introduced", and your brain goes 'WOW! 23% is a LOT!' - without for an instant considering that this implies that 77% said they would NOT support there being areas of Britain in which Sharia law was introduced - and 77% is a great deal more than 23%.

If 'only' 34% would tell the police if they thought someone they knew was getting involved with supporters of terrorism in Syria, that implies that if a radical has more than 3 mates, someone will likely tell the cops if they thought he was getting involved with supporters of terrorism in Syria. Bear in mind, most people (even white middle-class male adults) won't dob someone in to the cops on the mere suspicion that they plan to commit a violent crime; and the question is even less clear-cut than that, as it says 'involved with'; that does NOT necessarily imply supporting nor joining with, and might just mean 'reading the blogs of' or 'chatting online to' - so 34% is a pretty large number, given the question asked. Notice also that the question only says '... if they thought they knew...'. It's a question engineered to get a low response - and it STILL got 34% (more than one in three) saying they would report such activity to the cops.

I was going to ask "What proportion of the non-Muslim population do you think would report someone to the cops on mere suspicion that they were getting involved with violent criminals"? But then I remembered who I was talking to, so I will instead ask "What proportion of the population would a reasonable person think would report someone to the cops on mere suspicion that they were getting involved with violent criminals"?

These figures simply do not constitute a cause for concern - unless you start from the perspective that there MUST BE cause for concern, and are simply looking for an excuse to continue in that belief.

As I mentioned I would like to see how the figures are compiled. I recall one survey some years ago when I managed to see the actual questions were how Muslims would react if their faith was threatened. If I find this I will post it. This is a few years ago.

The main issue will be intolerance to gay people which 50 years ago we were not so bright ourselves. Now with Sharia Law, this is acceptable providing the courts comply to the Arbitration Act and preside within the Law. If they work fairly within the Law there is no problem. The largest official one of these is the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT). There are civil courts and cannot authorize imprisonment etc. The MAT also tries some non Muslim civil cases as the are supposed to be cheaper than conventional means.

Thought they knew, means most people wouldn't report it. It should be certain for human nature being what it is would indicate a higher response.

The problem is we are getting too many people pouring in from various parts of the world where our security would be affected. On the other hand our actions in causing wars in other countries determines our governments responsible for reparations as far as possible till the war is over.

Of course it would be good to see the exact wording of the questions. You spotted 'thought they knew' which does not emphasise any certainty.

 

[bilby]

...

The problem is we are getting too many people pouring in from various parts of the world where our security would be affected. ...

You keep asserting this; but you provide no evidence that this actually is a problem - you just take it as read.

You need to show: a) That there are 'too many' people 'pouring in'; and b) that 'our security would be affected', before you can declare this to be 'The problem'; but you have NOT shown that - you haven't even shown how we define 'too many' people, or what it means for them to 'pour in' (is this somehow different from simply 'arriving'?); much less that 'our security would be affected' - and that latter seems a highly dubious prospect, as even the handful of serious Islamic terrorist acts in Europe over the decade and a half since September 11, 2001 have mostly been carried out by people who were born in the EU, and are not immigrants at all.

There have been over 3,600 posts so far in this thread; and yet STILL neither of these basic claims have been supported with evidence.

 

[Juma]

Now with Sharia Law, this is already acceptable providing the courts comply to the Arbitration Act and preside within the Law. If they work fairly within the Law there is no problem. The largest official one of these is the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT).

What does "work faily within the law" mean?

The social pressure of religion/tradition on muslims (believers or not) from other muslims will force them to follow the law wether they want or not.

There should be only one law, equal for everyone!

 

[TSwizzle]

What on earth makes these bleeding hearts think Islam can be integrated with Western culture!

You are witnessing the deliberate destruction of Western civilization as we know it. Such is the left's hatred for the West, they seek to destroy it. It's a sickness in them.

And the figures in the survey are probably much worse than what is shown. A muslim would never lie, right ?

 

[bilby]

What on earth makes these bleeding hearts think Islam can be integrated with Western culture!

You are witnessing the deliberate destruction of Western civilization as we know it. Such is the left's hatred for the West, they seek to destroy it. It's a sickness in them.

1954 called; they want their anti-Communist paranoia back.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Now with Sharia Law, this is already acceptable providing the courts comply to the Arbitration Act and preside within the Law. If they work fairly within the Law there is no problem. The largest official one of these is the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT).

What does "work faily within the law" mean?

The social pressure of religion/tradition on muslims (believers or not) from other muslims will force them to follow the law wether they want or not.

There should be only one law, equal for everyone!

Actually it is a wrong grammatical use. It should be fair within the Law (England and Wales for the UK and Scotland with its own laws). We've had arbitration for the last few hundred years as a means of alternative dispute resolution. We should follow the English law but it is not only Muslims who don't. The problem has always been enforcement.

 

[Juma]

What does "work faily within the law" mean?

The social pressure of religion/tradition on muslims (believers or not) from other muslims will force them to follow the law wether they want or not.

There should be only one law, equal for everyone!

Actually it is a wrong grammatical use. It should be fair within the Law (England and Wales for the UK and Scotland with its own laws). We've had arbitration for the last few hundred years as a means of alternative dispute resolution. We should follow the English law but it is not only Muslims who don't. The problem has always been enforcement.

Eh? Do you have other ethnical groups that have their own arbitration?

I can agree on differing arbitration during games because games are completely voluntary.

Beibg part of a muslim community isnt.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Actually it is a wrong grammatical use. It should be fair within the Law (England and Wales for the UK and Scotland with its own laws). We've had arbitration for the last few hundred years as a means of alternative dispute resolution. We should follow the English law but it is not only Muslims who don't. The problem has always been enforcement.

Eh? Do you have other ethnical groups that have their own arbitration?

I can agree on differing arbitration during games because games are completely voluntary.

Beibg part of a muslim community isnt.

The Catholics and Jews have conducted their own arbitration procedures. This has been done for hundreds of years. Not everyone entering into arbitration knows their rights because it is voluntary. If applied well it is (usually) cheaper than using a court.

 

[angelo]

Hiding your head in the sand will not alter these figures. The same survey in ten years time would be interesting wouldn't it?

Probably not, no; because these figures don't need to alter, and they seem unlikely to alter significantly.

These figures are only scary to the stupid and the already fearful. Which is their entire purpose.

They said that years ago too when muslims were a fraction the numbers there are now in Europe and elsewhere.
What will the PC do gooders say in say, fifty years when the numbers quadruple at a minimum? Will 50% moslem population in Europe and elsewhere satisfy you? Or must it be 100% or nothing?

 

[angelo]

...

The problem is we are getting too many people pouring in from various parts of the world where our security would be affected. ...

You keep asserting this; but you provide no evidence that this actually is a problem - you just take it as read.

You need to show: a) That there are 'too many' people 'pouring in'; and b) that 'our security would be affected', before you can declare this to be 'The problem'; but you have NOT shown that - you haven't even shown how we define 'too many' people, or what it means for them to 'pour in' (is this somehow different from simply 'arriving'?); much less that 'our security would be affected' - and that latter seems a highly dubious prospect, as even the handful of serious Islamic terrorist acts in Europe over the decade and a half since September 11, 2001 have mostly been carried out by people who were born in the EU, and are not immigrants at all.

There have been over 3,600 posts so far in this thread; and yet STILL neither of these basic claims have been supported with evidence.

And you have failed to show one single example of a backward, savage culture such as these Islamics integrating with Western culture! If you don't see any danger in that fact alone, then you belong with the Greens at the bottom of the garden dwelling with the fairies.

 

[bilby]

Probably not, no; because these figures don't need to alter, and they seem unlikely to alter significantly.

These figures are only scary to the stupid and the already fearful. Which is their entire purpose.

They said that years ago too when muslims were a fraction the numbers there are now in Europe and elsewhere.
What will the PC do gooders say in say, fifty years when the numbers quadruple at a minimum? Will 50% moslem population in Europe and elsewhere satisfy you? Or must it be 100% or nothing?

Why do you persist in pulling these bullshit numbers out of your arse?

Surely you can't imagine that anyone gives them the slightest credence anymore. You have destroyed your own credibility in this thread many times over.

The scenario you predict is mathematically impossible. Your position is foolish, and your support for it is based on lies and nonsense. This has been shown over and over again. Why do you keep doing it? What can you possibly hope to achieve?

 

[angelo]

They said that years ago too when muslims were a fraction the numbers there are now in Europe and elsewhere.
What will the PC do gooders say in say, fifty years when the numbers quadruple at a minimum? Will 50% moslem population in Europe and elsewhere satisfy you? Or must it be 100% or nothing?

