19-02-2004 21:11									#91
	Got spare money?

If it goes that "presto", that may just be because the seed of extremism encounters a very, very fertile land, don't you think?

Besides, you don't even need a foreign preacher to have islamism grow on such terrain now: satellite TV is enough to give ideas to Arabic / Pakistani Britons who'll become radical leaders.

	19-02-2004 21:18									#92
	Got spare money?

That's a fair point Spiffor with regard to TV. Wouldn't most people consider blocking out seditious channels by the government a bit too 1984 though? I can't see the broadcast laws being changed anytime soon.

And I'm exaggerating with regard to the Presto bit.

Think of it this way; even though a lot of these radical imams play to pretty packed houses, not all of their followers go off and blow themselves up. They may hat the West when they leave, but they're not willing to blow themselves up over it. Instead the imam 'grooms' a few promising candidates privately, and further nurtures their hatred before letting them loose.

	19-02-2004 21:20									#93
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by our_man I state my point again. Your country has in the past, and probably still is, let in the wrong type of people. A charismatic Muslim preacher blows into town, tells dissaffected Muslim youth, "it's all the Christian's fault, go kill the infidels". Hey Presto! From one extremist, you now have a hundred.

Drawing from Irish history you have thousands of examples of why state ostracism of social groups on religious grounds is a really bad idea. We could pass laws aimed at Muslims, just as we did against Irish Catholics, but I'd hope that we've learned from bitter experience just how counter-productive that can be.

	19-02-2004 21:30									#94
	Increase Your PM Length

Yes, but I'm not proposing ostracising the Muslims. I'm proposing exactly what the Muslim Council has suggested: that certain types of Muslim are not welcome in Britain (or in Ireland either).

The fact is Laz that if enough of these guys got in, and found enough gullible people to believe them (OK, really stretching credibility here, but just bear with me for arguments sake), they would make life a living hell for anyone who did not subscribe to their hateful creed including other "misguided" Muslims.

If a situation like that ever arose, fear not. Your country would get to experience first hand what Ireland went through for 700 years. Except it would be Sharia Law we're talking about, not the Penal Laws.

Your point about Ireland is a good analogy though. Centuries ago we had immigrants come to my country who imposed their own system of beliefs and ignored our culture. I'd hate to see the same happen in Britain.

	19-02-2004 22:32									#95
	Inflate your Upload Space

Yes, they're clearly imposing their own system of belief on the societies they arrive in. Let's all bow down to the Muslims, our imperialist conquerors.

	19-02-2004 22:38									#96
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Laws like these are spreading across the european countries. Recently Holland tightened their immigration laws.

BTW: I'm for common EU refugee/immigration laws.

	19-02-2004 23:13									#97
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by our_man It's amazing that people are opposing Denmarks stance in this. The people that defend radical imams and their rhetoric just can't seem to understand that these people are a danger to our society. Hell, some Muslim immigrants would support this as the reason they fled to Europe in the first place was to escape from there crazed loons. The Muslim Council of Britain has stated before that extremists that hijack their religion for evil should not be tolerated. I remember after those two British Muslims went to Israel to become suicide bombers (after being urged on by one of Islams many 'holy men') the head of the Muslim Council in Britain adopted a far harder line than the British government, saying that there were some elements in British society that have been tolerated for far too long. He gave me the impression that if he were Prime Minister he'd clear the country of these guys. The secular Muslims can see that these people are a threat, so why are there still people defending them?

its an idealogical stance that views even horribly wrong ones should be tolerated. and that its the crimes u need to arrest ppl for.

	19-02-2004 23:54									#98
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Buck, it's pathetic if that's your response.

What's with the 'they' for example. I said that the majority of Muslims were opposed to the more extreme beliefs.

So Buck, what's the story, you don't like homosexuals or womens freedom? Because I'm trying to defend Muslims here, making a clear distinction between those that want to integrate into our society and those that want to turn Western Europe into a caliphate, like dear old Captain Hook in England. Please explain to me how people like him are not trying to impose their beliefs on society. I'm asking because I believe you can't.

Please answer me this question Buck: why do you support evil people like this? Do you get a kick out of watching suicide bombings? You must support them because you attacked my statement where I defended peaceful Muslims yet criticized these people.

yavoon, I'm not an advocate of freedom of speech when it's incitement to hatred, which is what these radical clerics like Abu Hamza are about.

	20-02-2004 00:25									#99
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I was making a wry comment about your Ireland analogy, which is one of the silliest I've ever seen on here.

I personally started off as a socialist in my adolocence. After a while I was persuaded to add feminist beliefs to my system. The problem is that the two are not fully compatible- working class men are among the most sexist in history, nad many women actively participate on the "wrong side" of the class struggle. Therefore there needs to be a balance- a society set up as a kind of pluralism, where every oppressed group has the right to self-expression and to a share of the power, without trampling all over the others. Throughout history people have attempted to support one group while oppressing all the others- Marxists have been notorious antifeminists and homophobes, some feminists are stuanchly capitalist, and so on. Your faction fits perfectly well in that pattern- you claim you're after the liberation of a couple fo groups (gays, women) and you use this as an excuse to oppress a cultural group (muslims). You claim you're after freedom but rather than let all ideas work on an equal basis and let people chose between them you actively fight some of them, thus promoting oppression and ultimately driving people into even more extreme cultural expressions.

Let me ask you this: What superior "western" values are there that are superior to the "eastern" ones you've orientalized up? Certainly christianity and capitalism are as oppressive as any "eastern" dictatorship. The one major difference western liberal democracy has from any other system is that it instils into the people that they're citizens, that they are responsible for the state, that they're allowed to and must express their beliefs in an orderly discourse. Expressing yourself, whether just airing your views and debating them with others or expressing them in terms of actual policy and legislation is what sets democracy apart from any other system and what makes it superior. The open society is by nature one where things are out in the open and people are allowed to fight for whatever cause they like.

What you're doing is telling people they have a right to chose then removing their options, telling them that they should become active citizens then banning their causes, telling them your open society welcomes them then showing it to be bigoted, monolithic and pitifully closed. And you wonder why people are alienated and start bombing things?

	20-02-2004 00:45									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Buck, you're obviously very ignorant of Irish history. If you don't know your facts, it's best that you leave things alone.

I outlined a worst case scenario above if fanatical Islamists fooled enough people. I also said other Muslims would not neccesarily be happy with that. This alludes extremely well with characters like Wolfe Tone in Irish history, who despite being Protestant fought against other Protestants to establish a free Ireland, irrespective of religion. Rather apt after all, don't you think?

I am actually wondering if you're reading what I'm writing at all. To you it's all about the Muslims, the Muslims, the Muslims. What I'm trying to say is that there are groups of radical Muslims that other Muslims despise, and they wouldn't really like you at all for supporting these guys. Can you get that concept? This is the second time I've had to explain it to you.

You never answered my question anyway about people like Abu Hamza trying to change our society. Is it because you know you're wrong?

Sorry, don't agree with you about the freedom of speech thing. You say by not allowing them a voice I'm encouraging extremism. I disagree. By allowing men like Abu Hamza to have a voice extremism is encouraged. Anyone who advocates violence against a group of people (Abu Hamza has) has lost their right to freedom of speech IMHO.

I agree with you about the capitalism and christianity though to a certain extent. If all things being equal though, why is the Muslim world so different to the West.

	20-02-2004 01:09									#101
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by our_man If all things being equal though, why is the Muslim world so different to the West.

It wasn't in pre-colonial times... Once the power balance shifted enough for the europeans to imperially dominate the middle east the society was pushed backward. For more reasons read Edward Said's thoroughly excellent Orientalism.

Are we referring to different bits of Irish history? I thought you were talking about the colonisation of parts of Ireland by people coming in from Great Britain. The difference obviously being that they were never an oppressed group but rather came as imperial conquerors, which was the point I was trying to get accross.

How exactly am I supposed to answer your question? It's based on premises that are not present in my posts and I futhermore do not agree with. I've read your next-to-last post again and how you could infer all that from a short statement putting cultural meetings into a power-system context is beyond me.

What I can say is that wanting to impose your beliefs on society is a good thing, and the basis of democracy. The beliefs we hate must also be fought by active citizenship and not by government repression- look at Palestine for a perfect example of why putting the boot down only fosters extremism. Abu Hamza is no threat to us, he's a hook-weilding fool with no power- the real threat comes from those who use the excuse of removing extremes to foster their own racist beliefs on the rest of society.

I can't help but feel you're in that category, our_man- the implied flavour of the "peaceful muslims" bullshit is "I'm not racist, even some of my friends are black". Real democracy is not based on the state favouring some cultural expressions over others, not on "integration" but on openness.

	20-02-2004 03:44									#102
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

OK Buck. One last question then. Would you have opposed the Nazis and what they preached? Or would you, like you are with radical Muslims, have defended their right to free speech and watch them goose-step towards the holocaust?

	20-02-2004 07:49									#103
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by our_man OK Buck. One last question then. Would you have opposed the Nazis and what they preached? Or would you, like you are with radical Muslims, have defended their right to free speech and watch them goose-step towards the holocaust?

I would have opposed them and protected their right to free speech.

	20-02-2004 14:38									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by MrFun Islam is a legitimate religion -- we don't need to "fight" it. It's the extremists who twist the Islamic religion to justify their inhuman actions that we need to fight.

I didn't say we should fight Islam! That would be kind of medieval. I ment [radical] Islamism, which is exactly the kind of extremists you're talking about.

	20-02-2004 15:47									#105
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by our_man OK Buck. One last question then. Would you have opposed the Nazis and what they preached? Or would you, like you are with radical Muslims, have defended their right to free speech and watch them goose-step towards the holocaust?

Another interesting example, because British Fascists and pro-Nazi groups had a free rein in the mid-30's. Free speech was never an issue- what beat them here was not legislation but a uniting of the communities and opposing ideologies against them. We might wonder how British history would have turned out had the Battle of Cable Street never occurred.

	20-02-2004 16:09									#106
	Support Apolyton

quote: its an idealogical stance that views even horribly wrong ones should be tolerated. and that its the crimes u need to arrest ppl for

Well said yavoon.

Let the radical Imams in. Arrest them and deport them if they commit crimes.

	20-02-2004 16:58									#107
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ramo It's sad that so many people believe that it's ok to oppress people one disagrees with.

How is declining to allow people you consider likely to be enemies to become citizens of your country oppression? It's a buyers market for immigrants, one can't take them all. So the government in this instance takes only those who are most likely to benefit the citizens of the country, which is after all their job.

	20-02-2004 17:16									#108
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Buck Birdseed I personally started off as a socialist in my adolocence. After a while I was persuaded to add feminist beliefs to my system.

Out of the frying pan and into the fire.

	20-02-2004 17:17									#109
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Buck Birdseed Edward Said's thoroughly excellent Orientalism.

	20-02-2004 18:13									#110
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Cruddy I think they're right... but why just limit it to Muslims? Why not ban all visitors and immigrants who advocate violence?

BINGO!

So, what evidence will they consider to determine whether or not a potential immigrant is "radical"?

Oh well, lets just err on the safe side, we have to protect ourselves.

This is clearly prejudicial legislation, which will inevitably be applied in a prejudicial manner.

	20-02-2004 18:24									#111
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Gangerolf Anyone read "Why I am not a Muslim" by Ibn Warraq? It's written by a (ex-)muslim and basically it says that Islam is f.u.b.a.r. I think the Western world should do more to fight Islamism, at least in our own countries. The question is how? I hope and think it can be done within a democratic frame work.

Anyone read the scores of books written by disaffected Christians?

I think we should do more to persecute Christians, but rest assures, all persecution of individual's religious freedom will be done democratically and for their own good.

	20-02-2004 18:39									#112
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Azazel If you think that I am going to respect other people's opinions just because they exist, sorry.

Not respect their opinion. Respect their right to HAVE their own opinion.

quote: I am saying that religion is bad, and the muslims are the only ones from the monotheists seriously clinging on to theirs.

quote: a) They have no right to try and change the rules of our society, just because their imaginary friends said so.

Uh, we all have a right to try to change the rules of our society...

quote: b) They have no right to infest the brains of their kids with that filth.

What filth?

quote: The difference is, Jews DID integrate into French society on the french society's terms, the moment they were declared equal.

This is preposterous. How do you define integration? The Jews, in communities throughout the world and throughout history, do not integrate. Which, btw, is their choice, their right, and I respect that.

quote: Yes. but the change of the european society from a deeply religious one to an almost completely secular one was ground-breaking. This will not be the case with Islam. It's not as if secular society is something unheard of. It's right next door. They're constantly exposed to it, but see it through a filter of deep conservatism, and superiority. I am glad that you agree that this change is necessary, but do we just let this pot stir itself, and wait for a thousand years of a wrong, and opressive society?

By that logic, Christianity should have been banned 1000 years ago.

quote: I never said that all muslims pose a threat, or that anyone should go on a crusade. I am saying that our own societies must be protected against this scourge.

Not a threat, but a scourge we must be protected from. Gee, thanks for clearing that up. I feel so much better...

	20-02-2004 18:50									#113
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by our_man It's amazing that people are opposing Denmarks stance in this. The people that defend radical imams and their rhetoric just can't seem to understand that these people are a danger to our society.

The people here who oppose Denmark's stance are not defending radical imans. They are pointing out the flaws in the APPROACH that Denmark is taking.

quote: The secular Muslims can see that these people are a threat, so why are there still people defending them?

secular Muslims?

Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

	20-02-2004 19:08									#114
	Increase the size of your Attachments

How will this legislation work out in real life?

Well, let me give you an analogy.

With the recent upgrade in "security" boarding commercial aircraft, items banned from carry-on baggage & personal effects include scissors and nail files.

On a recent flight I saw a five year-old lose her 2" long, entirely plastic scissors to the security guard.

And my nail-clippers were confiscated.

(I couldn't harm a mouse with my nail-clippers. But I could have taken my 6" aluminum chassis pen and shoved it through the security guys eyeball and into his brain.)

Extrapolate.

You will end up many banning perfectly safe, reasonable muslims. And others who are actually dangerous will get through.

It will give the fear-driven xenophobic public a little, false flavour of security. It will tell the Muslim community that you hate them. And for those who are friends, relatives etc. of the people wrongly barred from entry, you will stir up resentment that can olny fan the flames you seek to extinguish.

	20-02-2004 19:11									#115
	Support Apolyton

quote: How is declining to allow people you consider likely to be enemies to become citizens of your country oppression? It's a buyers market for immigrants, one can't take them all.

I happen to think that immigration barriers are fundamentally unjust.

quote: So the government in this instance takes only those who are most likely to benefit the citizens of the country, which is after all their job.

If it's the job of the state to deny people with disagreeable political opinions the freedom of movement, why shouldn't it be the job of the state to deny people with disagreeable political opinions the freedom of speech?

Not too long ago, people with my political ideology were considered enemies and banned from coming to this country.

	20-02-2004 19:19									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Mad Viking, yes, I do know what I'm talking about. You are aware that not all Muslims are raving fanatics?

There are secular Muslims out there that actually believe that our separation of church and state is a good thing. Hence the reason they come to the West.

And how is the Denmark law unjust? Countries have the right to enforce their borders as they see fit.

	20-02-2004 19:31									#117
	Get a bigger avatar today!

our man:

Okay, you are just using the word wrong.

Secular means "having nothing to do with religion".

So you can't have a secular muslim; it's an oxymoron.

A secular state is one that keeps the state separate from religion. So you mean muslims who believe in a secular state.

Look, Denmark can set their immigration law anyway they like.

I think it is a bad law that will not achieve what it sets out to do; worse, it may exacerbate the very problem it purports to solve. I think it will be bad for muslims and bad for Danes.

	20-02-2004 19:35									#118
	Full PM-box? Change here!

No, it's not an oxymoron. Try using a dictionary once in a while, OK?

Secularism - The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.

Therefore a secular Muslim is a Muslim who believes their religion should be excluded from these.

	21-02-2004 02:06									#119
	Suffering from ads?

Well, you might think that two words with the same root have the exact same meaning, but they don't.

We already have seen a difference in the interpretation between Islam and Islamism. (personally, I don't know about that one)

But after you went to your dictionary, I'm quite sure you read that "secular", the word you used in your post, means exactly what I said - not having any connection with religion.

Secularism, a MOVEMENT, (-ism) to make or keep political affairs/the state secular, is not the same thing.

You could just have thanked me for the enlightenment.

	21-02-2004 03:01									#120
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Um... nope. I'm afraid I'm going to have to insist on the validity of my phrase still Mad Viking. In the dictionary I'm using, one definition given for secular is "Relating to or advocating secularism".

I appreciate your attempt to enlighten me, but my use of the word is correct.