A Paranoia Thread

[SilentLoner]

I guess most of my paranoia lies with Islam spreading. I tend to follow news of Islam causing issues in Europe and it worries me.

 

I have some similar paranoia here in this country, except its with Latino immigration and Catholicism (I grew up it that, it scares me okay?)

[Shyone]

I guess most of my paranoia lies with Islam spreading. I tend to follow news of Islam causing issues in Europe and it worries me.

 

I have some similar paranoia here in this country, except its with Latino immigration and Catholicism (I grew up it that, it scares me okay?)

Would you be willing to make a donation to a Christian denomination (not necessarily Catholicism) in order to keep Islam from spreading here?

[SilentLoner]

I guess most of my paranoia lies with Islam spreading. I tend to follow news of Islam causing issues in Europe and it worries me.

 

I have some similar paranoia here in this country, except its with Latino immigration and Catholicism (I grew up it that, it scares me okay?)

Would you be willing to make a donation to a Christian denomination (not necessarily Catholicism) in order to keep Islam from spreading here?

 

Um, don't get how that would work.

[Shyone]

I guess most of my paranoia lies with Islam spreading. I tend to follow news of Islam causing issues in Europe and it worries me.

 

I have some similar paranoia here in this country, except its with Latino immigration and Catholicism (I grew up it that, it scares me okay?)

Would you be willing to make a donation to a Christian denomination (not necessarily Catholicism) in order to keep Islam from spreading here?

 

Um, don't get how that would work.

Well, it might not, but consider that the most likely reason that we aren't inundated by Islam here is that "This is a Christian Country" and similar attitudes. With Christianity fading, the vacuum is likely to be filled by Islam (as it is in Europe - largely due to immigration, but also conversion).

 

In the battle of the memes for people's minds, I think there will always be religion, and for the foreseeable future, that is going to be one of the three Abrahamic religions, and Judaism is the fastest shcrinking of the three. Atheism isn't really a meme, and is out of competition for top dog in this war.

 

So if you financially support one of the two "remaining" religions, and you want to prevent the spread of Islam, then donating to a nice Pentacostal church or MegaChurch (televangelist type) might bolster Christianity and fill their minds with Christian useless crap instead of Islamic useless crap.

 

This post is tongue in cheek. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." I am not suggesting that we have a fund-raising drive to support Christianity.

 

It would be nice to think of the rapid spread of rationality and the abandonment of religion entirely, but since that isn't going to happen...

[★ Citsonga ★]

Paranoia today is at a level equal or surpassing that of the McCarthy era and the Cold War. Conspiracy theories are at an all time high.

 

5. Medical science doesn't want to cure cancer because there's too much money in it.

 

I worry that people will take this one seriously and refuse to donate for research or even submit to treatment for cancer. Skepticism is usually a good thing, but when skepticism leads one away from known curative treatments, it becomes self-defeating.

 

There are plenty of diseases that we will never cure, but for many, many patients we have "cured" their cancer. That's why they are called cancer survivors. They may get another cancer (because of heredity or other genetic predisposition, or exposure to cancer causing agents that act for many years), but we can indeed "cure" some cancers.

 

Another thing I would point out about #5 is that "Medical science" is not one entity. There are a lot of people involved in it, so even if it's all about money, different people or organizations have different financial interests. Though it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there are some who want to keep cancer patients cancerous in order to continue making money off of their treatments, others would stand to make a lot of money off of cures. The fact that there would be "money in it" will be the driving force for some to further the advances in cancer research toward cures. (And that's not counting that there probably are some involved who actually care for people and want cures for non-financial reasons.) So, unless I've missed something, it seems to me that #5 falls flat on its face.

[★ Citsonga ★]

The only things I'm really "afraid of" right now have nothing to do with conspiracy theories.

 

I am concerned about whether or not I should tell my family that I am no longer a Christian, having abandoned the faith years ago, and what response I would get if I did so.

 

I am concerned about what I would do if I lost my current job.

 

I am also concerned that my wife and I will never again see eye-to-eye about religion, since I can't see myself going back and it doesn't look like she's going to come out of it.