Why do you persist in pulling these bullshit numbers out of your arse?

Surely you can't imagine that anyone gives them the slightest credence anymore. You have destroyed your own credibility in this thread many times over.

The scenario you predict is mathematically impossible. Your position is foolish, and your support for it is based on lies and nonsense. This has been shown over and over again. Why do you keep doing it? What can you possibly hope to achieve?

Go tell that to the Pakistanis, Afghanistan's Egyptians, and any other nation you care to name that has a Muslim majority now but were not.

 

[faded_Glory]

You think that radical isn't going to be a bit careful about his choice of mates? What that number means is that if he slips up and lets a moderate know his plans he's still got a 2 in 3 chance of not being caught. Let the average Christian know you plan to bomb an abortion clinic and I don't think you have a 2 in 3 chance they won't say something!

Interesting context of this 34% number:

...he describes as “alarming” the finding that only 34% of Muslims would report someone to the police who was involved with people who support terrorism in Syria. But for the survey’s “control” group – consisting of randomly selected people from across the country of all or no faiths – the figure is only 30%. And other polls have found that 94% of British Muslims would report someone they knew who was planning an act of violence to the police.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/what-do-muslims-think-skewed-poll-wont-tell-us

As to how worried we should be about the results of the poll: these are just people's opinions. Having opinions, even ones that we consider vile, is not against the law nor is it worth getting bothered about, unless and until they translate into political power.

There are no Islamic political parties in Europe. The small number of Muslims who are politically active are members of the existing mainstream parties and support their programs. The rapid rise of the far-right populist parties across the continent and the associated threat to our civil liberties is a far bigger worry than the private opinions of the Muslim minority. Imagine a world where the National Front gains real power in France, or UKIP in Great Britain. We would be right back in the 1930's. Such parties now have popular support in the region of 20 - 30%!

Call me when there are established Muslim parties in Europe that gain more than a few percent of the popular vote in elections. We really should carefully separate facts from hysteria.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Interesting context of this 34% number:

...he describes as “alarming” the finding that only 34% of Muslims would report someone to the police who was involved with people who support terrorism in Syria. But for the survey’s “control” group – consisting of randomly selected people from across the country of all or no faiths – the figure is only 30%. And other polls have found that 94% of British Muslims would report someone they knew who was planning an act of violence to the police.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/what-do-muslims-think-skewed-poll-wont-tell-us

As to how worried we should be about the results of the poll: these are just people's opinions. Having opinions, even ones that we consider vile, is not against the law nor is it worth getting bothered about, unless and until they translate into political power.

There are no Islamic political parties in Europe. The small number of Muslims who are politically active are members of the existing mainstream parties and support their programs. The rapid rise of the far-right populist parties across the continent and the associated threat to our civil liberties is a far bigger worry than the private opinions of the Muslim minority. Imagine a world where the National Front gains real power in France, or UKIP in Great Britain. We would be right back in the 1930's. Such parties now have popular support in the region of 20 - 30%!

Call me when there are established Muslim parties in Europe that gain more than a few percent of the popular vote in elections. We really should carefully separate facts from hysteria.

The UKIP has black candidates, ethnic minorities and supports asylum policies but is against open borders which are letting economic migrants when we are overcrowded. I recall one or two very small Muslim parties. It's easy to set up a party in Europe, and even easier in the UK.
If there is a block of around 20 per cent Muslims in a country there may be some Muslim parties who can command some support. In the UK most I understand vote for Labour.

 

[KeepTalking]

Interesting context of this 34% number:

...he describes as “alarming” the finding that only 34% of Muslims would report someone to the police who was involved with people who support terrorism in Syria. But for the survey’s “control” group – consisting of randomly selected people from across the country of all or no faiths – the figure is only 30%. And other polls have found that 94% of British Muslims would report someone they knew who was planning an act of violence to the police.

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/what-do-muslims-think-skewed-poll-wont-tell-us

I am shocked! Shocked, I tell you, with absolutely no sincerity.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Interesting context of this 34% number:



Source: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/what-do-muslims-think-skewed-poll-wont-tell-us

I am shocked! Shocked, I tell you, with absolutely no sincerity.

It seems the polls contradict each other by too wide a margin to be taken seriously.
There are still some reservations about gay people but there are also non Muslims who have that problem. I guess we can dispense with the polls and start looking again.