View Full Version : Let's go Nazism...
Kadagar_AV
04-13-2013, 04:46
Country 1: Moderate intake of people from sub-standard cultures - seen from today's civilized world. Heavily cheer on academical as well as physical progress among the population.
Country 2: Accepts about 1% (of pop) a year from sub-standard cultures - seen from today's civilized world. Are hardcore on everyone's equal right.
Imagine country 1 and 2 both are European, both have less than 10 million in population, and both are now on comparable levels when it comes to pretty much most political factors.
How would You judge these countries to do in 10 years, 20 years, 50 years....
*Yes brainiac, it's not hard to get what the real examples are*
Rhyfelwyr
04-13-2013, 13:23
I agree with your post, although I think there is a disconnect between the post and the thread title.
Respecting the importance of a peoples' culture and the integrity of national borders is one thing - Nazism is something else entirely.
Kadagar_AV
04-13-2013, 13:36
I ask a question, so there's not really anything to "agree" on.
With that said, You of course know my position and support it :)
In Sweden, my beliefs = nazism according to the main stream, hence topic title. On a more international board, I would call myself a "moderate" in immigrant questions.
Heck, Swedish politicians have a small panic attack before admitting negroes generally have a darker skin tone. Just joking, they wouldn't admit it, as there are no "races" or "sub-species".
Even thinking not all cultures are equal SCREAMS of nazism in Sweden. See, the other cultures are just DIFFERENT, not better or worse.
This of course contradicts any form of clear thinking, but hey, the country is basically filled with HoreTore's. They wouldn't admit we have a immigrant problem even if they hear gunshots outside.
It's about the immigrant having a hard time in society, see? *now don't question WHY they have a hard time, then You go all nazi again*
Sad as it is, I'm not joking. This is the reality in Sweden.
Rhyfelwyr
04-13-2013, 13:46
I ask a question, so there's not really anything to "agree" on.
Well it seemed like a rhetorical question.
You don't have to answer this, but would you say that that Swedish societies' portrayal of people like yourself as Nazis has, in fact, led to you identifying with Nazism on some level? Would it be true for certain elements in the Swedish right?
I just sometimes think that if you alienate people enough and force a certain image upon them, they will often adopt that image as a means of protest and distancing themselves from the people that use it against them, even if they don't necessarily agree with everything that image means.
Sad as it is, I'm not joking. This is the reality in Sweden.
Sweden is a very awesome place compared to lets say, the UK, in the communal attitude and their treatment of strangers, or it could have just been the novelty of being a Brit there. Hospitality was at a level where if I didn't feel bad for hardly knowing the language, I would seriously consider moving there.
Then to compare that experience to the experience of getting to Sweden via London... it was one of the most awful experiences in my life. Accosted by the worst and hostile elements of society all the way through the trip.
Well it seemed like a rhetorical question.
You don't have to answer this, but would you say that that Swedish societies' portrayal of people like yourself as Nazis has, in fact, led to you identifying with Nazism on some level? Would it be true for certain elements in the Swedish right?
I just sometimes think that if you alienate people enough and force a certain image upon them, they will often adopt that image as a means of protest and distancing themselves from the people that use it against them, even if they don't necessarily agree with everything that image means.
Sweden has made a point out of importing people who really don't belong there, their mindset couldn't be further away of the mindset of the your ordinary Swede. Can't blame the ordinary Swedish for noticing that they are living in a testlab
Noncommunist
04-13-2013, 17:40
Even thinking not all cultures are equal SCREAMS of nazism in Sweden. See, the other cultures are just DIFFERENT, not better or worse.
Yeah, that does heavily hint at nazism with their obsession with race. Plus, how would you even judge different cultures to be "better" or "worse"? Each culture has its own adaptations that allow people to survive in their particular environment. Some cultures tend to mesh better with western culture but that does not mean that they are intrinsically "better".
HoreTore
04-13-2013, 20:25
An Austrian using terms like "sub-cultures". What else is new?
Strike For The South
04-13-2013, 20:46
Sub standard culture?
You mean the one that makes men close there legs and needs a gallon of beer to say hello to a stranger?
Kralizec
04-13-2013, 22:11
...and needs a gallon of beer to say hello to a stranger?
Strike, that is very offensive.
That particular stereotype applies to Finns, not Swedes.
HoreTore
04-13-2013, 22:24
Strike, that is very offensive.
That particular stereotype applies to Finns, not Swedes.
I can confirm that it applies to everyone north of Copenhagen. Related video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGOLJlZW_qc
Heck, Swedish politicians have a small panic attack before admitting negroes generally have a darker skin tone. Just joking, they wouldn't admit it, as there are no "races" or "sub-species".
That's the scientific consensus, it's not just political correctness. There were a few anthropologists as early as the late 19th century who rejected the concept of race, and genetic studies in the 1930's-50's showed that basic evolutionary forces only affect simple traits like blood type and not complex ones like mental capacity. They also showed that human traits aren't distributed consistently, they vary across and within different environments. There's even some biologists who believe that sub-species classifications should be taken out of biology all together.
Even if there were human races, it wouldn't have anything to do with your views on culture and immigration anyway because culture is learned not inherited.
His point is that at some point political correctness starts to cloud reality in an Orwellian double-speak kind of way. George Carlin actually did a great little skit about it...
I see his point, and I agree with it, but I wanted to point out that academics don't believe in race just because it offends their sensibilities.
HoreTore
04-14-2013, 11:40
I see his point, and I agree with it, but I wanted to point out that academics don't believe in race just because it offends their sensibilities.
No, most academics don't believe in race because it doesn't make much sense.
Sweden is a very awesome place compared to lets say, the UK, in the communal attitude and their treatment of strangers, or it could have just been the novelty of being a Brit there. Hospitality was at a level where if I didn't feel bad for hardly knowing the language, I would seriously consider moving there.
Then to compare that experience to the experience of getting to Sweden via London... it was one of the most awful experiences in my life. Accosted by the worst and hostile elements of society all the way through the trip.
Ever been there, the Swedes aren't as tolerant to immigrants as you might think, immigrants aren't all that accepted, there is such a thing as passive-agression and Scandinavians have lots of it. Call it the cold shoulder, it is perfectly obvious that your pressence isn't really apreciated. I don't know if it's intentional, probably not, my Danish family was shocked when I said I found scandinavians coldblooded
Edit, I am also guilty of liking the French. It's easier for me to get along with them. I never see a hint of a smile or a tease in the eyes of vikings, I really don't belong there
The Lurker Below
04-14-2013, 15:52
Racism seems to be a natural and understandable thing. But to act on it in a discriminatory fashion is kinda assholish.
Racism seems to be a natural and understandable thing. But to act on it in a discriminatory fashion is kinda assholish.
Any reason to treat a person badly for no reason makes you a jerk, but especially on the left it is seen as acceptable as there is an excuse called 'a cause'. I dispise racists but I also find it really hard to respect the uncompromising attitude of the self-congratulating post-ww2 resistance as they claim it for theirselves to be against it. It's a rather insulting insinuation that has 'if you aren't with us you are against us' written all over it when you are just trying to be reasonable, but some (not all) lefties relish on being offended about perfectly fine facts. It's not getting us anywhere we need to be able to discuss problems, not just dismiss them and claw out the eyes of whoever brought them up. To be fair though, that's a lot better nowadays, the angry left is a dying breed
Rhyfelwyr
04-14-2013, 17:05
I dispise racists
Didn't you claim in a recent thread that there were substantial differences in intelligence between different races? Surely that would make you racist?
Seamus Fermanagh
04-14-2013, 17:17
No, most academics don't believe in race because it doesn't make much sense.
Actually, academe has -- for the most part -- discarded the notion of "race" because there are few if any quantifiable differences among the so-called races and most of those differences are connected to relatively narrowly defined physical/medical issues such as sickle-cell anemia.
The more compelling issue, in academe, is culture. The broad impact of issues such as the dialectic between individualist and collectivist culture, monochronic and polychronic thinking, power distance orientation and the like are far more explanative of human behavior and interaction than are things like melanin content or epicanthic folds.
Didn't you claim in a recent thread that there were substantial differences in intelligence between different races? Surely that would make you racist?
Of course. I should have said people who hate other races, my bad. Technically that makes me a racist yes, but not in the way some are. Hating other people is not something I am capable of but I do acknowledge these differences, so yes I am a racist depending on your definitions. But I am not a hater.
Kadagar_AV
04-14-2013, 17:29
Well it seemed like a rhetorical question.
You don't have to answer this, but would you say that that Swedish societies' portrayal of people like yourself as Nazis has, in fact, led to you identifying with Nazism on some level? Would it be true for certain elements in the Swedish right?
I just sometimes think that if you alienate people enough and force a certain image upon them, they will often adopt that image as a means of protest and distancing themselves from the people that use it against them, even if they don't necessarily agree with everything that image means.
Well, actually it wasn't rhetorical. The mass population in Sweden honestly believe this is the way forward, all evidence aside. I just wondered what country the peeps on the org would guess is more successful.
As to Your second part, I must agree. I was born and raised a multicultural socialist, real world experience and travels to other countries gave me a whole other perspective on life. These days I still think socialism is good (I believe the state should take care of its citizens), but now I also believe nationalism is good. We have an ethnicity, and this ethnicity has many positives in it. I believe much good can be done when the population of a nation CARE for the nation.
And what do You call them Nationalistic Socialists?
I'm not the type of Nazi who want to send Jews to concentration camps, I'm the type of Nazi who think 10% immigration would do any country good (preferably from all parts of the globe).
Yeah, that does heavily hint at nazism with their obsession with race. Plus, how would you even judge different cultures to be "better" or "worse"? Each culture has its own adaptations that allow people to survive in their particular environment. Some cultures tend to mesh better with western culture but that does not mean that they are intrinsically "better".
Well, the cultures that doesn't mesh with MY culture I deem as less good IN my nation state. If a culture find it normal to cut of females clitoris to "control their sexuality", I will find the culture sub-par from my experience.
If I have a daughter, I would want her to experience idiots like these when she goes to visit OTHER cultures, I wouldn't wish it to be part of a multicultural society she lives in.
An Austrian using terms like "sub-cultures". What else is new?
A Norwegian socialist turning his brain off when it comes to any sort of immigrant debate. What else is new? EDIT: I'm not sure You understand what "sub" refers to, if You deem "sub-cultures" as degenerative.
I for one belong to the skibum sub-culture. Also the punk rocker sub-culture. Also to the sk8er sub-culture.
You as a Norwegian socialist belong to a sub-par sub-culture.
That's the scientific consensus, it's not just political correctness. There were a few anthropologists as early as the late 19th century who rejected the concept of race, and genetic studies in the 1930's-50's showed that basic evolutionary forces only affect simple traits like blood type and not complex ones like mental capacity. They also showed that human traits aren't distributed consistently, they vary across and within different environments. There's even some biologists who believe that sub-species classifications should be taken out of biology all together.
Even if there were human races, it wouldn't have anything to do with your views on culture and immigration anyway because culture is learned not inherited.
Now explain why them negroes run faster. Heck, last time I checked Swedens sprint team, 4/4 were negroes.
Can we pretty please at least admit that different skin colours exist? And that they have different traits (how much is biological and physical is another debate altogether).
His point is that at some point political correctness starts to cloud reality in an Orwellian double-speak kind of way. George Carlin actually did a great little skit about it...
Loved this guy. Loony as hell but great at pushing buttons.
Word. Cheers!!
I see his point, and I agree with it, but I wanted to point out that academics don't believe in race just because it offends their sensibilities.
We have the human race, and then what then?
Fair enough if you don't accept the term race, but what do you supplant it with for clear communication? I just use the word people use :shrug:
Rhyfelwyr
04-14-2013, 18:02
As to Your second part, I must agree. I was born and raised a multicultural socialist, real world experience and travels to other countries gave me a whole other perspective on life. These days I still think socialism is good (I believe the state should take care of its citizens), but now I also believe nationalism is good. We have an ethnicity, and this ethnicity has many positives in it. I believe much good can be done when the population of a nation CARE for the nation.
And what do You call them Nationalistic Socialists?
I'm not the type of Nazi who want to send Jews to concentration camps, I'm the type of Nazi who think 10% immigration would do any country good (preferably from all parts of the globe).
Yeah, I got the feeling that's how things were with you.
You choose your own identity, but you are doing yourself an injustice to call yourself a Nazi. For all their other policies, the Holocaust will always be the defining feature of that regime and the ideology attached to it.
Also, bear in mind that titles can be misleading. The fact that you are a nationalist and a socialist does not make you a National Socialist - that term will always be reserved for reference to the NSDAP. Economic arrangements in the Third Reich would be best described as corporatism - a far cry from socialism. They were also not nationalists in a more traditional sense of the term - they were Aryan supremacists. Nationalists for example would oppose wars fought for economic interests in foreign countries - Nazi's would support imperialism for furthering their racial agenda.
While you might opt to call yourself a "national socialist" (notice the lack of capitals, although its so subtle it will still be misleading), by using the term Nazi you are explicitly identifying yourself with the Third Reich - Nazi is after all a shorted version of the German for National Socialism.
I know it's easy to do but don't let other peoples' prejudice shape your own identity in such a way that you would appear to support things that in reality you do not.
Before people get the bad idea about me, the differences in IQ are taken from the global development index and it's just a correlation, nothing more really. But these gaps do exist it's foolish to deny that when it's right in your face. 'IQ and the wealth of nations' turned the question around, chicken&egg. I don't know and neither do you, as Horetore rightly pointed out in that thread is that we simply don't know enough to make any calculation solid because we don't know enough to estimate intelligence. It's just what we got, the way it's measured can be be completily of.
Kadagar_AV
04-14-2013, 18:18
Wrote some damn clever stuff
:bow:
Socially nazism is social-democracy, but it's a bit more than that, terror, ethnic cleansing. It's impossible to seperate. Sure, the nazi's also did some good things, much to the horror of some they actually introduced the welfare-state. But building a death-factory kinda cancels everything, the nazi's were sadistic scum who knew perfectly well what they were doing. Nazi's who didn't know about the camps at least knew about the ghettos. No points from me
People who got swept up in the moment I can forgive, I suspect my grandfather was NSB, I'll ask my grandma sometimes, she is a bit closed on the subject. I do know for sure though that her second husband was as wrong as possible, fellow Dutchies probably know the name of his daughter, yes that Duisenberg. Nice legacy they layed out for me. But there is no excuse for actively working on such horrible policies even if you aren't directly responsible anyway
Yeah, who even cares about the role of people in World War II anymore? My great-grandfather was a judge at the criminal court in The Hague, and I know that my other great-grandfather (who was in the military police) had to shoot his best friend for desertion.
they actually introduced the welfare-state
Well, I guess that's debatable. But wouldn't you agree that the guilt-by-association argument is getting a bit old? Hitler ate sugar, therefor chocolate is evil.
As several people have already pointed out, "race" is not a valid biological concept. I suppose it carries as much meaning as "curly hair" and "non-curly hair". We can probably make up stuff as we go along: let's divide people into groups based on the size of their spleens.
Even if this idea of only allowing a certain percentage of people in per year, how would you even measure that? Do you get extra points if you're a political refugee? How would this realistically even work?
Montmorency
04-15-2013, 00:33
As several people have already pointed out, "race" is not a valid biological concept. I suppose it carries as much meaning as "curly hair" and "non-curly hair".
Or if it at some point will be, then its definition will be entirely different anyway - as I have pointed out.
At the least, we can already see that any notion of a "Negroid" race makes no sense.
Now explain why them negroes run faster.
Can you provide evidence that all dark-skinned individuals who can trace their ancestry to Subsaharan Africa from 1000-0 (a somewhat arbitrary range) years ago have a higher peak sprint-speed than everyone else?
Or, does the fact that a few dozen "Negroes" are the fastest runners in the world conclusively indicate that all "Negroes" are on average faster than everyone else?
Or, does the fact that the world's champion for hot-dog eating is Japanese lead you to believe that the Japanese are the best speed-eaters in the world?
I think your impression falls apart even further once one examines where exactly these 'fastest Negroes' come from, what their economic situations have been, etc.
Or: http://www.usatf.org/Athlete-Bios.aspx
Of 161 listed athletes, at best 70 'look black'.
classical_hero
04-16-2013, 16:58
Now explain why them negroes run faster. Heck, last time I checked Swedens sprint team, 4/4 were negroes.
Can we pretty please at least admit that different skin colours exist? And that they have different traits (how much is biological and physical is another debate altogether).
The difference are simply genetic isolation. Also it is not all Africans who are fast runners, it seems those from the West Africa, where most of the slaves came from in the West are faster, but the East Africans are better at the long distance races due to their genetics. They are both Black, Negro,or whatever, but even in the group you can see differences based on geography. The differences are basically superficial. The skin tone of an individual is related to the gene that regulates melanin and it is more than likely that those of a lighter skin tone are mutants of those who are darker skinned.
The Stranger
04-16-2013, 17:40
The difference are simply genetic isolation. Also it is not all Africans who are fast runners, it seems those from the West Africa, where most of the slaves came from in the West are faster, but the East Africans are better at the long distance races due to their genetics. They are both Black, Negro,or whatever, but even in the group you can see differences based on geography. The differences are basically superficial. The skin tone of an individual is related to the gene that regulates melanin and it is more than likely that those of a lighter skin tone are mutants of those who are darker skinned.
ah no wonder all the X-men were white! (yes halle berry too)
Yeah, who even cares about the role of people in World War II anymore? My great-grandfather was a judge at the criminal court in The Hague, and I know that my other great-grandfather (who was in the military police) had to shoot his best friend for desertion.
Well, I guess that's debatable. But wouldn't you agree that the guilt-by-association argument is getting a bit old? Hitler ate sugar, therefor chocolate is evil.
As several people have already pointed out, "race" is not a valid biological concept. I suppose it carries as much meaning as "curly hair" and "non-curly hair". We can probably make up stuff as we go along: let's divide people into groups based on the size of their spleens.
Even if this idea of only allowing a certain percentage of people in per year, how would you even measure that? Do you get extra points if you're a political refugee? How would this realistically even work?
Well I think disliking the idea is out of touch with reality, what causes what is in the same lague as the nature/nurture sphere, chicken & egg. But denying that these differences exist is being stubborn at best
Nobody is denying the existence of differences between people. The object of disagreement appears to be the question whether or not these differences are biologically hardwired.
The answer is: they are not.
Nobody is denying the existence of differences between people. The object of disagreement appears to be the question whether or not these differences are biologically hardwired.
The answer is: they are not.
That is what is turned around in that book, a different way of looking at cause and outcome using the global development index. Not that it has anything to do with all that directly but read this
http://www.bol.com/nl/p/dead-aid/1001004006538977/?Referrer=ADVNLGOO0020112463beo
Chicken and egg
classical_hero
04-17-2013, 14:00
Nobody is denying the existence of differences between people. The object of disagreement appears to be the question whether or not these differences are biologically hardwired.
The answer is: they are not.
The real question is, do these difference really matter at all? The answer is a clear no, but unfortunately for some people they do matter.
Kadagar_AV
04-17-2013, 18:38
Honestly, I am generally more interested in the cultural impact of mixed ethnicities. Specifically, I am shocked and disgusted by the impact of African and Arab culture in Sweden.
I just fail to see the positive side of it, where I can think of several negative factors. The most (for me) painful one being the upheaval of the wellfare state, as the general Swede no longer trust this fellow citizens.
Oh, and I also look down on Islamic culture, and have no interest in seeing it spread in MY culture.
I prefer surrounding myself with people grown up with Astrid Lindgren children tales and TV-shows... Than people growing up with Jihadist tales, and a complete lack of TV-shows.
Honestly, I am generally more interested in the cultural impact of mixed ethnicities.
I'm of "mixed ethnicity" too. Does this even mean anything?
Oh, and I also look down on Islamic culture, and have no interest in seeing it spread in MY culture.
Which is basically indefinable. Or do you think Muslims in Indonesia, China, and Morocco are the same? You have no clue what you're talking about.
Kadagar_AV
04-17-2013, 19:29
I'm of "mixed ethnicity" too. Does this even mean anything?
Which is basically indefinable. Or do you think Muslims in Indonesia, China, and Morocco are the same? You have no clue what you're talking about.
1. As am I, and it has had a negative impact on my life, even when the two ethnicities are WAY more close than in my above example. So yes, it means something.
2. I don't want too many Muslims from Indonesia, China or Morocco. I know their cultures are individually different, but I collectively dislike them. Why? Because their shared trait is being Muslim.
What part of me looking down on Islamic culture did You miss, mate?
The Stranger
04-17-2013, 19:54
1. As am I, and it has had a negative impact on my life, even when the two ethnicities are WAY more close than in my above example. So yes, it means something.
2. I don't want too many Muslims from Indonesia, China or Morocco. I know their cultures are individually different, but I collectively dislike them. Why? Because their shared trait is being Muslim.
What part of me looking down on Islamic culture did You miss, mate?
in that case can u almost ever not be of a mixed etnicity? or do you want groups to continue inbreeding untill eternity?
culturally people from the north and the south of holland are already very different, and this is such a small patch of land.
Kadagar_AV
04-17-2013, 20:07
in that case can u almost ever not be of a mixed etnicity? or do you want groups to continue inbreeding untill eternity?
culturally people from the north and the south of holland are already very different, and this is such a small patch of land.
Have You read my previous posts in this thread? If so, I can't get how You from that understand me as wanting groups to continue inbreeding until eternity? :shrug:
2. I don't want too many Muslims from Indonesia, China or Morocco. I know their cultures are individually different, but I collectively dislike them. Why? Because their shared trait is being Muslim.
Eh, yes, okay, so I guess that single fact, regardless of their socio-economic, cultural and academic background makes everything else completely irrelevant. Makes perfect sense.
Kadagar_AV
04-18-2013, 01:09
Eh, yes, okay, so I guess that single fact, regardless of their socio-economic, cultural and academic background makes everything else completely irrelevant. Makes perfect sense.
I didn't say it was irrelevant, mate.
I said they were Islamists, and I don't want Islamists to gain a foothold in Sweden.
The degree of their Islamisation is thus irrelevant for me. Anyone taking some fables run by a pedophile as a guideline in their life is a unwanted being in my society, or comes in a small and controlled enough group that they adapt to my culture in an ordered way.
I didn't say it was irrelevant, mate.
I said they were Islamists, and I don't want Islamists to gain a foothold in Sweden.
The degree of their Islamisation is thus irrelevant for me. Anyone taking some fables run by a pedophile as a guideline in their life is a unwanted being in my society, or comes in a small and controlled enough group that they adapt to my culture in an ordered way.
A muslim is just someone who comes from a country with a muslim tradtion. Islamists are the scum
A muslim is just someone who comes from a country with a muslim tradtion. Islamists are the scum
That's not how semantics work. You can't make up the meaning of words to suit your purposes.
Muslim and Islamist mean the same thing. They both mean "an adherent to the religion of Islam".
But hey, I can't complain. I like Christians; but the followers of Christ? *shudder* What a crazy bunch.
~Jirisys ()
The Lurker Below
04-18-2013, 06:44
That's not how semantics work. You can't make up the meaning of words to suit your purposes.
Muslim and Islamist mean the same thing. They both mean "an adherent to the religion of Islam".
But hey, I can't complain. I like Christians; but the followers of Christ? *shudder* What a crazy bunch.
~Jirisys ()
this looks fun. let me try
I like women, but bitches be crazy!
Montmorency
04-18-2013, 06:46
Polysemy...
I guess he means Islam fundamentalists or Political Islam.
Always so afraid of them. Just boo them away like Christian fundamentalists and Political Christians.
I mean, why would such a strong and civilised culture be afraid of such dirty ammonites? /sarcasm
~Jirisys ()
I said they were Islamists, and I don't want Islamists to gain a foothold in Sweden.
..but you didn't mention that anywhere.
That's not how semantics work. You can't make up the meaning of words to suit your purposes.
Muslim and Islamist mean the same thing. They both mean "an adherent to the religion of Islam".
But hey, I can't complain. I like Christians; but the followers of Christ? *shudder* What a crazy bunch.
~Jirisys ()
There certainly is a difference, muslim and islamist are not the same thing, period. If you deny that you simply can't know enough about what you are saying
Seamus Fermanagh
04-18-2013, 21:07
Polysemy...
Stop that or you will go blind.
There certainly is a difference, muslim and islamist are not the same thing, period. If you deny that you simply can't know enough about what you are saying
Did...did I just agree with you, 100%?
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
04-19-2013, 00:07
It's actually impossible that different human populations don't have a predisposition to certain character traits - we see this in all other animals, and we know that our genetic profiles have adapted to our environment, not as much as dogs or cats, but the same principle applies.
The question is how much the pre-disposition affects who we actually are.
This is like the fourth thread that's wound up being a semantics debate. This is the interwebz, with language barriers and optional grammar. Who cares?
It's hard for you to lose a debate when you keep diverting the argument's focus from the topic a hand to semantics.
Did...did I just agree with you, 100%?
That's almost as bad as agreeing with both Rhy and Kad.
~Jirisys ()
Play the ball. You don't know what you are talking about, for your ordinary muslim islamism is as welcome as the inquisition they are terrified of these guys.
Kadagar_AV
04-19-2013, 07:58
..but you didn't mention that anywhere.
I'm so fed up with this muslim/islamist debate...
If You accept muslims, You will get islamists. Remind me Hax, doesnt the MUSLIM holy text have a lot to say about POLITICS?
If so, why bother separating muslims/islamists?
I'm so fed up with this muslim/islamist debate...
If You accept muslims, You will get islamists. Remind me Hax, doesnt the MUSLIM holy text have a lot to say about POLITICS?
If so, why bother separating muslims/islamists?
You just did already 'if you accept muslims you get islamists'
Doublepost, scuzi. Opertunity to expand though, the stubborn unwillingniss to differentiate from both the multicultural left and the xenophobe right isn't good for any of us. People shouldn't be so uncompromising your view on things isn't your dick. I would absolutely have a problem with my dick being cut off, but listening to what other people have to say leaves it intact.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.