[Shyone]

 

Another thing I would point out about #5 is that "Medical science" is not one entity. There are a lot of people involved in it, so even if it's all about money, different people or organizations have different financial interests. Though it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there are some who want to keep cancer patients cancerous in order to continue making money off of their treatments, others would stand to make a lot of money off of cures. The fact that there would be "money in it" will be the driving force for some to further the advances in cancer research toward cures. (And that's not counting that there probably are some involved who actually care for people and want cures for non-financial reasons.) So, unless I've missed something, it seems to me that #5 falls flat on its face.

Most people in research don't consider overarching motives any more than people consider religion in the grocery store. There, however, notable exceptions. And, as long as we're talking about money making schemes in the treatment or prevention of cancer...

 

The ideal money making scheme would be a vaccine that 1) everyone should have, 2) is only effective in a "significant percentage" of cases, and 3) expires every few years.

 

Watch the news for "cancer vaccines." There's gold in them thar hills!

 

Incidentally, there is at least one commercially available cancer vaccine on the market, but expect the market to be flooded with dozens in the next few years.

[Vigile]

Well, it might not, but consider that the most likely reason that we aren't inundated by Islam here is that "This is a Christian Country" and similar attitudes. With Christianity fading, the vacuum is likely to be filled by Islam (as it is in Europe - largely due to immigration, but also conversion).

 

I'm not convinced it's as big a problem as people make it out to be. It's a problem in developing nations. It's a problem in some French neighborhoods. That's more a result of their past colonization than anything else.

 

There are Muslims here in Russia but almost 100% of them come from the southern CCCP states. I know no Russians who are converting and I don't see the ones that are here causing any problems. In India I saw Muslims living happily next to Hindus and Buddhists and xians without any problems. Some of the Muslims I met there were the nicest people you'd want to meet.

 

A lot of atheists and non desert religion theists make the mistake of thinking that wars and conflicts are based on religious differences. I've always disagreed with this premise. People with political agendas often use religious xenophobia, et al, to shore up support, but the conflicts are almost always based on politics and power and resources at their root. Adherents of Xianity and Islam just fall prey to jingoism more readily than most.

[Shyone]

The only things I'm really "afraid of" right now have nothing to do with conspiracy theories.

 

I am concerned about whether or not I should tell my family that I am no longer a Christian, having abandoned the faith years ago, and what response I would get if I did so.

 

I am concerned about what I would do if I lost my current job.

 

I am also concerned that my wife and I will never again see eye-to-eye about religion, since I can't see myself going back and it doesn't look like she's going to come out of it.

These are reasonable and "real" fears, and you are truly not alone in feeling them.

 

With respect to the spousal relationship, that's the one that I think looms the largest. You can always get another job, and blood relatives will generally forgive in time. When spouses have major disagreements though, there isn't any separation of time or space to get past the delimma.

 

Each couple comes to some kind of "agreement" about their differences, and there are inevitably differences. There is a large range of potential solutions ranging from "agreeing to disagree" to divorce. The latter is painful beyond belief - rivaled in some cases only by leaving the church for some people.

 

Acceptance of differences is sometimes the best compromise.

 

My wife is an anti-Obama, Republican, Christian. I am an Obama liberal Democrat and atheist. We get along fine, but occasionally I can't keep my mouth shut, or my wife will make comments while watching MSNBC, but we recognize when we're entering dangerous territory and either she or I will say, "Let's talk about something else." Or we just stop arguing. It's our solution, and it works for us.

 

You know your wife best. New interests unrelated to religion, making plans for the future (trips, places, etc.), and anything else that will keep you from angry confrontation may help. Maybe you can try for a type of compromise; you won't push her if she won't push you. A dose of apology goes a long way to get a discussion of compromse started.

 

And that's enough from me. I do wish you the best of luck, and hope for a prosperous and loving future.

[Shyone]

 

A lot of atheists and non desert religion theists make the mistake of thinking that wars and conflicts are based on religious differences. I've always disagreed with this premise. People with political agendas often use religious xenophobia, et al, to shore up support, but the conflicts are almost always based on politics and power and resources at their root. Adherents of Xianity and Islam just fall prey to jingoism more readily than most.

I think Sam Harris made an excellent case for the potential "dangers" of religion to secular society, and he focused his attention in large part on the Muslims.

 

You don't see the conflicts because they aren't one-on-one but rather insidious in their creeping conquest.

 

Muslims have an overall agenda that includes converting everyone, and the "moderate" Islamists are complicit in the strategies that they fail to oppose. They make demands for their religion, and as their numbers increase, their influence will increase.

 

Here's a link to illustrate what I'm talking about:

 

From 2006

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1535478/Sharia-law-is-spreading-as-authority-wanes.html

Compare with 2008

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1031611/Sharia-law-SHOULD-used-Britain-says-UKs-judge.html

And 2009

http://www.homesoverseas.co.uk/news/Sharia_law_enters_France/8971-1002

 

The March of Islam across Europe:

http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia-europe.html

 

And here's a comment from the people who are opposing Sharia (hold on to your hats):

 

And so it starts afresh.

First of all they want Sharia for themselves. Once they get it they will want it to spread across Germany (and Europe) and rule over the rest of us.

Look at what is happening in Pakistan.

 

If they want Sharia law - move to a country that already has it. Done.

 

And don't give me this "it's God's law" crap either - in the West our laws are based on the 10 Commandments, so we already HAVE God's law. Just not THEIR Pagan Moongod's law.

(emphasis added)

 

People are already being executed in the name of Sharia law who are not Muslims. The Netherlands will be a Muslim dominated country by 2015, and France by 2040.

 

Yep, individually, they are the nicest people you could want to meet, but they take their religion seriously.

 

"Men never commit evil so fully and joyfuly as when they do it for religious convictions"

-- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)

[nightflight]

I admit that when I read posts about police here I get nervous about going outside the house and driving anywhere.

[deathbyluxury]

When it comes to the threat of Islam, I fear for Dearborn, MI. The amount of Islamic influence there is overwhelming.

 

I found myself siding with the Christians in this video. Imagine that.

[Shyone]

When it comes to the threat of Islam, I fear for Dearborn, MI. The amount of Islamic influence there is overwhelming.

 

I found myself siding with the Christians in this video. Imagine that.

It's coming. It's serious business, and they are violently against opposing religious opinions.

 

The girl is not wearing a hijab. I wonder why not.

 

Sharia law is one manifestation of their desire to transform American (and European) society, but the real dangers come from accomodation. No one wants to offend a Muslim. It could get you killed.

[Thegodthatfailed]

3,4,5,7,8,11,and 13 get my vote.Guess that makes me paranoid.

How about 14.-the government actually originates some of these theories to discredit

valid reality-based info that they would rather not have you subscribe to.

[Vigile]

Muslims have an overall agenda that includes converting everyone, and the "moderate" Islamists are complicit in the strategies that they fail to oppose. They make demands for their religion, and as their numbers increase, their influence will increase.

 

I'll admit I'm only vaguely familiar with the works of Sam Harris. What I've read from him left me with the impression that he is slightly xenophobic on the issue.

 

Muslims generally live in very poor countries and the violent acts we have seen from this group have generally come at the behest of organized efforts from those with agenda that reach beyond the edicts of their faith. In a vacuum I argue that most of them would be far to busy struggling to eke out a living than to organize and spread their faith via violence and other means. I'm arguing that they are simply a tool used by those with other agenda and who have the capacity to organize them.

 

This is a chicken v egg question. I personally think Harris and others are focusing in on the details and missing the big picture of what motivation comes first. The soldiers are certainly motivated by their Imams and the tenets of their faith. The leaders that organize them, from my perspective, are motivated by much more real and pressing issues, which include desire for power, desire for political ends, and desire to control resources. This is no different from what we see in the US where our soldiers are motivated by patriotic duty whereas our leadership is motivated by the three factors I just mentioned.

 

In a nutshell, the premise of my argument is that patriotism is a tool and religion is a tool and they are both a means to an end, not a cause.

 

People are already being executed in the name of Sharia law who are not Muslims. The Netherlands will be a Muslim dominated country by 2015, and France by 2040.

