• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Europe submits voluntarily

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you aren't, it only shows that the only European value you're defending is Europe as a monolithic, mono-religious block.

In which case, you aren't really any better than ISIS or the Saudi ruling family.
Yes, it only shows that; or else it only shows that your current sequence of arguments is not up to your usual standards for logic.

Oh yeah, letting the Irish in means the end to the American way of life.

How did that one work out again? I think you're shooting yourself in the foot here.
:rolleyes:
I point out reasoning error after reasoning error in your posts in this thread, and you reply by making believe my post was offered as proof of the Islamic threat?!? Are you trying to become another untermensche? You're better than this.
 
Interesting times indeed. After 1,200 years or so of battling islamic aggression, christendom has surrendered in the most unimaginable way. Well played to mullahs, they have played a blinder.

I'm in Europe and I have another analysis. The Syrians now leaving Syria are the ones who think ISIS are cunts. These are the Syrians we want in Europe.

Syria has always had a happy mixture of religions and ethnicities. So the assumption that they're all conservative Muslims is dumb-ass. Under Assad Syria was liberal.

It's not submitting. It's skimming the cream.

:hysterical:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8e9_1441703780

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tl16QDk2sig[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEHbv6O71wE[/YOUTUBE]
 
I heard on ABC radio this morning that the Arab Emirates have refused to take any refugees.

This the same for the UAE where my current employer is based.

They have a strict immigration policy like most Muslim countries. You need a work permit to work there. There is no citizen deal for people who work for over five years.
Once a person's visa runs out even after 30 years of work, it's the bum's rush. If a person quits their job for whatever reason and does not have a new they are classified as an absconder and treated as fugitives. Some notices in buildings have telephone numbers to report illegals.
 
I heard on ABC radio this morning that the Arab Emirates have refused to take any refugees.

This the same for the UAE where my current employer is based.

They have a strict immigration policy like most Muslim countries. You need a work permit to work there. There is no citizen deal for people who work for over five years.
Once a person's visa runs out even after 30 years of work, it's the bum's rush. If a person quits their job for whatever reason and does not have a new they are classified as an absconder and treated as fugitives. Some notices in buildings have telephone numbers to report illegals.

Really? The UAE and the Arab Emirates have the same policy?? Wow. I bet that happens almost as rarely as the United States having the same policy as the USA. :rolleyes:
 
Oh yeah, letting the Irish in means the end to the American way of life.

How did that one work out again? I think you're shooting yourself in the foot here.

Well put. The Roman Empire was minimally affected when it invited in barbarian tribes, with the expectation that these foreign peoples would submit and be a new vibrant tax base. Likewise, Britain was minimally affected when King Vortigern invited in those Anglos and Saxons to aid him in his domestic squabbles. And likewise, Ireland was minimally affected when Mac Murchada invited in the Anglo-Normans to strengthen his position against his native rivals. And further likewise, history is replete with examples of Muslim "migrants" moving into infidel lands and causing no troubles to the indigenous populations.
 
I'm in Europe and I have another analysis. The Syrians now leaving Syria are the ones who think ISIS are cunts. These are the Syrians we want in Europe.

Syria has always had a happy mixture of religions and ethnicities. So the assumption that they're all conservative Muslims is dumb-ass. Under Assad Syria was liberal.

It's not submitting. It's skimming the cream.

:hysterical:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8e9_1441703780

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tl16QDk2sig[/YOUTUBE]

Maybe this is their accent and they are chanting "Thank YOU!"?
 
I heard on ABC radio this morning that the Arab Emirates have refused to take any refugees.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZbCK95Zu_0[/YOUTUBE]

Europeans are suckers.

You may be happy to model your society on some of the worst societies out there. Some of us, though, prefer to live in civilised countries.
 
Oh yeah, letting the Irish in means the end to the American way of life.

How did that one work out again? I think you're shooting yourself in the foot here.

Well put. The Roman Empire was minimally affected when it invited in barbarian tribes, with the expectation that these foreign peoples would submit and be a new vibrant tax base. Likewise, Britain was minimally affected when King Vortigern invited in those Anglos and Saxons to aid him in his domestic squabbles. And likewise, Ireland was minimally affected when Mac Murchada invited in the Anglo-Normans to strengthen his position against his native rivals.

Those are not comparable situations - those leaders invited foreign armies, or invited a knightly caste giving them land complete with peasants to rule over, immediately establishing an alternate power base. An apples to apples comparison needs to look at examples of civilian mass immigration into the lower and middle ranks of a society. There are plenty of such examples, and they don't show what you want them to show. When "hordes" of Huguenots were admitted in Britain, the Netherlands, or the Protestant states of Germany, they didn't turn their new homes into a France 2.0. When Poland-Lithuania admitted a "flood" of Jews fleeing persecution in Western Europe, it didn't loose it's Catholic nature.

Oh, but Muslim immigrants are different, they refuse to assimilate and always kick up a fuss? Guess what - that's what they said about the Irish. So tell me more about those Catholic no-go areas all along the East Coast!

800px-Joseph_F._Keppler_-_Uncle_Sam%27s_lodging-house.jpg

(via https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Joseph_F._Keppler_-_Uncle_Sam's_lodging-house.jpg. The caption reads: "Look here, you, everybody else is quiet and peaceable, and you're all the time a-kicking up a row!")
 
I'm in Europe and I have another analysis. The Syrians now leaving Syria are the ones who think ISIS are cunts. These are the Syrians we want in Europe.

Syria has always had a happy mixture of religions and ethnicities. So the assumption that they're all conservative Muslims is dumb-ass. Under Assad Syria was liberal.

It's not submitting. It's skimming the cream.

:hysterical:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8e9_1441703780

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tl16QDk2sig[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEHbv6O71wE[/YOUTUBE]

If you've followed how they've been treated by the Hungarians you'd understand.
 
If you've followed how they've been treated by the Hungarians you'd understand.

The Hungarians didn't give them handouts?

View attachment 4013

If you'd actually been handing out donations at the train station in Vienna or Munich, you'd know that they find it really embarassing to accept handouts. That father of three who tried to make his 2-year-old give me back the apple I'd given her on the train from Salzburg to Munich wants a future, and he wants to build it himself. He wants to go to Germany because he hopes to be able to do so there. Perpetual welfare isn't his dream - it's a nightmare for him if anything.

But it's always easy to denigrate people you've never met from your arm chair in your comfy home in the Northwest, isn't it?
 
Well put. The Roman Empire was minimally affected when it invited in barbarian tribes, with the expectation that these foreign peoples would submit and be a new vibrant tax base. Likewise, Britain was minimally affected when King Vortigern invited in those Anglos and Saxons to aid him in his domestic squabbles. And likewise, Ireland was minimally affected when Mac Murchada invited in the Anglo-Normans to strengthen his position against his native rivals.

Those are not comparable situations - those leaders invited foreign armies, or invited a knightly caste giving them land complete with peasants to rule over, immediately establishing an alternate power base. An apples to apples comparison needs to look at examples of civilian mass immigration into the lower and middle ranks of a society. There are plenty of such examples, and they don't show what you want them to show. When "hordes" of Huguenots were admitted in Britain, the Netherlands, or the Protestant states of Germany, they didn't turn their new homes into a France 2.0. When Poland-Lithuania admitted a "flood" of Jews fleeing persecution in Western Europe, it didn't loose it's Catholic nature.

Oh, but Muslim immigrants are different, they refuse to assimilate and always kick up a fuss? Guess what - that's what they said about the Irish. So tell me more about those Catholic no-go areas all along the East Coast!

800px-Joseph_F._Keppler_-_Uncle_Sam%27s_lodging-house.jpg

(via https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Joseph_F._Keppler_-_Uncle_Sam's_lodging-house.jpg. The caption reads: "Look here, you, everybody else is quiet and peaceable, and you're all the time a-kicking up a row!")

I don't know why you would use the Huguenots in trying to make a point. Huguenots were Protestants. That they assimilated in Protestant countries should not be surprising. (If, instead, the Huguenots had gone to Catholic Spain and prospered, that would be a relevant to your argument.) The Irish example is also unpersuasive because German, English, Irish, or Scot - all Christians from the same European culture. Their differences were ethnic, not religious. It is to be remembered that Syria, as well as all of North Africa, Egypt, and the Middle East, were once all Christian. Now that Muslims have demographically displaced them, how are Christians (or non-theists) treated? In which predominately Muslim country can a Christian build a new Church unmolested or an atheist publicly question religion? Hence, why would you advocate for the mass migration of Muslims into a secular country? Do you expect a Muslim Syrian to magically change to a secular German once he arrives in Hamburg? What's the tipping point to becoming a Lebanon?

And for a historical, but ignored perspective:

But the attention of the emperor was most seriously engaged, by the important intelligence which he received from the civil and military officers who were intrusted with the defence of the Danube. He was informed, that the North was agitated by a furious tempest; that the irruption of the Huns, an unknown and monstrous race of savages, had subverted the power of the Goths; and that the suppliant multitudes of that warlike nation, whose pride was now humbled in the dust, covered a space of many miles along the banks of the river. With outstretched arms, and pathetic lamentations, they loudly deplored their past misfortunes and their present danger; acknowledged that their only hope of safety was in the clemency of the Roman government; and most solemnly protested, that if the gracious liberality of the emperor would permit them to cultivate the waste lands of Thrace, they should ever hold themselves bound, by the strongest obligations of duty and gratitude, to obey the laws, and to guard the limits, of the republic. These assurances were confirmed by the ambassadors of the Goths, F who impatiently expected from the mouth of Valens an answer that must finally determine the fate of their unhappy countrymen. The emperor of the East was no longer guided by the wisdom and authority of his elder brother, whose death happened towards the end of the preceding year; and as the distressful situation of the Goths required an instant and peremptory decision, he was deprived of the favorite resources of feeble and timid minds, who consider the use of dilatory and ambiguous measures as the most admirable efforts of consummate prudence. As long as the same passions and interests subsist among mankind, the questions of war and peace, of justice and policy, which were debated in the councils of antiquity, will frequently present themselves as the subject of modern deliberation. But the most experienced statesman of Europe has never been summoned to consider the propriety, or the danger, of admitting, or rejecting, an innumerable multitude of Barbarians, who are driven by despair and hunger to solicit a settlement on the territories of a civilized nation. When that important proposition, so essentially connected with the public safety, was referred to the ministers of Valens, they were perplexed and divided; but they soon acquiesced in the flattering sentiment which seemed the most favorable to the pride, the indolence, and the avarice of their sovereign. The slaves, who were decorated with the titles of praefects and generals, dissembled or disregarded the terrors of this national emigration; so extremely different from the partial and accidental colonies, which had been received on the extreme limits of the empire. But they applauded the liberality of fortune, which had conducted, from the most distant countries of the globe, a numerous and invincible army of strangers, to defend the throne of Valens; who might now add to the royal treasures the immense sums of gold supplied by the provincials to compensate their annual proportion of recruits. The prayers of the Goths were granted, and their service was accepted by the Imperial court: and orders were immediately despatched to the civil and military governors of the Thracian diocese, to make the necessary preparations for the passage and subsistence of a great people, till a proper and sufficient territory could be allotted for their future residence.

