Macron at a crossroads with rising riots and protests over gasoline and nuclear

8 minutes ago, Rodent said:

Thank goodness bad spelling isn't one of the community guideline offenses. 

LOL..   You are right.  I am guilty.  It is a generational thing i believe.   When i was in school many,  many,  many decades ago,  the Teachers stated that "formatting, punctuation,  and spelling" WERE EVERYTHING.

These days,  everyone abbreviates,  or skips transitional words all together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Paul, my guess would be Indonesia.  As I understand it, there are more muslims in INdonesia than in any other country. 

How long that religious tradition has been there, I dunno.  But it seems to work for them, so hey, what works, works. 

On a strictly personal note, after the fiascos and mass deaths of 9/11 in New York, the local muslim folks have made it a point to reach out to the Christian communities near where I live and invite the Christians, and this is through various church groups, not posters on the street  poles, to come join them for the celebration of the end of Ramadan.  A nice feast is prepared and we (the Christians) are graciously invited over to participate.  I must say I was warmly received.  The Islamic religion is basically rather mild, it is the crazies that warp things in order to fit into some mentally-ill agenda.  That is a quite small group.  Personally, I am perfectly happy to have Muslim neighbors, it just happens that there are none in my neck of the woods.  In Vermont, two Syrian refugee families were invited to settle, and that was all that could get past the Trump prohibitions on Muslim refugees.  Personally, I find that to be a bit of a shame.  I would certainly have enjoyed having a new Syrian restaurant in town. Oh, well. 

The other thing you want to keep in mind is that a good number of the Syrian refugees that sought admission to the USA were in fact Christians. Cheers.

 

7 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Under @Marina Schwarzs multiculturalism thread I already sent you a link to an interview with a gay imam that has founded an inclusive mosque. Why do you choose solely to focus on the negative rather than the positive? 

 

7 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

I will be happy to answer: the former territories of the Ottoman empire have pretty extensive first-hand experience with Islam without actually being Muslim countries. The majority of the population was decidedly not in favour of incoming migration.

The three of you have provided me different accounts.  Jan claims there is an overwhelmingly Muslim country that functions just fine as well as tiny minorities in other countries that function just fine. Rasmus points out a gay imam, which is evidence of change.  Marina points out that the former territories of the Ottoman empire have "extensive first-hand experience" and are "decidedly not in favour" of Islamic migration.  

If we read my previous posts, we'll see that I specifically outlined the conditions under which problems occur: tiny minorities blend into the larger population because they have no power - but as the Muslim presence grows, history shows that it flexes its political muscle, driving out the natives in the process.  Even in the modern era, this is often accompanied by violence.  

Jan, I'm afraid your examples are off point.  Indonesia "functions" because it suppresses all dissent.  If anything, that's an argument for banning Islam in Western countries; we don't do that here.  Also, it's all fine and well that a handful of grateful migrants blended in, but I want to know how people behave when they're given power.  What happens when they're 10% of the population?  50%?  75%? Growth into these levels is where problems occur, so that's what we must look at.  

Rasmus, I'm glad there are examples of progress.  How common are they? 

This all leads to the next questions: 
1)  Have progressive practices spread to the majority of Islam?  Most importantly, have basic human rights been accepted by Muslim majority nations and Islamic religious leaders?  If it's an isolated incident that the religious leaders reject, then we can expect it to be suppressed in Western nations as Muslim populations grow & exert political influence.  If it's mainstream, then we have nothing to worry about
2)  When accepting immigrants, how should a host country separate the moderates from the extremists?  

In short, we need to understand the entire population and be able to distinguish those who are compatible with Western values from those who are not. 

 

8 hours ago, shadowkin said:

"after the fiascos and mass deaths of 9/11 in New York"   You mean mass murder? It's clear what you're about. You ever think that those Syrian Christians fleeing Syria might have something do to with "the local muslim folks".

This is an important point.  The rise of Muslim majorities tends to coincide with the exodus of non-Muslim natives.  E.g. before the war in Kosovo, hundreds of thousands of Serbs had already fled the Muslim majority in Albania.  That wasn't a coincidence.  

