Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 09, 2016, 05:16:04 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
98821 Posts in 2346 Topics by 1082 Members
Latest Member: James
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  Islam in Europe
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] Print
Author Topic: Islam in Europe  (Read 178153 times)
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38292


« Reply #700 on: August 17, 2016, 06:19:28 PM »

http://www.patdollard.com/muslim-london-mayor-sets-up-task-force-to-jail-those-who-annoy-muslims-online/
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8404


« Reply #701 on: August 19, 2016, 11:48:16 AM »

German news agency dpa quotes Merkel as saying that "Islamist terrorism by IS isn't a phenomenon that came to us with the refugees, it's one that we had before too."
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/08/18/world/europe/ap-eu-germany-merkel.html?_r=0
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/08/chancellor_merkel_no_link_between_terrorism_and_refugees.html#ixzz4Hn50t6Ni

Right, but Ms. Merkel, you made it worse, you made it worse by a million ('finding a needle in a stack of needles'), and you made it unsolvable, irreversible. 

Might as well deny it...
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14096


« Reply #702 on: August 19, 2016, 01:50:48 PM »

Lung cancer existed before I smoked two packs a day...

German news agency dpa quotes Merkel as saying that "Islamist terrorism by IS isn't a phenomenon that came to us with the refugees, it's one that we had before too."
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/08/18/world/europe/ap-eu-germany-merkel.html?_r=0
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/08/chancellor_merkel_no_link_between_terrorism_and_refugees.html#ixzz4Hn50t6Ni

Right, but Ms. Merkel, you made it worse, you made it worse by a million ('finding a needle in a stack of needles'), and you made it unsolvable, irreversible. 

Might as well deny it...

Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 6386


« Reply #703 on: August 19, 2016, 02:32:28 PM »

I think Merkel , the Clintons, the Obamas, some of the socialists from Europe and throw in a couple of illegals from Europe, Asia, Africa, South and Central America, and why not from Australia and Antarctica all in one giant home together against there will on an island in the middle of the Pacific.  Any one for Pitcairn island?

Ah what a beautiful loving family they would all make .  It takes a village.  Heavy on the sarcasm.   wink
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14096


« Reply #704 on: August 30, 2016, 10:30:38 AM »

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/541889/cop-stab-street-Toulouse-France-isis

Amazing how common violent mental illness is in Europe now.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38292


« Reply #705 on: August 31, 2016, 11:51:35 AM »

With The Terror Threat Growing, Europe Changes Course
by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
August 31, 2016
http://www.investigativeproject.org/5617/with-the-terror-threat-growing-europe-changes
 
 Sixteen years ago, when Dutch commentator Paul Scheffer published his "Multicultural Drama" declaring that multiculturalism in the Netherlands had failed, the response was swift and angry. Critics across Europe called him racist, bigoted, nationalistic. Others dismissed his views as mere rants and ramblings of a Leftist in search of a cause.

Not anymore.

With over 275 people killed in 10 Islamic terrorist attacks since January 2015, Europeans harbor no more illusions about the multiculturalist vision: where immigrants from Muslim countries are concerned, that idealist vision has more than just failed. It has produced a culture of hatred, fear, and unrelenting danger. Now, with European Muslim youth radicalizing at an unprecedented rate and the threat of new terrorist attacks, Europe is reassessing its handling of Muslim communities and its counterterrorism strategies and laws.

Among the changes being considered are a reversal of laws that allow radical Muslims to receive handouts from the very governments they seek to destroy; restricting foreign funding of mosques; and stronger surveillance on private citizens.

Chief among the new counterterrorism approaches is a program to coordinate intelligence data among European Union countries – a tactic that has not been pursued with any regularity or such depth before now. But following the November attacks in Paris, the Dutch intelligence agency AIVD initiated weekly meetings among intel agencies from all EU countries, Switzerland, and Norway, with the objective of sharing information, exchanging new clues, insights, and suspect alerts, and discussing improvements to a Europe-wide system of counterterrorism and intelligence.

Through these meetings and the improved shared database, it is now possible for each country to contextualize its intelligence and understand links between individuals and various groups from one city to another – and so, between radicals and radical groups as they pass through a borderless EU.
Concurrently, EU members are now beginning to share information about web sites and even details about private citizens where needed. Most countries had been reluctant to make such exchanges, citing both privacy concerns and the need to protect their sources. Other cooperative efforts include an EU initiative begun in February 2015 to counteract Islamic extremist propaganda. The project received a major €400 million boost in June, indicating the high priority Europe now places on fighting recruitment.

Earlier this month, Europol began a new effort to screen refugees still awaiting placement in Greek asylum centers. According to a report from Europa Nu, an initiative between the European parliament and the University of Leiden, Europol agents "specifically trained to unmask and dismantle terrorists and terror networks" will be dispatched to the camps to try to prevent terrorists from infiltrating the flood of refugees to Europe.

Some EU measures, however, have been based more in politics than counterterrorism, including efforts to crack down on the ability of radical Muslims to benefit from welfare programs. British citizens, for instance, reacted with outrage when it was discovered that the family of "Jihadi John" had received over £400,000 in taxpayer support over the course of 20 years. In Belgium, Salah Abdeslam, the terrorist accused of participating in the Nov. 13 Paris attacks, pulled in nearly €19,000 in welfare benefits from January 2014 and October 2015, according to Elsevier. And Gatestone reports that more than 30 Danish jihadists received a total of €51,000 in unemployment benefits all while battling alongside the Islamic State in Syria.

Such concerns have also spread to the United States. Earlier this year, U.S. Rep. Bruce Poliquin, R-Maine, introduced the "No Welfare For Terrorists Act."
"Terrorist victims and their families should never be forced to fund those who harmed them," he said in a statement. "This bill guarantees this will never happen."

But not all of Europe's new approaches to the terror threat are being coordinated out of Brussels. Many more, in fact, are country-specific, such as England's decision to follow an example set earlier by the Netherlands and Spain, separating jailed terrorists and terror suspects from other prisoners. The measures follow others the country adopted after the July 7, 2005 bombings of a London underground and buses, to criminalize "those who glorify terrorism, those involved in acts preparatory to terrorism, and those who advocate it without being directly involved," the New York Times reported.
In fact, prisons worldwide, including in the U.S., have long been viewed as warm breeding grounds for radicals and potential terrorists. Ahmed Coulibaly, the gunman at the Porte de Vincennes siege in January 2015, was serving time for a bank robbery, for instance, when he met Cherif Koauachi, one of the Charlie Hebdo attackers. Both converted to Islam there. It was in that same prison that the two encountered Djamel Beghal, an al-Qaida operative who attempted to blow up the American Embassy in Paris in 2001.

Hence many experts now argue in favor of isolating those held on terrorism-related charges as a way to stop them from radicalizing their fellow inmates.
Yet British officials have until now resisted creating separate wings for terror suspects, arguing that doing so gives them "credibility" and makes it harder to rehabilitate them. But a recent government report on Islamist extremism in British prisons forced a change in thinking, in part by noting that "other prisoners – both Muslim and non-Muslim – serving sentences for crimes unrelated to terrorism are nonetheless vulnerable to radicalization by Islamist Extremists [sic]."

Similarly, France, the site of the worst attacks of the past two years, also balked at first at the idea of separating terrorists from other prisoners, arguing that doing so "forms a terrorist cell within a prison." But the Charlie Hebdo attacks of January 2015 changed all that. Now, officials are even going further, looking at other potential sources of radicalization: the mosques.

Shortly after the Bastille Day attack in Nice, Prime Minister Manuel Valls announced plans to ban foreign financing for French mosques as part of an effort to establish a "French Islam," led by imams trained only in France. France hosts dozens of foreign-financed mosques – many sponsored by Saudi Arabia and Morocco – which preach Salafism, an extreme version of Islam practiced in the Saudi Kingdom and the root of much radical Islamist ideology. And according to a new report on counter-radicalization, about 300 imams come from outside France.

That same report also calls for "regular surveys" of France's 4-5 million Muslims, according to France 24, in order "to acquire a better understanding of this population in a country where statistics based on religious, ethnic, or racial criteria are banned."

Both proposed measures have been met with resistance. The "surveys," as even the report itself notes, are a means of circumventing laws against gathering information on the basis of religious criteria – and so, go against democratic principles. And many French officials also oppose the ban on foreign funding for mosques, arguing that French government intervention in places of worship contradicts separation between church and state. Besides, they claim, radicalization doesn't take place there anyway.

But Dutch authorities and counter-extremism experts are not so sure. The announcement earlier this month that Qatar would finance an Islamic center in Rotterdam, for instance, set off alarms even among Muslim moderates, including Rotterdam's Moroccan-born mayor Ahmed Marcouch. There are good reasons for this. The Salafist Eid Charity, which sponsors the project, has been on Israel's terror list since 2008, according to Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad. Moreover, in 2013 the U.S. Treasury Department accused the charity's founder, Abd al-Rahman al-Nu'aymi, of providing funding for al-Qaida and its affiliates, and named him a "specially designated global terrorist."

Plans for the center sound much like those of the now-abandoned plans for New York's "Ground Zero mosque," with sports facilities, prayer space, tutoring for students, Islamic child care, and, reports Dutch newspaper Volkskrant, imam training.

Yet the center's prospective director, Arnoud van Doorn, a convert to Islam and former member of the far-right, anti-Islam political party PVV, insists that any fears about the project are unfounded. "Our organization has nothing to do with extremism," he told the NRC. "We want only to provide a positive contribution to Dutch society."

Notably, though, France's proposal to ban foreign mosque funding and the Qatari backing of the Rotterdam center point to some of the deepest roots of Europe's radical Islam problem, and, despite all the new initiatives now underway, the greatest challenges to ending it. When Muslim immigrants came to Europe in the 1970s, they carved prayer spaces wherever they could: the backs of community grocery stores, in restaurants and tea rooms. But these soon became too small to handle the growing Muslim population. Mosques – real mosques – would have to be built.

But by whom? The Muslim communities themselves were too poor. Western governments, wedded to the separation of church and state, could not subsidize them with taxpayer funds. And so the door was opened to foreign – mostly Saudi – investment, and the placement of Saudi-trained and Saudi-backed imams in European mosques. Europe had, in essence, rolled out the welcome mat for Salafism.

Now they want to roll it in again. But is it too late? Even as Western intelligence is now uniting to fight radical Islam, Islamic countries are pooling together in Europe to expand it. The result, as Manuel Valls told French daily Le Monde, is that, "What's at stake is the republic. And our shield is democracy."

Hence as the number attacks against Western targets increase, many Europeans are coming to understand that preserving the core of that democracy may mean disrupting some of the tenets on which it's built, like certain elements of privacy, for instance, and religious principles that violate the freedom that we stand for . It is, as it were, a matter of destroying even healthy trees to save the forest. But in this tug-of-war between the Islamic world's efforts to shape the West, and Western efforts to save itself, only our commitment to the very heart of our ideals will define who wins this fight.

Abigail R. Esman, the author, most recently, of Radical State: How Jihad Is Winning Over Democracy in the West (Praeger, 2010), is a freelance writer based in New York and the Netherlands.
 
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14096


« Reply #706 on: August 31, 2016, 03:28:25 PM »

File this under "too little, too late".

With The Terror Threat Growing, Europe Changes Course
by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
August 31, 2016
http://www.investigativeproject.org/5617/with-the-terror-threat-growing-europe-changes
 
 Sixteen years ago, when Dutch commentator Paul Scheffer published his "Multicultural Drama" declaring that multiculturalism in the Netherlands had failed, the response was swift and angry. Critics across Europe called him racist, bigoted, nationalistic. Others dismissed his views as mere rants and ramblings of a Leftist in search of a cause.

Not anymore.

With over 275 people killed in 10 Islamic terrorist attacks since January 2015, Europeans harbor no more illusions about the multiculturalist vision: where immigrants from Muslim countries are concerned, that idealist vision has more than just failed. It has produced a culture of hatred, fear, and unrelenting danger. Now, with European Muslim youth radicalizing at an unprecedented rate and the threat of new terrorist attacks, Europe is reassessing its handling of Muslim communities and its counterterrorism strategies and laws.

Among the changes being considered are a reversal of laws that allow radical Muslims to receive handouts from the very governments they seek to destroy; restricting foreign funding of mosques; and stronger surveillance on private citizens.

Chief among the new counterterrorism approaches is a program to coordinate intelligence data among European Union countries – a tactic that has not been pursued with any regularity or such depth before now. But following the November attacks in Paris, the Dutch intelligence agency AIVD initiated weekly meetings among intel agencies from all EU countries, Switzerland, and Norway, with the objective of sharing information, exchanging new clues, insights, and suspect alerts, and discussing improvements to a Europe-wide system of counterterrorism and intelligence.

Through these meetings and the improved shared database, it is now possible for each country to contextualize its intelligence and understand links between individuals and various groups from one city to another – and so, between radicals and radical groups as they pass through a borderless EU.
Concurrently, EU members are now beginning to share information about web sites and even details about private citizens where needed. Most countries had been reluctant to make such exchanges, citing both privacy concerns and the need to protect their sources. Other cooperative efforts include an EU initiative begun in February 2015 to counteract Islamic extremist propaganda. The project received a major €400 million boost in June, indicating the high priority Europe now places on fighting recruitment.

