Multiculturalism is dangerous

[Mr K]

It does seem to be the response to 'smell coffee' when your arguments have been totally debunked !

Personally I prefer tea, it's good to be diverse

Originally Posted by Mr K

It does seem to be the response to 'smell coffee' when your arguments have been totally debunked !

Personally I prefer tea, it's good to be diverse

Yorkshire Tea, obvs., harvested in the underground tea mines of Keighley (the Otley tea mine was shut down after an explosion).

https://x.com/yorkshiretea/status/96...Fx9lsEXWlOa1jg

[roughbeast]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Sorry to put it this way - but your eyes must be very close together, preventing your ability to focus on reality. IVAN: "Khey, you vant go UK, Abdul?" ABDUL: "Sure - and my friends Ishmael and Moammar?" IVAN: 100% - jump into my truck, I take you now via Finland. From there you go south to France and then simples". PUTIN: "Excellent work, Ivan".

Why should Sunak not be believed? It's actually happening as I cited earlier.



You go too far by using the word "hate". I've explained very cogently what my fears are, shared by millions of Brits if not more. Actors are using "British values" to eventually destroy British Values so that we'll all have to face east. I do not hate Muslims. I do not like Islam as a practised culture, based on my observations over a long number of years. Indeed, Islam does not do multiculturalism.






Please open your eyes and smell the coffee.

Which version of Sephiroth am I replying to today? Is this the version who appears to be aware of nuance in a non-binary world, where absolute extreme positions are hard to maintain or is this the version of Sephiroth who declares that 300,000 peace marchers are all Hamas supporters and believes that Islam, unlike Christianity and Judaism, is incompatible with our society?

1. A minority of refugees from countries such as China, Afghanistan and Iran flee via Russia. Some of those have been weaponised by Russia, compromising the borders of neighbouring states like Poland and Finland. The vast majority enter Europe via the Mediterranean and Turkey of their own volition with no direction from Wagner or anybody else, but exploited by traffickers. Sunak is looking for excuses for his shambolic and inhumane immigration and asylum policies and is looking for enemies of the state to unify us all against.

2. Islam does do multiculturalism. As I previously pointed out, when Islam was at it's height in terms of geographical spread, there were more Christian churches in Muslim lands than in Christian lands. We see the small Christian community of Gaza hiding under siege in their main church with Israeli snipers picking them off if they venture outside. Mainstream Islam tolerates all three Abrahamic/Ibrahimic religions and had found an accommodation with Hinduism and Sikhism in India before the Brits arrived and destabilised everything, imposing divisive laws against homosexuality and protest. The Prophet also declared that good Muslims should abide by the laws in any country they emigrate to. We both complain about the extremists and I mourn the loss of the moderate Muslim states I encountered in the early 1970s. Islamic extremists are no different than extreme evangelical Christians and Jews. Just take an historical perspective and look at the behaviour and attitudes of so-called Christians in the Bible Belt of the USA and of the extremists driving the expansion of Jewish settlements in occupied Palestine.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by roughbeast

Which version of Sephiroth am I replying to today? Is this the version who appears to be aware of nuance in a non-binary world, where absolute extreme positions are hard to maintain or is this the version of Sephiroth who declares that 300,000 peace marchers are all Hamas supporters and believes that Islam, unlike Christianity and Judaism, is incompatible with our society?

1. A minority of refugees from countries such as China, Afghanistan and Iran flee via Russia. Some of those have been weaponised by Russia, compromising the borders of neighbouring states like Poland and Finland. The vast majority enter Europe via the Mediterranean and Turkey of their own volition with no direction from Wagner or anybody else, but exploited by traffickers. Sunak is looking for excuses for his shambolic and inhumane immigration and asylum policies and is looking for enemies of the state to unify us all against.

2. Islam does do multiculturalism. As I previously pointed out, when Islam was at it's height in terms of geographical spread, there were more Christian churches in Muslim lands than in Christian lands. We see the small Christian community of Gaza hiding under siege in their main church with Israeli snipers picking them off if they venture outside. Mainstream Islam tolerates all three Abrahamic/Ibrahimic religions and had found an accommodation with Hinduism and Sikhism in India before the Brits arrived and destabilised everything, imposing divisive laws against homosexuality and protest. The Prophet also declared that good Muslims should abide by the laws in any country they emigrate to. We both complain about the extremists and I mourn the loss of the moderate Muslim states I encountered in the early 1970s. Islamic extremists are no different than extreme evangelical Christians and Jews. Just take an historical perspective and look at the behaviour and attitudes of so-called Christians in the Bible Belt of the USA and of the extremists driving the expansion of Jewish settlements in occupied Palestine.

I'm genuinely honoured that you're asking about two Sephiroth's. At least you recognise the intellectual value offered by one of me. That said, you've correctly described both of me. In particular, Islam as delivered by those at the top, is incompatible with our society.

On your numbered points:

1/
You've conflated Sunak's behaviour with the real illegal immigration issue. These people, some of whom may be terrorists, many/most of whom destroy whatever documentation they possess, land in Europe. Note, Europe. EU law requires them to be processed at first EU entry point. That may be the case in Greece/Italy, but no attempt is made to contain these people who are allowed to drift west where they are trafficked to the UK. We pay France millions to stop the traffic but, they just shepherd the boats across the border line.

My real point is, why should they be allowed to come here?

I am in favour of a properly agreed (with the EU) and managed quota with protocols that allow us to return unauthorised immigrants to France or wherever.

2/
Islam in today's context, does not do multiculturalism. The historical context is not denied. But the historic context pre-dates the machine gun; pre-dates the Ayatollahs; pre-dates 9/11, 7/, Paris, Sderot. Hizbollah keeps Lebanon in submission; Hamas likewise in Gaza - and look how difficult it is to shut that down.

The baddies tend to dominate in present day politics. The Ultras in Israel are as much proof as is needed. Also watch out for the West Bank and military factions that are developing there.

Whatever the Koran says runs contrary to the actual practice in God's name by the largest Islamic states. Koran/Schmoran - it's whatever they want to highlight from there to suit their agenda.

My overriding fear is that the UK's good Muslims would come under the thumb of the baddies, once they have a Parliamentary majority. The baddies would have the guns and the goodies would, at least, be top of the heap (not being infidels).

I seem to look further ahead than you who prefers to refer to the historical context.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by roughbeast

Islam does do multiculturalism.

I mean, it is hilarious, but i wouldn’t open with it.

As I previously pointed out, when Islam was at its height in terms of geographical spread, there were more Christian churches in Muslim lands than in Christian lands.

That’s as maybe, but way before the Islamist revolution of Iran, and the Islamist ideological capture of most of the region, which resulted in the almost total eradication of any religion other than Islam.

It’s like saying when Germany was at its height in terms of geographical spread, there were tens of millions of Jews living there, when Germany lost though, there was around six million less Jews.

Mainstream Islam tolerates all three Abrahamic/Ibrahimic religions and had found an accommodation with Hinduism and Sikhism

We’re not dealing with mainstream Islam

in India before the Brits arrived and destabilised everything, imposing divisive laws against homosexuality and protest.

Avoiding the emotive rhetoric, we didn’t “arrive” we were asked by the forerunner to the UN to administer the region, previously administered by the Ottoman Empire.

The Prophet also declared that good Muslims should abide by the laws in any country they emigrate to.

Which they very obviously don’t.

We both complain about the extremists and I mourn the loss of the moderate Muslim states I encountered in the early 1970s.

I mourn them too. Before the Islamist revolution in Iran, the region was very progressive. Not a burkha or hijab in sight.

Islamic extremists are no different than extreme evangelical Christians and Jews.

Well they are as there are very little, if any, incidents of extreme evangelical Christians and Jew massacring anyone.

Just take an historical perspective and look at the behaviour and attitudes of so-called Christians in the Bible Belt of the USA

Oh yes, all the murders, and all the supporting of murders, and marching supporting all the Christian freedom fighting murderers…………………I totally take your point.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by roughbeast

2. Islam does do multiculturalism. As I previously pointed out, when Islam was at it's height in terms of geographical spread, there were more Christian churches in Muslim lands than in Christian lands. We see the small Christian community of Gaza hiding under siege in their main church with Israeli snipers picking them off if they venture outside. Mainstream Islam tolerates all three Abrahamic/Ibrahimic religions and had found an accommodation with Hinduism and Sikhism in India before the Brits arrived and destabilised everything imposing divisive laws against homosexuality and protest.

Bloody British, destabilising things by outlawing perfectly reasonable practices like Sati and when you say tolerates and accommodates do you mean by way of Jizya?

Originally Posted by Pierre

Avoiding the emotive rhetoric, we didn’t “arrive” we were asked by the forerunner to the UN to administer the region, previously administered by the Ottoman Empire.


Well they are as there are very little, if any, incidents of extreme evangelical Christians and Jew massacring anyone.

Funnily enough the British ran into some particularly nasty extreme evangelical Jews when we were mandated to administer that region

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Bloody British, destabilising things by outlawing perfectly reasonable practices like Sati and when you say tolerates and accommodates do you mean by way of Jizya?




Funnily enough the British ran into some particularly nasty extreme evangelical Jews when we were mandated to administer that region

Nothing funny about that. Btw, the Irgun was Begin's lot -> Likud.

---------- Post added at 03:08 ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 ----------


@TheDaddy

Your darling EU has seen the light and echoed Sunak's warning of hostile powers orchestrating illegal immigration.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-ne...tmsource=email

Extract:

The European Union has struck a deal to tighten immigration controls, making it easier to deport failed asylum seekers and hold families in detention centres on the bloc’s external borders.

The agreement, reached after three years of negotiations, promises to overhaul how the bloc processes migrants and paves the way for rapid assessments at borders.

Those deemed to have the lowest chance of being granted the right to stay, including families with women and children, will be processed at facilities near the bloc’s external frontiers within three months.

Before that, authorities will have just seven days to determine the status of any asylum seekers.

Those from the likes of Turkey, India and Tunisia, who have a less than 20 per cent acceptance level, are the most likely to be labelled as economic migrants and held at the border before being returned home.

Member states away from the major points of arrival, such as Italy and Greece, will be expected to house asylum seekers to ease the burden on southern Europe.

European capitals that refuse to take in migrants can instead opt to pay financial compensation to other EU countries hosting more asylum seekers or contribute to the cost of programmes in third countries aimed at reducing migratory flows.

But it offers no change to the bloc’s Dublin regulation, which dictates that asylum seekers should seek protection in the first EU country they enter, which is most often Greece or Italy.

Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, added: “It means that Europeans will decide who comes to the EU and who can stay, not the smugglers. It means protecting those in need.”

The senior Eurocrat insisted the deal would protect the bloc “when hostile countries deliberately attempt to destabilise the EU”, echoing a similar recent warning from Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I'm genuinely honoured that you're asking about two Sephiroth's. At least you recognise the intellectual value offered by one of me. That said, you've correctly described both of me. In particular, Islam as delivered by those at the top, is incompatible with our society.

On your numbered points:

1/
You've conflated Sunak's behaviour with the real illegal immigration issue. These people, some of whom may be terrorists, many/most of whom destroy whatever documentation they possess, land in Europe. Note, Europe. EU law requires them to be processed at first EU entry point. That may be the case in Greece/Italy, but no attempt is made to contain these people who are allowed to drift west where they are trafficked to the UK. We pay France millions to stop the traffic but, they just shepherd the boats across the border line.

My real point is, why should they be allowed to come here?

I am in favour of a properly agreed (with the EU) and managed quota with protocols that allow us to return unauthorised immigrants to France or wherever.

2/
Islam in today's context, does not do multiculturalism. The historical context is not denied. But the historic context pre-dates the machine gun; pre-dates the Ayatollahs; pre-dates 9/11, 7/, Paris, Sderot. Hizbollah keeps Lebanon in submission; Hamas likewise in Gaza - and look how difficult it is to shut that down.

The baddies tend to dominate in present day politics. The Ultras in Israel are as much proof as is needed. Also watch out for the West Bank and military factions that are developing there.

Whatever the Koran says runs contrary to the actual practice in God's name by the largest Islamic states. Koran/Schmoran - it's whatever they want to highlight from there to suit their agenda.

My overriding fear is that the UK's good Muslims would come under the thumb of the baddies, once they have a Parliamentary majority. The baddies would have the guns and the goodies would, at least, be top of the heap (not being infidels).

I seem to look further ahead than you who prefers to refer to the historical context.

You say you offer "intellectual value" yet then utter phrases like "We pay France millions to stop the traffic but, they just shepherd the boats across the border line". You are a contradiction.

Regarding Islam, you seem to focus on the extreme wing of the religion and represent it as the whole. I guess nuance is a bridge to far. You are painting a near future of religious Armageddon: a gun-toting Parliamentary majority. This is cult level fantasy.

I do agree with you on the Islamist danger specifically it's role in radicalising the impressionable young. One of the key ways this is done is by allowing the provision of faith schools that can depart from the mainstream curriculum and so provide an opportunity to teach the more radical forms of Islam. If all children of immigrants attended state schools they would mix with their peers who would ideally come from many backgrounds and so provide a context for integration. This approach should apply to all faiths.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by ianch99

You say you offer "intellectual value" yet then utter phrases like "We pay France millions to stop the traffic but, they just shepherd the boats across the border line". You are a contradiction.

Regarding Islam, you seem to focus on the extreme wing of the religion and represent it as the whole. I guess nuance is a bridge to far. You are painting a near future of religious Armageddon: a gun-toting Parliamentary majority. This is cult level fantasy.

I do agree with you on the Islamist danger specifically it's role in radicalising the impressionable young. One of the key ways this is done is by allowing the provision of faith schools that can depart from the mainstream curriculum and so provide an opportunity to teach the more radical forms of Islam. If all children of immigrants attended state schools they would mix with their peers who would ideally come from many backgrounds and so provide a context for integration. This approach should apply to all faiths.

If you wanted to call my views 'fantasy', then the "cult level" qualifier you put onto that is bizarre.

One f my main points is, and has been throughout this thread, that if there is a Muslim parliamentary majority, then the baddies will take over; the zealots, the jihadis; the ones who have already demonstrated their specialities.

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

If you wanted to call my views 'fantasy', then the "cult level" qualifier you put onto that is bizarre.

One f my main points is, and has been throughout this thread, that if there is a Muslim parliamentary majority, then the baddies will take over; the zealots, the jihadis; the ones who have already demonstrated their specialities.

Not if the shapeshifting reptilian humanoids get in first…

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Nothing funny about that. Btw, the Irgun was Begin's lot -> Likud.

Funny can mean odd or strange, like the funny feeling I have about you, nothing to do with humour, I'd never conflate you with that

Your darling EU has seen the light and echoed Sunak's warning of hostile powers orchestrating illegal immigration.

Interesting last line, countries attempting to destabilise the EU, like Russian influence on a referendum,

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

One of my main points is, and has been throughout this thread, that if there is a Muslim parliamentary majority, then the baddies will take over; the zealots, the jihadis; the ones who have already demonstrated their specialities.

How does this particular conspiracy theory play out? Extreme Muslims get elected under the pretence of being moderate Muslims then show their true faces and leave the EHRC so they can impose their laws which take their inspiration from the Gulf States?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

How does this particular conspiracy theory play out? Extreme Muslims get elected under the pretence of being moderate Muslims then show their true faces and leave the EHRC so they can impose their laws which take their inspiration from the Gulf States?

It plays out like everywhere that despots have taken control after free elections.

Gaza was one example; Lebanon another (hostage to Hizbollah). Zimbabwe; Iran, Russia.

[jonbxx]

Just dipping and and there are some strong Great Replacement Theory vibes from some people here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Replacement

Just lovely..

Unfortunately for your hypothesis, none of your examples remotely resemble the U.K. either politically, historically, or ethnically

To be credible, you need to show how politicians from one specific ethnic minority would be able to gather the majority of votes in 326 separate constituencies…