 

7 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

What about holocaust? Is that also a muslim conspiracy? 

I get your attempt at humor, but this isn't helpful.  

 

2 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

How is this different from pointing out other evils in European history such as the crusades? Pls explain to me. The general narrative that many want to portray is how immigrants are to blame for everything. No immigration = happy societies. I give you 1940 - 1945. No immigration, but definitly not a happy Europe. 

The first - and most important - difference is understanding what I actually said.  At no point did I say immigrants are to blame for everything, nor did I say that all immigrants are bad.  Your straw man argument isn't helpful.  

Another difference is putting evidence in context.  When we see a thing, we must study it until we understand what actually happened.  E.g. Europe started the crusades after repeated Islamic attempts to conquer Europe, so we can't flippantly dismiss the crusades as bad behavior.  I've already explained this.

The next difference is that I'm following a process - which is distinctly different than grasping for scapegoats.  When strong evidence accumulates about a particular thing, it behooves us to study it more carefully.  Think of it as quality control.  In QC, we take periodic samples to ensure the system is operating as intended.  When a significant fraction of samples fail testing, we stop the production line and search for the root cause.  Production does not resume until the root cause is found.  I am following this process.  There is an extensive collection of problems with mass migration in general and Islamic immigration in particular.  I propose that we halt the recent mass immigration until we've understood & addressed the root causes.  Again, I have already explained my reasoning in great detail and asked for additional data.  The spurious arguments aren't helpful.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Illurion said:

Muslims do not integrate with Christians,  or anyone,  for that matter.

They sit there and GROW,  as a solid, " indigestible rock",  in the gullet of the victim nation.

Eventuality,  the victim nation dies (is conquered) ,  or the Muslim "rock" is surgically removed  (revolution).

This is what I've been hinting at.  If we don't ensure mainstream Islam learns to integrate itself with other cultures - which is not the same as dominating other cultures, as we've seen happen in Muslim majority countries - we're setting ourselves up for massive civil wars and unprecedented loss of life.  

I'll repeat myself: we need to solve the root cause of this problem before allowing immigration.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is the Koran.    It contains many passages under the category of jihad.

The Koran teaches NOT to integrate.  The Koran teaches to KILL all non Muslims.

Read "Satanic Verses"  for examples of these passages.

Over the last 2000 years,  the BIBLE has been CHANGED....   edited into newer versions that remove such things that could have been interpreted that way.  the latest official version is the "King James."

There is no process in which the KORAN can be changed,  or edited.

The Saudi Royal Family are supposed to be the direct descendants of Mohammad.

Only they could order changes to the Koran with any "authority."

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Illurion said:

Uh...?... YOU ?

ps:   you typo'd "condescending" .  please use spell-check.

To be fair, I don't think English is Rasmus's first language.  I think we should give him credit for conveying his ideas as well as he does despite that.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, perhaps we have reached a point in this conversation that calls for a time out.

Is it possible to get this conversation back on the Macron/protester topic? 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Illurion said:

The problem is the Koran.    It contains many passages under the category of jihad.

The Koran teaches NOT to integrate.  The Koran teaches to KILL all non Muslims.

Read "Satanic Verses"  for examples of these passages.

Over the last 2000 years,  the BIBLE has been CHANGED....   edited into newer versions that remove such things that could have been interpreted that way.  the latest official version is the "King James."

There is no process in which the KORAN can be changed,  or edited.

The Saudi Royal Family are supposed to be the direct descendants of Mohammad.

Only they could order changes to the Koran with any "authority."

For the edification of all present, can you quote some of those passages?  This is a discussion of sensitive issues, so if we're going to claim an ideology says something, it's important to provide a source.  The source both reifies your claim and provides the opposition an opportunity to respond.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rodent said:

Okay, perhaps we have reached a point in this conversation that calls for a time out.

Is it possible to get this conversation back on the Macron/protester topic? 

I see your point, but I also see the protests as related to mass immigration.  We followed a chain of topics that led us progressively closer to root causes - or at least what we believe are the root causes.  Maybe we could investigate other possible root causes.  Does anyone have competing theories? 

I do want to hear Illurion's quotes from the Koran though.  That would be an appropriate, authoritative capstone to the entire discussion.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Illurion said:

LOL..   You are right.  I am guilty.  It is a generational thing i believe.   When i was in school many,  many,  many decades ago,  the Teachers stated that "formatting, punctuation,  and spelling" WERE EVERYTHING.

These days,  everyone abbreviates,  or skips transitional words all together.

Having seen the transition from proper writing to obsessive brevity, what are your thoughts?  Was anything significant gained or lost? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, mthebold said:

I see your point, but I also see the protests as related to mass immigration.  We followed a chain of topics that led us progressively closer to root causes - or at least what we believe are the root causes.  Maybe we could investigate other possible root causes.  Does anyone have competing theories? 

I do want to hear Illurion's quotes from the Koran though.  That would be an appropriate, authoritative capstone to the entire discussion.  

I understand the progression of the topic, and agree that you can follow it back to Macron/protesters. However, I think that rabbit hole is deep enough at this point. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

12 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Paul, my guess would be Indonesia.  As I understand it, there are more muslims in INdonesia than in any other country. 

How long that religious tradition has been there, I dunno.  But it seems to work for them, so hey, what works, works. 

On a strictly personal note, after the fiascos and mass deaths of 9/11 in New York, the local muslim folks have made it a point to reach out to the Christian communities near where I live and invite the Christians, and this is through various church groups, not posters on the street  poles, to come join them for the celebration of the end of Ramadan.  A nice feast is prepared and we (the Christians) are graciously invited over to participate.  I must say I was warmly received.  The Islamic religion is basically rather mild, it is the crazies that warp things in order to fit into some mentally-ill agenda.  That is a quite small group.  Personally, I am perfectly happy to have Muslim neighbors, it just happens that there are none in my neck of the woods.  In Vermont, two Syrian refugee families were invited to settle, and that was all that could get past the Trump prohibitions on Muslim refugees.  Personally, I find that to be a bit of a shame.  I would certainly have enjoyed having a new Syrian restaurant in town. Oh, well. 

The other thing you want to keep in mind is that a good number of the Syrian refugees that sought admission to the USA were in fact Christians. Cheers.

About Indonesia where the Christian governor of Jakarta was recently imprisoned for blasphemy against Islam

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/09/jakarta-governor-sentenced-two-years-prison-blasphemy/

or Libya, Algeria where African migrants are sold into slavery, murdered and raped today, not 500 years ago.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/20/libyan-government-investigate-slave-auctions-african-migrants/

https://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFKCN1IV1R5-OZATP

or forced by the thousands into a death march into the Sahara desert by Algeria  

https://apnews.com/9ca5592217aa4acd836b9ee091ebfc20

You're clueless and out of your depth or simply pimping for muslims

Edited by shadowkin
correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

You're clueless and out of your depth or simply pimping for muslims

fyi: if you read Jan's comments, you'll find that he produces well-considered, exquisitely written pieces that display deep understanding of issues and spark critical thought.  He's respected on this forum for good reason.  It's often the case that Jan writes something I had no clue about and that immediately changes my position.  

In this case, I happen to disagree with Jan - but I'm not so bold as to believe I'm absolutely right and he is absolutely wrong.  We come from different experiences, and each of those experiences has led to different opinions.  Each of our opinions is valid based on what we currently know.  However, if we see this difference and refuse to investigate it - if there is nothing that will change our minds - then our opinion immediately becomes invalid.  Ignoring discrepancies is not an option.  As citizens, we are obligated to find out why differences.

As a journalism professor allegedly quipped, "If someone says it's raining, and another person says it's dry, it's not your job to quote them both. Your job is to look out the f***ing window and find out which is true." 

 

That said, my point in this forum is not to stand on a soapbox and bash ideologies.  I see troubling trends across the world, and I honestly want someone to convince me I'm wrong.  The stakes are high, high stakes demand a high standard of evidence, and I don't ignore difficult truths - but I do want to know what I'm missing.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mthebold said:

For the edification of all present, can you quote some of those passages?  This is a discussion of sensitive issues, so if we're going to claim an ideology says something, it's important to provide a source.  The source both reifies your claim and provides the opposition an opportunity to respond.  

No thanks for many reasons.

(1)   Most everyone knows what those passages are anyway.

(2)   Rodent says for us to move on.

(3)   There are many "Fatwa's" against the "Satanic Verses" even though it just reprints the Koran as it is written.

(4)   Finally,  my best friend for the last 20 years is Sunni Muslim,  and he says i should never mention "SV" because,  though he personally doesn't care,  he says there are lots of crazies out there that will try to fulfill the various "Fatwa's".

 

So,  lets move on.

Looks like Macron has wimped out and canceled the gas tax increase,  so,  how long before he does something else stupid ?

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, mthebold said:

In this case, I happen to disagree with Jan - but I'm not so bold as to believe I'm absolutely right and he is absolutely wrong.  We come from different experiences, and each of those experiences has led to different opinions.  Each of our opinions is valid based on what we currently know

Arguments are valid, or not.  There is no test of opinions - they are personal views which can range from bat-crazy to well-considered in the eyes of others.

11 minutes ago, mthebold said:

That said, my point in this forum is not to stand on a soapbox and bash ideologies.  I see troubling trends across the world, and I honestly want someone to convince me I'm wrong.  The stakes are high, high stakes demand a high standard of evidence, and I don't ignore difficult truths - but I do want to know what I'm missing.  

Delusional?  I seldom see such nonsense from a poster.  Luckily for us natural disasters exacerbated by the effects if climate change are not a troubling trend in your eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Red said:

Arguments are valid, or not.  There is no test of opinions - they are personal views which can range from bat-crazy to well-considered in the eyes of others.

Arguments are built on the data available.  They're also prone to errors, humans being imperfect.  The point of a discussion is to ensure all sides know what data is available and then to check the arguments built upon it.  Other people may know things I don't, I may have made mistakes, and there are a surprising number of ways to construct arguments from the same data.  That's why I say I'm not so bold as to believe I'm absolutely right and someone else is absolutely wrong.  I do not question the validity of logic, as you seem to be suggesting.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Illurion said:

The problem is the Koran.    It contains many passages under the category of jihad.

The Koran teaches NOT to integrate.  The Koran teaches to KILL all non Muslims.

Read "Satanic Verses"  for examples of these passages.

Over the last 2000 years,  the BIBLE has been CHANGED....   edited into newer versions that remove such things that could have been interpreted that way.  the latest official version is the "King James.

The Old Testament remains part of the inerrant King James Version of the Bible.  To suggest it's squeaky clean is a bit rich isn't it?

For example: in Joshua 6:20-21 God helps the Israelites destroy Jericho, killing “men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.”  And in Deuteronomy 2:32-35 God has the Israelites kill everyone in Heshbon, including children, while in Deuteronomy 3:3-7 God has the Israelites do the same to the people of Bashan. Then we have Numbers 31:7-18 where the Israelites kill all the Midianites except for the virgins, whom they take as spoils of war.  How about a flood that killed off everyone, except those matey with Noah.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Osama said:

I wish there was a "WOW" sign as well!

 

well the gentleman's an expert but....do you buy the argument?

It's an alternative narrative to the official narrative.  I suspect the actuality lies somewhere in middle.  Both sides seem to hype their position as relatively absolute.  I don't particularly buy into the belief of absolutes. 

Different viewpoints exist.

When any narrative is presented as the absolute truth that must be believed, and questioning is verboten, I tend to be sceptical.

 

8e4e6b76334d152a4a8ccbc80514446ddb5e55aed8bae77c70fc8a124a93b2b2.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites