Thanks To Angela Merkel . . .

[MikeK]

It means it is no way as bad as you are portraying.

You mean the things we all have seen on tv and in YouTube videos aren't happening, or they aren't really all that bad? Well, I'm sorry if you find it hard to accept but what you see is what it is -- and it is really bad.

No, what you see is events being used as propaganda. Do you think German on German crime isn't happening just because you aren't seeing it plastered all over Youtube? These guys at this hostel are minding their own business, and the German residents are harassing them.

German-on-German crime is very different from crime perpetrated on Germans by foreign invaders. Do you not agree with that?

 

[Lewdog]

It means it is no way as bad as you are portraying.

You mean the things we all have seen on tv and in YouTube videos aren't happening, or they aren't really all that bad? Well, I'm sorry if you find it hard to accept but what you see is what it is -- and it is really bad.

No, what you see is events being used as propaganda. Do you think German on German crime isn't happening just because you aren't seeing it plastered all over Youtube? These guys at this hostel are minding their own business, and the German residents are harassing them.

German-on-German crime is very different from crime perpetrated on Germans by foreign invaders. Do you not agree with that?

No, because once the immigrants are granted asylum into Germany, they are just the same as Germans.

 

[MikeK]

No, because once the immigrants are granted asylum into Germany, they are just the same as Germans.

Those laws were originally drafted to accommodate legitimate asylum-seekers. The vast majority of these Muslims are de facto invaders, as their conduct clearly demonstrates. How long do you think these legal technicalities will continue to serve the interest of what in fact is an invasion by a foreign entity?

The German people are just beginning to wake up. When they finally do I can assure you a lot of changes will take place -- as they did in the early 1930s. The difference is this time all of Europe, and quite possibly the U.S. and Russia, will stand firmly behind the new Germany.

This stew is just starting to warm up. It will take time for it to boil. But when it does you will see some very dramatic changes in the laws and accompanying events in Germany.

Right now Germany is still enduring the effects of a monumental guilt complex because of the events surrounding WW-II. But what these Muslims are doing will enable the German people to discard that subliminal burden and become really pissed off. And when they do I promise you the changes will be dramatic to say the least and will spread across the Western World.

Briefly stated, those Muslims really don't know who they are fucking with.

 

[Pogo]

Sorry but it is just your racism that shows you are scared of excepting how other cultures live. They aren't the problem, you are. They only react to how they are treated.

If you don't think that other cultures had problems assimilating? Have you ever watched "The Gangs of New York?" Yeah, it's a movie, but it is based on true events.

In The Gangs of New York, two opposing factions of Irish immigrants engaged in occasional violent confrontations for the purpose of dominating profitable enterprises in their common community. The general public was in no way affected.

Please explain how that intra-ethnic gang vs gang activity is in any way similar to what we've recently seen taking place in Germany and Sweden, which are just just two examples of the mass molestation and random rape of women on public streets by Muslim "asylum-seekers." Can you cite the slightest comparison in the two activities?

The Gangs of New York chronicled the actions of gangs vs gangs. The Muslim migrants have plainly demonstrated that they are a menace to White society. Can you deny that?

I would not deny the plain menace presented by muslims. But, the Gangs of New York explored only intergang warfare. This did not mean it was the only violence from the Irish. The Irish brought a wave of violence unseen before. That's why they weren't wanted anywhere. Today Irish gangs exist as organized crime syndicates utilizing smaller groups of enforcers.

The very first organized prison gang was Irish. Calling themselves the Bluebirds they controlled prisons by executing the families of the guards. Over the years the Bluebirds changed. We know them today as the Aryan Brotherhood.

You are now equating fanaticism with a culture of people. I can do the same thing. Are you Jewish? They killed one of the greatest pacifist of all-time, Jesus Christ (if you believe in him). Are you Christian? There are Christians in Africa that kill and eat Muslims... yes EAT them.

Birom Christians eat Roasted flesh of Muslims they Killed in Jos, Nigeria

Oh wait, Christians and Baptist called to kill people for... being homosexual.

... not to mention those religious folks that kill people at abortion clinics.

That doesn't mean all the people of these individual faiths are bad people, that's a logical fallacy.

Welcome to the site, since I haven't seen you before. You'll find that particular fallacy is rampant on this board, conflating coincidence with causation. Even in this thread the base of reasoning seems to vacillate indiscriminately between culture and religion, as if they can't tell the difference.

Yet another example:

The Muslims intend to replace the native culture with its own

And in this case (reading on) even conflating religion with race:

These Muslim bastards are openly and unmistakably at war with Whites -- which is what I am responding to.

Some of the reasoning in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

 

[MikeK]

And in this case (reading on) even conflating religion with race:

These Muslim bastards are openly and unmistakably at war with Whites -- which is what I am responding to.

Some of the reasoning in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

Can you cite one example of a non-White being victimized by these Middle-Eastern and North-African invaders? If not, why not?

 

[Pogo]

And in this case (reading on) even conflating religion with race:

These Muslim bastards are openly and unmistakably at war with Whites -- which is what I am responding to.

Some of the reasoning in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

Can you cite one example of a non-White being victimized by these Middle-Eastern and North-African invaders? If not, why not?

I don't make it a habit to follow hair-on-fire media stories, but I do know that "white" is a race and "Muslim" is a religion. They're not mutually exclusive. I know Muslims that are black and Muslims that are white, and brown in between. One does not follow the other.

As I said, the reasoning being tossed at the wall to see if it sticks in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

 

[MikeK]

I don't make it a habit to follow hair-on-fire media stories, but I do know that "white" is a race and "Muslim" is a religion. They're not mutually exclusive. I know Muslims that are black and Muslims that are white, and brown in between. One does not follow the other.

As I said, the reasoning being tossed at the wall to see if it sticks in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

If I seem to incline toward a racial rather than religious distinction it's because my orientation in this specific issue began in the 1970s when the Black Muslim Movement arose with a bitter denouncement of Whites as the Devil, a declaration which corresponds with the rhetoric of contemporary Islamic jihadists, all of whom are Muslim and all of whom refer to Western (European) peoples (Whites) as the Great Satan and vowing to exterminate us.

This is a readily verifiable fact. It is not fanciful speculation tossed at a wall to see if it sticks.

 

[Lewdog]

I don't make it a habit to follow hair-on-fire media stories, but I do know that "white" is a race and "Muslim" is a religion. They're not mutually exclusive. I know Muslims that are black and Muslims that are white, and brown in between. One does not follow the other.

As I said, the reasoning being tossed at the wall to see if it sticks in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

If I seem to incline toward a racial rather than religious distinction it's because my orientation in this specific issue began in the 1970s when the Black Muslim Movement arose with a bitter denouncement of Whites as the Devil, a declaration which corresponds with the rhetoric of contemporary Islamic jihadists, all of whom are Muslim and all of whom refer to Western (European) peoples (Whites) as the Great Satan and vowing to exterminate us.

This is a readily verifiable fact. It is not fanciful speculation tossed at a wall to see if it sticks.

Once again, you are talking about fanaticism, NOT what the true religion is. And as far as the Muslims wanting to spread their faith to the Western world? Well I hate to break it to you, but just about EVERY religion speaks about spreading the word of their faith.

 

[Pogo]

I don't make it a habit to follow hair-on-fire media stories, but I do know that "white" is a race and "Muslim" is a religion. They're not mutually exclusive. I know Muslims that are black and Muslims that are white, and brown in between. One does not follow the other.

As I said, the reasoning being tossed at the wall to see if it sticks in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

If I seem to incline toward a racial rather than religious distinction it's because my orientation in this specific issue began in the 1970s when the Black Muslim Movement arose with a bitter denouncement of Whites as the Devil, a declaration which corresponds with the rhetoric of contemporary Islamic jihadists, all of whom are Muslim and all of whom refer to Western (European) peoples (Whites) as the Great Satan and vowing to exterminate us.

This is a readily verifiable fact. It is not fanciful speculation tossed at a wall to see if it sticks.

Then in that case it has to do with Black history, not with Islam. Clearly Islam was not at all required to facilitate it, so again, coincidence does not equate to some kind of causation.

And further you seem to make no distinction between Islam as a whole and "jihadists", which is like making no distinction between the Westboro Batshit Church and Mother Theresa.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I don't make it a habit to follow hair-on-fire media stories, but I do know that "white" is a race and "Muslim" is a religion. They're not mutually exclusive. I know Muslims that are black and Muslims that are white, and brown in between. One does not follow the other.

As I said, the reasoning being tossed at the wall to see if it sticks in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

If I seem to incline toward a racial rather than religious distinction it's because my orientation in this specific issue began in the 1970s when the Black Muslim Movement arose with a bitter denouncement of Whites as the Devil, a declaration which corresponds with the rhetoric of contemporary Islamic jihadists, all of whom are Muslim and all of whom refer to Western (European) peoples (Whites) as the Great Satan and vowing to exterminate us.

This is a readily verifiable fact. It is not fanciful speculation tossed at a wall to see if it sticks.

Then in that case it has to do with Black history, not with Islam. Clearly Islam was not at all required to facilitate it, so again, coincidence does not equate to some kind of causation.

And further you seem to make no distinction between Islam as a whole and "jihadists", which is like making no distinction between the Westboro Batshit Church and Mother Theresa.

I'm not sure if anybody ever told you this, but the concept of Jihad is FROM Islam.

Evidently, what you don't know (which is considerable when it comes to Islam) CAN hurt you.

 

[Pogo]

I don't make it a habit to follow hair-on-fire media stories, but I do know that "white" is a race and "Muslim" is a religion. They're not mutually exclusive. I know Muslims that are black and Muslims that are white, and brown in between. One does not follow the other.

As I said, the reasoning being tossed at the wall to see if it sticks in this thread can only be described as bizarre.

If I seem to incline toward a racial rather than religious distinction it's because my orientation in this specific issue began in the 1970s when the Black Muslim Movement arose with a bitter denouncement of Whites as the Devil, a declaration which corresponds with the rhetoric of contemporary Islamic jihadists, all of whom are Muslim and all of whom refer to Western (European) peoples (Whites) as the Great Satan and vowing to exterminate us.

This is a readily verifiable fact. It is not fanciful speculation tossed at a wall to see if it sticks.

Then in that case it has to do with Black history, not with Islam. Clearly Islam was not at all required to facilitate it, so again, coincidence does not equate to some kind of causation.

And further you seem to make no distinction between Islam as a whole and "jihadists", which is like making no distinction between the Westboro Batshit Church and Mother Theresa.

I'm not sure if anybody ever told you this, but the concept of Jihad is FROM Islam.

Evidently, what you don't know (which is considerable when it comes to Islam) CAN hurt you.

Read it again, Evelyn Wood. My term was jihadISTS. A noun. Referring to a specific set of people within Islam, as used by the poster who wasn't even you in the first place. That's exactly why the analogy that follows it ALSO refers to people.

Once again you're dishonestly changing other people's posts from what they actually say into what you wish they had said because you can't deal with the reality.

 

[MikeK]

Once again, you are talking about fanaticism, NOT what the true religion is. And as far as the Muslims wanting to spread their faith to the Western world? Well I hate to break it to you, but just about EVERY religion speaks about spreading the word of their faith.

I'm not talking about "spreading the word of their faith." I'm talking about barbaric behavior. And I really don't want to hear that it's just the fanatics who are doing that unless you can suggest a way to positively distinguish the fanatics from the peaceful and civilized. I hope you won't suggest that because there is no way to tell the difference we'll just have to put up with the raping and the molestation of our daughters, sisters, wives and mothers, and the general menacing and abuse of our defenseless and outnumbered citizens.

In the way of analogy; if it were learned that individuals within this refugee category are carrying a lethal communicable virus the culture of which is not identifiable during its six month incubation stage, so the specific carriers could not be identified for that length of time but meanwhile are capable of infecting thousands. What would your recommendation be?

 

[Lewdog]

Once again, you are talking about fanaticism, NOT what the true religion is. And as far as the Muslims wanting to spread their faith to the Western world? Well I hate to break it to you, but just about EVERY religion speaks about spreading the word of their faith.

I'm not talking about "spreading the word of their faith." I'm talking about barbaric behavior. And I really don't want to hear that it's just the fanatics who are doing that unless you can suggest a way to positively distinguish the fanatics from the peaceful and civilized. I hope you won't suggest that because there is no way to tell the difference we'll just have to put up with the raping and the molestation of our daughters, sisters, wives and mothers, and the general menacing and abuse of our defenseless and outnumbered citizens.

In the way of analogy; if it were learned that individuals within this refugee category are carrying a lethal communicable virus the culture of which is not identifiable during its six month incubation stage, so the specific carriers could not be identified for that length of time but meanwhile are capable of infecting thousands. What would your recommendation be?

No, I don't want to hear that you believe all Muslims are barbaric unless you can prove it. See how that works? There are about 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States as of 2015 ( A new estimate of the U.S. Muslim population ) and there isn't a rash of Muslim "barbaric" behavior going on.

You are full of nothing but logical fallacies and "Chicken Little" ideals. I have yet to see you make one valid point, while I have provided you with hard facts and provided links to those facts.

 

[elektra]

No, I don't want to hear that you believe all Muslims are barbaric unless you can prove it. See how that works? There are about 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States as of 2015 ( A new estimate of the U.S. Muslim population ) and there isn't a rash of Muslim "barbaric" behavior going on.
.

How many, is a "rash of"?
Muslim Man Guilty of 'Honor Killing' in Daughter's Death
Muslim Man Guilty of 'Honor Killing' in Daughter's Death

Honor killing in America: DOJ report says growing problem is hidden in stats | Fox News
Honor killing in America: DOJ report says growing problem is hidden in stats

 

[Pogo]

No, I don't want to hear that you believe all Muslims are barbaric unless you can prove it. See how that works? There are about 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States as of 2015 ( A new estimate of the U.S. Muslim population ) and there isn't a rash of Muslim "barbaric" behavior going on.
.

How many, is a "rash of"?
Muslim Man Guilty of 'Honor Killing' in Daughter's Death
Muslim Man Guilty of 'Honor Killing' in Daughter's Death

Honor killing in America: DOJ report says growing problem is hidden in stats | Fox News
Honor killing in America: DOJ report says growing problem is hidden in stats

And yet again, another conflation of culture with religion ^^.

They can't help themselves it would seem.

Hang on --- this just in:
Two Christian Pastors Charged in Human Trafficking

Cue "Christians are barbaric and we need to deport them all" association fallacy in four...... three.... two......

Well?? Batter up!

 

[MikeK]

[...]

No, I don't want to hear that you believe all Muslims are barbaric unless you can prove it. See how that works? There are about 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States as of 2015 ( A new estimate of the U.S. Muslim population ) and there isn't a rash of Muslim "barbaric" behavior going on.

You are full of nothing but logical fallacies and "Chicken Little" ideals. I have yet to see you make one valid point, while I have provided you with hard facts and provided links to those facts.

If I ask you what time it is and you tell me it's raining, that is called evasive deflection -- at which you seem well practiced. So once again, In the way of analogy; if it were learned that individuals within this refugee category are carrying a lethal communicable virus the culture of which is not identifiable during its six month incubation stage, so the specific carriers could not be identified for that length of time but meanwhile are capable of infecting thousands. What would your recommendation be?

I don't give a damn how many Muslims are living in the U.S. I'm concerned with the behavior of those which is based on the notion that non-Muslims are "infidels" to be scorned or killed and with consequent criminal action such as we presently are seeing toward Whites in Europe and Scandinavia. So if I ask what you think of that behavior I wonder how you intend to twist and wiggle your way out of an answer.

I predict your tactic will be to suggest through some convoluted rationale that because there are so many Muslims in the U.S. and because there is no way to identify the radicals we should just accept and ignore the barbarism, the assaults, the rape and molestation when the so-called "asylum-seekers" start pouring in.

 

[Lewdog]

[...]

No, I don't want to hear that you believe all Muslims are barbaric unless you can prove it. See how that works? There are about 3.3 million Muslims living in the United States as of 2015 ( A new estimate of the U.S. Muslim population ) and there isn't a rash of Muslim "barbaric" behavior going on.

You are full of nothing but logical fallacies and "Chicken Little" ideals. I have yet to see you make one valid point, while I have provided you with hard facts and provided links to those facts.

If I ask you what time it is and you tell me it's raining, that is called evasive deflection -- at which you seem well practiced. So once again, In the way of analogy; if it were learned that individuals within this refugee category are carrying a lethal communicable virus the culture of which is not identifiable during its six month incubation stage, so the specific carriers could not be identified for that length of time but meanwhile are capable of infecting thousands. What would your recommendation be?

I don't give a damn how many Muslims are living in the U.S. I'm concerned with the behavior of those which is based on the notion that non-Muslims are "infidels" to be scorned or killed and with consequent criminal action such as we presently are seeing toward Whites in Europe and Scandinavia. So if I ask what you think of that behavior I wonder how you intend to twist and wiggle your way out of an answer.

I predict your tactic will be to suggest through some convoluted rationale that because there are so many Muslims in the U.S. and because there is no way to identify the radicals we should just accept and ignore the barbarism, the assaults, the rape and molestation when the so-called "asylum-seekers" start pouring in.

You are bringing up "what ifs" that don't even exist. Your fear of people that are not like yourself has made you become, irrational.

 

[MikeK]

You are bringing up "what ifs" that don't even exist. Your fear of people that are not like yourself has made you become, irrational.

So in your opinion being resentful of what Muslim refugees are doing in Europe and Scandinavia is xenophobic.

 

[Lewdog]

You are bringing up "what ifs" that don't even exist. Your fear of people that are not like yourself has made you become, irrational.

So in your opinion being resentful of what Muslim refugees are doing in Europe and Scandinavia is xenophobic.

No, blowing out of proportion the crimes of a few people that happen to be part of a sub group of human beings, and demonizing the entire group of people for it, and wanting to treat those individuals as sub-human... that's xenophobic.

 

[MikeK]

No, blowing out of proportion the crimes of a few people that happen to be part of a sub group of human beings, and demonizing the entire group of people for it, and wanting to treat those individuals as sub-human... that's xenophobic.

Again, you are avoiding my question. In the way of analogy; if it were learned that individuals within this refugee category are carrying a lethal communicable virus the culture of which is not identifiable during its six month incubation stage, so the specific carriers could not be identified for that length of time but meanwhile are capable of infecting thousands. What would your recommendation be?

How about an answer in place of accusations of xenophobia.