Earlier this month, Europol began a new effort to screen refugees still awaiting placement in Greek asylum centers. According to a report from Europa Nu, an initiative between the European parliament and the University of Leiden, Europol agents "specifically trained to unmask and dismantle terrorists and terror networks" will be dispatched to the camps to try to prevent terrorists from infiltrating the flood of refugees to Europe.

Some EU measures, however, have been based more in politics than counterterrorism, including efforts to crack down on the ability of radical Muslims to benefit from welfare programs. British citizens, for instance, reacted with outrage when it was discovered that the family of "Jihadi John" had received over £400,000 in taxpayer support over the course of 20 years. In Belgium, Salah Abdeslam, the terrorist accused of participating in the Nov. 13 Paris attacks, pulled in nearly €19,000 in welfare benefits from January 2014 and October 2015, according to Elsevier. And Gatestone reports that more than 30 Danish jihadists received a total of €51,000 in unemployment benefits all while battling alongside the Islamic State in Syria.

Such concerns have also spread to the United States. Earlier this year, U.S. Rep. Bruce Poliquin, R-Maine, introduced the "No Welfare For Terrorists Act."
"Terrorist victims and their families should never be forced to fund those who harmed them," he said in a statement. "This bill guarantees this will never happen."

But not all of Europe's new approaches to the terror threat are being coordinated out of Brussels. Many more, in fact, are country-specific, such as England's decision to follow an example set earlier by the Netherlands and Spain, separating jailed terrorists and terror suspects from other prisoners. The measures follow others the country adopted after the July 7, 2005 bombings of a London underground and buses, to criminalize "those who glorify terrorism, those involved in acts preparatory to terrorism, and those who advocate it without being directly involved," the New York Times reported.
In fact, prisons worldwide, including in the U.S., have long been viewed as warm breeding grounds for radicals and potential terrorists. Ahmed Coulibaly, the gunman at the Porte de Vincennes siege in January 2015, was serving time for a bank robbery, for instance, when he met Cherif Koauachi, one of the Charlie Hebdo attackers. Both converted to Islam there. It was in that same prison that the two encountered Djamel Beghal, an al-Qaida operative who attempted to blow up the American Embassy in Paris in 2001.

Hence many experts now argue in favor of isolating those held on terrorism-related charges as a way to stop them from radicalizing their fellow inmates.
Yet British officials have until now resisted creating separate wings for terror suspects, arguing that doing so gives them "credibility" and makes it harder to rehabilitate them. But a recent government report on Islamist extremism in British prisons forced a change in thinking, in part by noting that "other prisoners – both Muslim and non-Muslim – serving sentences for crimes unrelated to terrorism are nonetheless vulnerable to radicalization by Islamist Extremists [sic]."

Similarly, France, the site of the worst attacks of the past two years, also balked at first at the idea of separating terrorists from other prisoners, arguing that doing so "forms a terrorist cell within a prison." But the Charlie Hebdo attacks of January 2015 changed all that. Now, officials are even going further, looking at other potential sources of radicalization: the mosques.

Shortly after the Bastille Day attack in Nice, Prime Minister Manuel Valls announced plans to ban foreign financing for French mosques as part of an effort to establish a "French Islam," led by imams trained only in France. France hosts dozens of foreign-financed mosques – many sponsored by Saudi Arabia and Morocco – which preach Salafism, an extreme version of Islam practiced in the Saudi Kingdom and the root of much radical Islamist ideology. And according to a new report on counter-radicalization, about 300 imams come from outside France.

That same report also calls for "regular surveys" of France's 4-5 million Muslims, according to France 24, in order "to acquire a better understanding of this population in a country where statistics based on religious, ethnic, or racial criteria are banned."

Both proposed measures have been met with resistance. The "surveys," as even the report itself notes, are a means of circumventing laws against gathering information on the basis of religious criteria – and so, go against democratic principles. And many French officials also oppose the ban on foreign funding for mosques, arguing that French government intervention in places of worship contradicts separation between church and state. Besides, they claim, radicalization doesn't take place there anyway.

But Dutch authorities and counter-extremism experts are not so sure. The announcement earlier this month that Qatar would finance an Islamic center in Rotterdam, for instance, set off alarms even among Muslim moderates, including Rotterdam's Moroccan-born mayor Ahmed Marcouch. There are good reasons for this. The Salafist Eid Charity, which sponsors the project, has been on Israel's terror list since 2008, according to Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad. Moreover, in 2013 the U.S. Treasury Department accused the charity's founder, Abd al-Rahman al-Nu'aymi, of providing funding for al-Qaida and its affiliates, and named him a "specially designated global terrorist."

Plans for the center sound much like those of the now-abandoned plans for New York's "Ground Zero mosque," with sports facilities, prayer space, tutoring for students, Islamic child care, and, reports Dutch newspaper Volkskrant, imam training.

Yet the center's prospective director, Arnoud van Doorn, a convert to Islam and former member of the far-right, anti-Islam political party PVV, insists that any fears about the project are unfounded. "Our organization has nothing to do with extremism," he told the NRC. "We want only to provide a positive contribution to Dutch society."

Notably, though, France's proposal to ban foreign mosque funding and the Qatari backing of the Rotterdam center point to some of the deepest roots of Europe's radical Islam problem, and, despite all the new initiatives now underway, the greatest challenges to ending it. When Muslim immigrants came to Europe in the 1970s, they carved prayer spaces wherever they could: the backs of community grocery stores, in restaurants and tea rooms. But these soon became too small to handle the growing Muslim population. Mosques – real mosques – would have to be built.

But by whom? The Muslim communities themselves were too poor. Western governments, wedded to the separation of church and state, could not subsidize them with taxpayer funds. And so the door was opened to foreign – mostly Saudi – investment, and the placement of Saudi-trained and Saudi-backed imams in European mosques. Europe had, in essence, rolled out the welcome mat for Salafism.

Now they want to roll it in again. But is it too late? Even as Western intelligence is now uniting to fight radical Islam, Islamic countries are pooling together in Europe to expand it. The result, as Manuel Valls told French daily Le Monde, is that, "What's at stake is the republic. And our shield is democracy."

Hence as the number attacks against Western targets increase, many Europeans are coming to understand that preserving the core of that democracy may mean disrupting some of the tenets on which it's built, like certain elements of privacy, for instance, and religious principles that violate the freedom that we stand for . It is, as it were, a matter of destroying even healthy trees to save the forest. But in this tug-of-war between the Islamic world's efforts to shape the West, and Western efforts to save itself, only our commitment to the very heart of our ideals will define who wins this fight.

Abigail R. Esman, the author, most recently, of Radical State: How Jihad Is Winning Over Democracy in the West (Praeger, 2010), is a freelance writer based in New York and the Netherlands.
 
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38292


« Reply #707 on: September 04, 2016, 12:34:32 AM »

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/30/angela-merkel-on-refugee-crisis-germany-screwed-up-big-time/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38292


« Reply #708 on: September 04, 2016, 12:43:23 PM »

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/03/world/europe/burkini-ban-muslim-women.html?emc=edit_th_20160904&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14096


« Reply #709 on: September 04, 2016, 12:49:47 PM »


Perhaps they would be happier in a sharia compliant country. Plenty of those on the planet.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14096


« Reply #710 on: September 06, 2016, 09:54:54 PM »

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/09/hugh-fitzgerald-never-mind-about-50-million-frenchman-can-13000-chinese-be-wrong

Hugh Fitzgerald: Never Mind About 50 Million Frenchman – Can 13,000 Chinese Be Wrong?

September 5, 2016 10:54 am By Hugh Fitzgerald 91 Comments

Given the big demonstration in Paris on September 4, I’d like to come back to the same subject I posted about two weeks ago.

Chinese rally

“Thousands rally in Paris to protest crime targeting Chinese,” Reuters, September 4, 2016:

    At least 13,000 people [the latest figures range from 15,000 to 50,000] attended a rally in Paris on Sunday to protest against what they say is a crime wave targeting the Chinese community in France, police said, after a Chinese textile designer died after being mugged last month.

    Demonstrators waving French flags and sporting T-shirts printed with the slogans “Stop violence, muggings, insecurity” or “Equality for all, security for all” marched from the Place de Republique square to the Bastille in eastern Paris, asking for more police protection.

    Chaoling Zhang, a 49-year-old textile designer, died last month after five days in a coma after being attacked in the northern Paris suburb of Aubervilliers by three men who stole his bag.

    Members of Aubervilliers’ large Chinese community, home to many Chinese immigrants, said that the death of Chaolin Zhang was the latest in a string of targeted assaults.

    At first it was just stealing bags, then it was stealing bags with violence, and now it’s stealing bags and killing. It could happen to anyone,” 31-year-old Wang Yunzhou told Reuters TV.

    The people here are angry. We can’t feel relaxed in the street, and if we don’t even get a basic welcome in the police station people start to wonder,” he said, adding that he moved to France from Wenzhou in south east China twenty years ago.

    Aubervilliers, which has a population of 77,500, is home to a large Chinese community connected to the garment trade. Some 600,000 ethnic Chinese people live in the country overall, including French citizens.

    Last month, 27 Chinese tourists were robbed and their driver sprayed with tear gas as they boarded a bus that was to take them to Paris’s Charles de Gaulle airport. The incident raised fears that Chinese tourists, important luxury spenders, would stop coming to Paris.

    Tourist traffic in Paris has dropped significantly since attacks by Islamist militants last November, leading to sharp declines in sales for luxury goods makers but also for the capital’s retailers, hotels and restaurants.

    Attacks on Chinese, Korean and Japanese tourists are also frequent in the French capital as robbers believe they carry large sums in cash and their suitcases are stuffed with luxury goods purchased in Paris, according to police.

    In May, Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo traveled to Beijing to reassure Chinese authorities that Paris – the most visited city in the world – had taken measures to beef up its security.

Now what is striking about this Reuters article is that it nowhere identifies those who are attacking the Chinese. Nor are they identified in this story from Channel News Asia, nor in this one from RFI, nor in this from Le Figaro, nor in any of the half-dozen other versions of the story I’ve checked. Not one of them, that is, dares to make mention of “Islam” or “Muslims,” even though in Paris and in Aubervilliers, the Chinese are protesting the violence visited upon them from Muslims, calling it “anti-Asian racism.”

When I posted my piece on the attacks that the Chinese immigrants in Aubervilliers, a heavily Muslim suburb on the outskirts of Paris, endure from their Muslim neighbors, I noted that Muslims have been robbing, extorting money from businesses, physically attacking, and even killing Chinese immigrants who have the misfortune to live and work near them. I should also have noted that robberies of the Chinese in Aubervilliers have tripled in just one year. Some explain this by suggesting the Muslims feel humiliated because the Chinese clothing and textile warehouses, and import-export shopping malls, are so successful, standing in silent economic reproach of the Muslims, who tend to live off welfare benefits for as long as they can (some are very good at turning it into a lifetime benefit), and have failed to demonstrate any entrepreneurial flair, unlike the Chinese migrants. But that’s nonsense. The Muslims in France aren’t ashamed of living off welfare; they’re proud they can manipulate the system, and claim their informal Jizyah from French taxpayers. The main reason that the Chinese are attacked in Aubervilliers is the same reason that the French are attacked – they are Infidels, and thus a legitimate target for Muslims. Chinese property is as much a form of Jizyah as are the welfare benefits offered by the French state.

This harassment of the Chinese near Paris has been going on for a long time. It got so bad that at one point the Chinese ambassador to France was forced to pay a visit to Aubervilliers to try to calm his countrymen down. And in 2013, the Socialist mayor of Aubervilliers, Jacques Salvator, suggested that the violence against them could be halted if Chinese companies would agree to hire more Arabs and Africans. The Chinese were not assuaged, countering that “Muslims do not work as hard as the Chinese, that they are more demanding, and that they complain too much.”Anyone familiar with Muslim work habits would need no convincing.

Since that demonstration in Aubervilliers two weeks ago, apparently little has been done to placate the Chinese. They described to reporters covering their demonstration in Paris their feeling of frustration at not being listened to by the French authorities who, they said, fail to realize what kind of daily terror they endure. And in addition to the attacks on Chinese who live in the suburbs, there has been a steady increase in the number of attacks targeting Chinese (and Korean, and Japanese) tourists in central Paris. These Asian tourists are known both to buy luxury goods to take home with them, and to carry lots of cash. Just the other day, a gang of six (unidentified men) jumped onto a bus just about to leave a hotel for the airport, and made off with luxury-filled luggage belonging to the 27 Chinese tourists on board. The attackers in Aubervilliers have been identified as Muslims, but in the stories about attacks on Chinese tourists the criminals are not identified. But reading between the lines suggests that those attacking the tourists, like those known to be attacking the Chinese in Aubervilliers, are Muslims, and for a simple reason: had any of these criminals been French, the press, which tends to protect Muslims, would certainly have been eager to describe them as such. A refusal to identify them, in the current climate, almost certainly means they were Muslims.

So on September 4, in Paris, according to the police, at least 15,000 Chinese showed up to demand “security for all.” Chinese sources claim that as many as 50,000 people may have turned out to show support. It’s a fantastic showing, in any case, and what’s more, no one can dismiss it as a “right-wing” or “racist” rally because it’s not white Frenchmen, but Chinese who are protesting against the “anti-Asian racism” by their attackers. Since some white Europeans may still be reluctant to stand up for themselves against Muslims, then perhaps they will find it easier to stand up for the Chinese in France as, in the U.K., it may be easier for the British to stand up for Hindus and Sikhs, and then Europeans will begin to realize – as I wrote two weeks ago and will repeat verbatim here – that wherever you look, it’s not a case of Islam against the West, but of Islam against All the Rest.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38292


« Reply #711 on: September 21, 2016, 10:06:38 AM »

London Mayor Sadiq Khan to U.S. Immigrants: Don't Assimilate
by Raheem Kassam  •  Sep 16, 2016
Cross-posted from Breitbart
http://www.meforum.org/blog/2016/09/sadiq-khan-immigrants-shouldnt-assimilate
 
Originally published under the title "London's Islamist-Linked Mayor Tells U.S. Audience: 'Immigrants Shouldn't Assimilate'."
 
Sadiq Khan narrowly won London's mayoral election in May.

London's Muslim mayor Sadiq Khan has continued his pro-Hillary Clinton tour of the United States by declaring that immigrants into the West should not be forced to assimilate.  His comments come hot on the heels of the Chicago press exposing his connections to radical Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.
Mr. Khan, who was elected to be London's mayor in May 2016, has also used his trip to claim that Republican candidate Donald Trump is "playing into the hands" of the Islamic State.

His trip runs contrary to the U.S. visit from former UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage, who presented an upbeat message of defeating the political establishment on stage with Donald Trump.

Instead, Mr. Khan insisted: "One of the lessons from around the world is that a laissez-faire or hands-off approach to social integration doesn't work. We need rules, institutions, and support to enable people to integrate into cohesive communities and for the avoidance of doubt, I don't mean assimilation, I mean integration, and there's a difference."

He added: "People shouldn't have to drop their cultures and traditions when they arrive in our cities and countries."

The United Kingdom, and especially areas of East London which overwhelmingly voted for Mr. Khan, is currently suffering from Muslim ghettoisation, horrific employment rates for Muslim women, an internal debate surrounding the banning of the burka, and ongoing issues such as female genital mutilation, anti-Semitism, and homophobia within Muslim communities.


Under Mr. Khan's plans, none of these "cultures and traditions" would need to be dropped for Muslim migrants to Western countries.

According to VOA News, Mr. Khan called himself a "big fan" of Hillary Clinton, adding: "We play straight into the hands of those who seek to divide us, of extremists and terrorists around the world, when we imply that it's not possible to hold Western values dear and to be a Muslim."

Mr. Khan has been repeatedly criticised for connections with former Guantanamo Bay detainees, as well as known Muslim extremists in the United Kingdom.

His appearances have been widely covered by Britain's media, but are routinely ignored by the political establishment.  He has also pledged to ban images of women not covered up from advertisements on the London Underground (Tube).  Recently, Breitbart London revealed that Mr. Khan appointed an extremism-linked advisor to his City Hall team.

Raheem Kassam is a Shillman-Ginsburg fellow at the Middle East Forum and editor-in-chief of Breitbart London.
Logged
Martel
Newbie
*
Posts: 44


« Reply #712 on: September 21, 2016, 11:33:50 AM »

If we accept that most mosques are funded by groups hostile to the West and that mosques are the place to disseminate and instill doctrine, then we know that in the US and Europe perhaps 80% of mosques are Wahhabist. In the UK half of the mosques are Deobandi (Taliban) and Wahhabi (Saudi) adherents.

Integration is prohibited by the Quran, as indicated by these verses.

Yusuf Ali version, 3:28
Let not the believers take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than Believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.

Pickthall version 48:29
Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves.

Yusuf Ali version, 6:106
Follow what thou art taught by inspiration from thy Lord: there is no god but He: and turn aside from those who join gods with Allah.

Yusuf Ali 8:55
For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.

Yusuf Ali 9:28
O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean;

Yusuf Ali 9:29
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Logged

My freedom is more important than your good idea.
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 14096


« Reply #713 on: September 25, 2016, 09:10:55 PM »

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/714291/Malmo-gun-attack-shooting-Sweden-several-injured

Probably some extremist Lutherans....
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8404


« Reply #714 on: September 26, 2016, 12:41:38 PM »


We get accustomed to GM's wit but this a profound point.  If these attacks are happening around the world in random places, why wouldn't the Swedish attacker be Lutheran?  But Malmo Sweden is a de facto Muslim country.  The flags they fly are 'Palestine' and ISIS.  These aren't random acts in random places; they are acts of war in places where the enemy was invited in to destroy us.
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 640


« Reply #715 on: September 26, 2016, 12:43:55 PM »


We get accustomed to GM's wit but this a profound point.  If these attacks are happening around the world in random places, why wouldn't the Swedish attacker be Lutheran?  But Malmo Sweden is a de facto Muslim country.  The flags they fly are 'Palestine' and ISIS.  These aren't random acts in random places; they are acts of war in places where the enemy was invited in to destroy us.

Agreed. I would enter what I truly think of multiculturalism from a historical perspective, but don't want to give the Left any fuel.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Martel
Newbie
*
Posts: 44


« Reply #716 on: September 26, 2016, 12:51:16 PM »

They're following the 7 point plan Al-Qaeda laid out (9/11 being the opening salvo), converging with the 5 point plan of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Both discuss escalating and ultimately open confrontation. While the attacks look 'random' and 'small minority' they have social cover - but once the iron fist shows itself, which eventually it must, they lose the protected status they presently have. They (as collective social enablers and the active militant group) will then be exposed. The plan rides on the mass following along in defense of Islam.

I expect that sadly it will get to this stage, and while it may not be pleasant and there will be casualties, it is where the tide is likely to turn. The enemy will no longer be amorphous, but clearly identified.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2016, 01:06:00 PM by Martel » Logged

My freedom is more important than your good idea.
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 640


« Reply #717 on: September 26, 2016, 12:58:07 PM »

They're following the 7 point plan Al-Qaeda laid out (9/11 being the opening salvo), converging with thethe 5 point plan of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Both discuss escalating and ultimately open confrontation. While the attacks look 'random' and 'small minority' they have social cover - but once the iron fist shows itself, which eventually it must, they lose the protected status they presently have. They (as collective social enablers and the active militant group) will then be exposed. The plan rides on the mass following along in defense of Islam.

I expect that sadly it will get to this stage, and while it may not be pleasant and there will be casualties, it is where the tide is likely to turn. The enemy will no longer be amorphous, but clearly identified.

Exactly so. The same is true of the Left (or any group that has a minority following, but that is prone to violence - as any group that wishes to govern must be), that while they suffer a numerical minority, they will wage war indirectly, often with words, but capable of escaping overt violence levied against them. In the end, historically, differing cultures have never existed together, long term, peacefully. The stronger group will always do one of the three following; submit the smaller group into assimilation on one form or another, kill the smaller group off, or drive them from the land they inhabit. The only exception to this, is the smaller group fighting a prolonged war, often guerrilla in nature, and winning. There is nothing else. If I'm mistaken (and I don't believe I am), I honestly welcome someone else to point it out.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Martel
Newbie
*
Posts: 44


« Reply #718 on: September 26, 2016, 01:14:25 PM »

The enemies of the West have had centuries of practice, however they are also using persuasion, infiltration, confidence games and the principles of 4th Gen Warfare expertly. They have studied us, we haven't kept pace with them.
They've taken Boyd's concepts of warfare to their logical conclusion, and at present running rings around us.

A major stumbling block is the loss of cultural confidence brought on by excessive liberalism.

What concerns me from reading the documents, is the level of preparation they may have made. How many of their loyal people are in critical positions in the police, military, medical services, utilities? They are waiting for what they call 'Zero Hour'.

The longer we leave the push back, the more bloody it will be to regain control. To push back now would be wiser, but things will have to come to a head for the truth to be revealed.

All the same, I am confident.
Logged

My freedom is more important than your good idea.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38292


« Reply #719 on: October 02, 2016, 09:50:10 AM »

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/world/europe/womens-emergence-as-terrorists-in-france-points-to-shift-in-isis-gender-roles.html?emc=edit_th_20161002&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193&_r=0
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 38292


« Reply #720 on: October 24, 2016, 09:56:50 AM »

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/10/uk-government-puts-up-15-foot-screens-so-arriving-muslim-migrant-children-cant-be-seen
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8404


« Reply #721 on: October 24, 2016, 09:58:53 AM »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3851012/I-don-t-feel-safe-refugees-Inside-stunning-German-ski-resort-hit-major-migrant-crime-wave-women-frightened-carry-pepper-spray.html

"The unease felt by many in Garmisch-Partenkirchen, pictured, is mirrored across Germany where Chancellor Merkel decision to open Germany's border to almost a million migrants has led to political and social unrest."

No word in the story about religion of the "migrants" and "asylum seekers", just a "clash of cultures".  I will move this to the Violent Lutherans in Europe thread if that turns out to be the case.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!