 

And we know this how? I call BS on this statement. It's pure fear mongering.

[Shyone]

 

I'll admit I'm only vaguely familiar with the works of Sam Harris. What I've read from him left me with the impression that he is slightly xenophobic on the issue.

Um, you really might want to read his book. Really. It's not Xenophobia, but analysis.

 

Muslims generally live in very poor countries and the violent acts we have seen from this group have generally come at the behest of organized efforts from those with agenda that reach beyond the edicts of their faith. In a vacuum I argue that most of them would be far to busy struggling to eke out a living than to organize and spread their faith via violence and other means.

 

Well, there are reasons their countries are generally poor, and it has to do with religion as much as location. At one time, Islamic scientists were encouraged to study and do research, but if you think Christianity has become anti-intellectual and anti-scientific, Muslims are even more so. You don't find many Muslim geneticists, for example. Nuclear physics is not so threatening to their beliefs (just to the rest of the world).

 

I could do an in depth analysis and present the specific areas where there are problems, but Sam Harris (among others) has done the work so well.

 

In a nutshell, the premise of my argument is that patriotism is a tool and religion is a tool and they are both a means to an end, not a cause.

Granted that patriotism is a tool and religion is a tool. The problem is that religion, and some religions more than others, give motivations that are stronger than patriotism with respect to the "spread" of the meme. Patriotism is nationalistic while religion is global in its ultimate goals.

 

People are already being executed in the name of Sharia law who are not Muslims. The Netherlands will be a Muslim dominated country by 2015, and France by 2040.

 

And we know this how? I call BS on this statement. It's pure fear mongering.

It's based on extrapolations of census data.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe#Projections

 

With regard to Islam and scientific education, this is a passage written by a Muslim who is proposing the "secularization" of education in the Muslim universities. It is also a tract on how to spread Islam to the entire world through "jihad" which these Muslims describe as a peaceful conquest.

 

Muslim "religious mentality" and cultures are dominated by takhsis (reductionism) and Sufism which are akin to and worse than secularism. Takhsis (Imam Ghazali, d.505 AH/1111 CE) restricted fiqh to family law, and "Islamic studies" to humanities, while rejecting the natural sciences, technology, and even many social sciences. Sufism is anti-reason, anti-science, etc., and made a Muslim "apolitical; asocial; amilitary; anethical; unproductive; an egoist... shaken neither by the misery, poverty, disease, and subjugation of his own society nor of mankind" (Shaheed Ismail & Lamya al-Faruqi, The Cultural Atlas of Islam, p. 304 ).

 

The tract, of course, is written by a Muslim with a certain perspective - he can see the faults in Sufism, but not his own sect (Shia or Sunni - I can't tell which).

 

Let me put it this way; The struggle with Islam is like a tug of war in which, because one side is cheating, the other side can never gain any ground. They can only lose ground or stay the same. Every inch given will never be regained.

 

If you believe that Islam is a peaceful religion with a few miscreants, then you don't understand Islam.

 

 

Finally, you had better read this:

 

The Prophet established a city state and expanded it through da'wah, defensive wars and preemptive strikes against his enemies. The equivalent of that city state in America would be Islamic organizations and Muslim neighborhoods. We should promote Muslim neighborhoods in all major cities of the U.S. to serve as nuclei and expand them through conversion and migration to the Muslim enclaves. The development of enclaves would give us control over the schools, local politics and help in establishing necessary institutional infrastructure. As these enclaves grow in size through conversion and immigration, the Muslims will have some say in national politics and perhaps even be able to elect Muslims as congressmen and senators.

 

It's not paranoia to say that their goal is domination of the US and the world. It's their plan.

[Vigile]

Well, there are reasons their countries are generally poor, and it has to do with religion as much as location. At one time, Islamic scientists were encouraged to study and do research, but if you think Christianity has become anti-intellectual and anti-scientific, Muslims are even more so. You don't find many Muslim geneticists, for example. Nuclear physics is not so threatening to their beliefs (just to the rest of the world).

 

It has as much to do with their past colonial histories as it does their religion. Anyone can data mine and make a case. I've paid attention to the same issues, I have a degree in International Relations, and I come to different concussions than Harris. I'm not saying my analysis is better than his, but as I said, from what I've read from him he doesn't convince me that my own observations and analysis are wrong. It occurs to me that it is much more logical that those with power to organize and use motivational tools have objectives that reach beyond religious dogma.

It's based on extrapolations of census data.

http://en.wikipedia....ope#Projections

 

It states:

 

Don Melvin writes that, excluding Russia, Europe's Muslim population will double by 2020. He also says that in 2005, almost 85% of Europe's total population growth in 2005 was due to immigration in general.[16][18] Omer Taspinar predicts that the Muslim population of Europe will nearly double by 2015, while the non-Muslim will shrink by 3.5%, due to the higher Muslim birth rate.[19] Esther Pan predicts that, by 2050, one in five Europeans will likely be Muslim.[19][20]

 

It doesn't say anything about Muslims taking a majority in the Netherlands. And it doesn't address assimilation.

 

If you believe that Islam is a peaceful religion with a few miscreants, then you don't understand Islam.

 

I believe it is at least as fucked up as xianity. I don't see it as any more a threat to the future than I see xianity. I'll try to restate my position in its simplest terms (I have a train to catch so sorry I can't spend time on this now).

 

Political leaders and power elites have agendas that are generally focused on political gain, political power, money, and resources. Large ideological groups easily fall prey to propaganda, jingoism, and other methods of motivation that support the agenda of these leaders. They both can be dangerous in the right context. Xian idiology was used as a tool to motivate the Nazis, for e.g. Xian idiology was used as a tool to garner support for the war in Iraq. Islamic ideology was used as a tool to motivate those with a political agenda in the ME in the attack on the Trade Center, to garner support for a Palestinian state, etc... It's relatively easy for leaders with an agenda who control the message to motivate large groups toward action.

 

Islamic populations in Europe are more likely, IMO, to assimilate to European values and their brand of Islam is likely to soften just as xianity has unless other factors fan the flames of their ideologies, such as economic and political discrimination. Harris can point to microcosms and make a case but it doesn't mean he is right about the big picture. That doesn't mean that his argument won't be compelling. Just because it is compelling doesn't make it right.

[OpheliaGinger]

Europe just needs to stand strong and not bow to Islamic pressure to adopt Sharia law, just as America needs to stand strong to not bow to Christian pressure.

[Shyone]

 

It doesn't say anything about Muslims taking a majority in the Netherlands. And it doesn't address assimilation.

Sorry, I glanced at that article and thought it said the same as the article I first read which I couldn't find on the spot.

 

Article 1:

http://tkcollier.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/i-dont-hate-muslims-i-hate-islam-says-hollands-rising-political-star/

which states:

Get ready for a new furor from the Netherlands, where census figures show that Muslims will be the majority by 2015. How will the tolerant to-a-fault Dutch react?

 

And a second article:

http://ajnorge.0catch.com/English/DemoBomb-E.htm

which states:

For comparison it may be mentioned that similar calculations for The Netherlands indicate muslim majority in all major cities by 2017.

 

Recognizing that population extrapolation is risky business, these estimates are close. Whether they account for all of the variables, I can't say.

 

 

Islamic populations in Europe are more likely, IMO, to assimilate to European values and their brand of Islam is likely to soften just as xianity has unless other factors fan the flames of their ideologies, such as economic and political discrimination. Harris can point to microcosms and make a case but it doesn't mean he is right about the big picture. That doesn't mean that his argument won't be compelling. Just because it is compelling doesn't make it right.

There may be nothing we can do about it, but that doesn't mean there isn't a significant threat to society from Islam.

 

Assimilation is less likely with Islam (which makes it such a powerful meme in the first place) because assimilation is contrary to their religious beliefs.

 

For the view from the Right:

http://newzealandconservative.blogspot.com/2009/03/some-thoughts-on-muslim-assimilation.html

 

And from the Mideast Policy Council:

http://www.mepc.org/journal_vol11/0403_malik.asp

What about Western Muslims? They're unlikely to assimilate, despite the modernization and secularization of Western Muslim youths.

 

I think of Islam like the Borg in Star Trek. They have one goal, and that is to assimilate other cultures.

 

There may be some cultural adaptation, but they have core values that resist being assimilated and favor assimilation of others.

 

Assimilation into society does not mean that they will not reassert their heritage when (or if) they become the dominant population. When Muslims are in the majority, they tend to become more dogmatic in their political beliefs and less tolerant of others.

 

Switching to still another factor, when Muslims gain dominance in a society they frequently punish and even kill those who convert away from Islam. This maybe particularly the case if the person joins another faith. This could create a rachet factor. Once Muslims win a country they rarely lose it. This may strengthen Islam's long term prospects.

 

Individual Muslims are kind, friendly and generous. As a group, they are intolerant, singleminded, and unified in their goal to subjugate other cultures and countries.

 

The Taliban is not a weird exception; it is the model for Sharia.

[♦ nivek ♦]

Fer what it may be worth.

 

I've been to countries where Occidentals are not a majority. My mission was to build infrastructure of all kinds. Most often we were rebuilding things placed by company/corporations many decades ago, were only abandoned by same when the "locals" nationalized and took over.

 

The "locals" are not unintelligent, nor in their ways and means *uneducated*. The Big However is that they have been kept ignorant of big picture engineering. They are not willing often to take care or maintain that which is "below their station".

Quite often their religious preferences are used to replace grease gun work and sweat. "god provides".

 

I have little fear that organized, hardcore, Occidentals can "take care of the religious rifraff" and preserve their way of life.

 

As far as the OP? I fear so few things that I am mentally classified as... Never mind. "Fear is the mind killer...."

 

kFL

[Vigile]

Shyone, I can appreciate the fears but the articles you cite are no more than oppinion and inuendo. Where is the proof that Islam is a big threat to the European way of life, and hence the way of life for us all? 9/11? Lockerby? That seems like a mighty big conclussive jump. Do we have proof that the Muslim population in Holland will reach a majority status in just 5 1/2 short years or just an article stating this will be the case? Do we have proof that Muslims don't assimilate or do we just have some guy's oppinion on the matter?

 

It seems to me the burden of proof is on those making the claims here. I've lived in Europe on and off for over 14 years now. I just don't see a major shift in Euro law moving towards sharia. They may give them an inch here or there to be good hosts but they aren't going to give them anything like control. The only people in Europe worried about this issue, I'm betting, are the Lega Nord (North League) types. Reading bits and peices of the story from the US without actually knowing what the situation looks like on the ground can easily skew one's views on this and many other matters.

 

I'm convinced this is all built on fear mongering tactics and will all lead to naught just like Y2K, just like 2012 (will) just like [fill in the blank]. I'm convinced of this because I have seen no credible evidence to the contrary. I'm convinced of this because I can't think of one major war that was purely religiously motivated since the crusades and even those were likely motivated by other issues, which were all wrapped in an xian flag.

[Shyone]

Shyone, I can appreciate the fears but the articles you cite are no more than oppinion and inuendo. Where is the proof that Islam is a big threat to the European way of life, and hence the way of life for us all? 9/11? Lockerby? That seems like a mighty big conclussive jump. Do we have proof that the Muslim population in Holland will reach a majority status in just 5 1/2 short years or just an article stating this will be the case? Do we have proof that Muslims don't assimilate or do we just have some guy's oppinion on the matter?

Population extrapolations?

The opinion of the Muslim Policy Council? Some guy?

 

Fine believe what you want.

 

It seems to me the burden of proof is on those making the claims here. I've lived in Europe on and off for over 14 years now. I just don't see a major shift in Euro law moving towards sharia. They may give them an inch here or there to be good hosts but they aren't going to give them anything like control. The only people in Europe worried about this issue, I'm betting, are the Lega Nord (North League) types. Reading bits and peices of the story from the US without actually knowing what the situation looks like on the ground can easily skew one's views on this and many other matters.

You don't happen to know of any assasinations of outspoken anti-muslim politicians, do you? How about authors threatened with death or "intifadah" or artists killed in the name of Allah? How about riots for anti-muslim cartoons? Or just riots for the heck of it in France? No, nothing going on.

 

Were you in Englad?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm5rpBa7WOw

 

You're right. An inch here, an inch there, and you'll never see anything of importance.

 

I'm convinced this is all built on fear mongering tactics and will all lead to naught just like Y2K, just like 2012 (will) just like [fill in the blank]. I'm convinced of this because I have seen no credible evidence to the contrary. I'm convinced of this because I can't think of one major war that was purely religiously motivated since the crusades and even those were likely motivated by other issues, which were all wrapped in an xian flag.

You seem to think that I'm talking about a single event that will happen in a particular year. I'm not. I'm talking about a deliberate and systematic process that is designed to replace democracy with Sharia.

 

Whether it's 2015, 2040 or 2100 doesn't matter. It is happening now.

 

‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing’

 

Well, after all, there is nothing we can do.

 

So you win the argument. I'm just paranoid.

[Vigile]

 

Population extrapolations?

 

The source you gave me for these extrapolations was just a wordpress blog. Where is the census data? http://tkcollier.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/i-dont-hate-muslims-i-hate-islam-says-hollands-rising-political-star/

 

More importantly, where is analysis of that Census data? Are these Muslims in name only or are they the raving lunatics we see burning flags in Iran? How can we know from what little information is being provided here?

 

The opinion of the Muslim Policy Council? Some guy?

 

It's still just an opinion. I googled it and couldn't even find such an animal. Are you referring to these guys? http://www.mepc.org/resources/policyMusPol.asp Regardless, appeals to authority are logical errors. I'm more interested in facts these authorities might offer. I'm not saying they are wrong, just that I don't have enough evidence here to weigh out.

 

You don't happen to know of any assasinations of outspoken anti-muslim politicians, do you? How about authors threatened with death or "intifadah" or artists killed in the name of Allah? How about riots for anti-muslim cartoons? Or just riots for the heck of it in France? No, nothing going on.

 

This goes to the point I've been trying to make. Are these isolated events or dangerous trends? You're a doctor. You are surely aware that it is important to establish a statstically significant trend before broader conclussions can be reached and extrapolated from.

 

Regarding riots in France, I already addressed that. These are specifically related to past French colonialization policy, which includes a liberal immigration policy for former colonies, not to mention internal discrimination issues faced by those communities. It hardly represents what is occuring across Europe and it hardly speaks to a danger that Muslim immigrants are going to usurp European nationals with religious policy and agenda.

 

If I had to assess the situation on the ground as it now stands I'd probably refer to it as a minor irritation, not a gathering wave that threatens the European way of life. But you are the one making the claims here. Are there legitimate mainstream Euro groups predicting that this threat is going to become an overwhelming problem in coming decades? Like I said, I have no doubt the Italian North League (Italian equivalent to the Limbaugh dittoheads - or rather, the new brown shirts) and similar groups are up in arms. How about the more centrist groups?

 

You seem to think that I'm talking about a single event that will happen in a particular year. I'm not. I'm talking about a deliberate and systematic process that is designed to replace democracy with Sharia.

 

Whether it's 2015, 2040 or 2100 doesn't matter. It is happening now.

 

It is? I'm trying to figure out what you are referring to, so forgive me if I'm wrong in my assumptions. Are you talking about a few token policy changes that appease Muslim communitees? If so, are you arguing that some minor appeasement by the Europeans represents a slippery slope? That seems rather inflexible to me. Europeans are not generally political purists like many in the US are. A minor policy appeasement does not mean they are in danger of breaking the dike of Euro traditions and law that have developed over millenia. Is the statement "give them an inch and they'll take a mile" really an accurate representation of what will occur in Europe moving forward? Do you really imagine their legal and cultural infrastructure to be that weak?

[Franko47]

An interesting debate. I think there are certain hurdles facing Islam in it's bid to conquer Europe and western civilization. In time, they may have to integrate so much of western culture and thinking in the process that by the time they "take over", they will be merely pseudo-secular religious people much like most Christians have become in Europe.

 

In other words, it won't really matter.

 

On the other hand, has anyone seen my prayer mat ?