An undisciplined and unsettled nation of Barbarians required the firmest temper, and the most dexterous management. The daily subsistence of near a million of extraordinary subjects could be supplied only by constant and skilful diligence, and might continually be interrupted by mistake or accident. The insolence, or the indignation, of the Goths, if they conceived themselves to be the objects either of fear or of contempt, might urge them to the most desperate extremities

"That successful day put an end to the distress of the Barbarians, and the security of the Romans: from that day, the Goths, renouncing the precarious condition of strangers and exiles, assumed the character of citizens and masters, claimed an absolute dominion over the possessors of land, and held, in their own right, the northern provinces of the empire, which are bounded by the Danube." Such are the words of the Gothic historian, 72 who celebrates, with rude eloquence, the glory of his countrymen. But the dominion of the Barbarians was exercised only for the purposes of rapine and destruction.

The imprudence of Valens and his ministers had introduced into the heart of the empire a nation of enemies

One of the most dangerous inconveniences of the introduction of the Barbarians into the army and the palace, was sensibly felt in their correspondence with their hostile countrymen; to whom they imprudently, or maliciously, revealed the weakness of the Roman empire.

Screen-Shot-2015-09-06-at-11.32.36-AM-550x512.png

The Barbarians would have deserved to feel the cruel and perfidious policy of the Imperial court, if they had suffered themselves to be dispersed through the provinces. They required, and they obtained, the sole possession of the villages and districts assigned for their residence; they still cherished and propagated their native manners and language; asserted, in the bosom of despotism, the freedom of their domestic government; and acknowledged the sovereignty of the emperor, without submitting to the inferior jurisdiction of the laws and magistrates of Rome.

Notwithstanding these specious arguments, and these sanguine expectations, it was apparent to every discerning eye, that the Goths would long remain the enemies, and might soon become the conquerors of the Roman empire. Their rude and insolent behavior expressed their contempt of the citizens and provincials, whom they insulted with impunity.

http://www.cca.org/cm/rome/vol2/index.html

Modern Europe will be lucky to make it another century.
 
I don't know why you would use the Huguenots in trying to make a point. Huguenots were Protestants. That they assimilated in Protestant countries should not be surprising. (If, instead, the Huguenots had gone to Catholic Spain and prospered, that would be a relevant to your argument.)

Then instead just take the example of the hordes of Jews that fled persecution to go to the Netherlands from all over.


The Irish example is also unpersuasive because German, English, Irish, or Scot - all Christians from the same European culture.

What. The "same" European culture? What? Do you not understand how Europe works? These are all vastly different cultures that until very recently were at each other's throats.


Their differences were ethnic, not religious.

Whether people despise immigrants because they're from the wrong ethnicity/culture or the wrong religion is rather irrelevant.



It is to be remembered that Syria, as well as all of North Africa, Egypt, and the Middle East, were once all Christian. Now that Muslims have demographically displaced them, how are Christians (or non-theists) treated? In which predominately Muslim country can a Christian build a new Church unmolested?

Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Indonesia, to name but a few.


Modern Europe will be lucky to make it another century.

Oh fuck off. I'm getting tired of people being oh so dramatic about all this. People have expressed this exact same sentiment for more than a thousand years, and they have been wrong for just as long. You're not even European, and have no real comprehension of what is actually happening here. But as is so often the case, the ignorant don't know how wrong they really are, and therefore can be confident when they spout their nonsense. I'd rather have another muslim immigrant move into my neighborhood than someone like yourself. Every muslim adult I've known has been nothing but polite and respectful; far more so than the average native; and if they have objectionable political views then at least they don't bother me with them.
 
Problems with assimilation usually occur because of the hatred these people feel in their adopted land. Even then in a generation most are completely assimilated.

As we see these hatreds are very real and irrational.

The desire to shun a person you have never met based on a stereotype is a real defect in human nature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom