View Full Version : My reich for a multiculture
Looks like the multicultists are radicalising in germany as well. The most brilliant idea, why don't we tag along imam's when the police is on patrol, after all the muslims youth terrorising the locals don't recognise the police as an authority and who in their right mind would, has to be said, they got a point. But doesn't the government lose the authority to rule when it no longer can make guarenty the safety of those that pay them to do so, they can still prevent us from using self-defence after, and are generaly much more firm when it happens, like a girlfriend you dumped they can become pretty vicious. This is so wrong, police looking for the help of imams to try to govern, well, who's area exactly? Not saying that the imam's aren't trying to do their thing, it is just so incredibly rediculous that the ones that are supposed to protect are asking for protection. Not apeasement but a apleasement, makes me sick. A state witout the monoply on the use of violence ceases to exist as a real state.
GAH2Germany
Mikeus Caesar
10-23-2007, 20:27
I wonder how long it will take before Godwin's law comes into effect in this particular topic?
I wonder what exactly Frag is talking about, I have yet to see policemen with an Imam tagging along.
That said, we do have a green party here, but most countries have one, no? :sweatdrop:
Haudegen
10-23-2007, 20:58
This is the story right?
http://www.westfaelische-rundschau.de/wr/wr.politik.volltext.php?kennung=on7wrPOLWelNational39376&zulieferer=wr&kategorie=POL&rubrik=Welt®ion=National&auftritt=WR&dbserver=1
Sorry, couldn´t find an English article.
To clarify this a bit: The purpose of the imams is to strenghten the moral authority of the police. I think it´s an attempt to teach young muslims that obeying the law is their religious duty.
If it works, fine ...
But you are mistaken if you assume that ...
- the policemen did this because they fear for their lifes (more than usual)
- the imams are given any powers of a policeman
- the police stopped prosecuting crimes committed by muslims
This is the story right?
http://www.westfaelische-rundschau.de/wr/wr.politik.volltext.php?kennung=on7wrPOLWelNational39376&zulieferer=wr&kategorie=POL&rubrik=Welt®ion=National&auftritt=WR&dbserver=1
Sorry, couldn´t find an English article.
To clarify this a bit: The purpose of the imams is to strenghten the moral authority of the police.
Yeah that is the problem, they shouldn't need to, and they sure as hell shoudn't be it because that way we could as well privatise protection. Goverment has no claim to authority if their most primal reasons to exist are handled by third party's who can have other interests, it legitimity ceases to be.
Boyar Son
10-23-2007, 21:45
whats godwins law?
and besides, what with a number of muslims being extremists
(large ## ?, i guess according to europeans fearing them like nukes)
if you piss them off they're gonna suicide bomb you!!:tnt:
whats godwins law?
and besides, what with a number of muslims being extremists
(large ## ?, i guess according to europeans fearing them like nukes)
if you piss them off they're gonna suicide bomb you!!:tnt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. ”
—Mike Godwin <godwin@eff.org>
Why would they attack us they aren't nuts, screw terrorism they don't need it they have multicultists. Just a mild threat to a days comfort is enough to get an audiance with the pope. The multiculture has to work most of all no matter what, truly pious they are.
Fragony, what's your problem here?
Sure it sounds weird, but the old lady who was robbed every week and isn't being robbed anymore will probably appreciate it. And once they have learned to obey police it may not even be necessary anymore. Maybe it doesn't fit your perfect definition of how things should be but then where are all things perfect?
This is an attempt to improve police work, how can you say that's bad after your endless cries that police were ineffective? Should they just beat the young kids instead of talking to them? Yes, that might generate some form of respect, they'd stay far a way when they started throwing the first rocks. :dizzy2:
Geoffrey S
10-23-2007, 23:09
If it works I'm happy. The whole point is getting muslim religious authority to (finally) back Western values and law more emphatically, and this seems like a good step in that direction to me. Getting the clerics on the side of whichever nation they're in is essential in preventing radicalism and showing that yes, they are a part of Western culture and need to adjust.
IrishArmenian
10-23-2007, 23:18
If it works I'm happy. The whole point is getting muslim religious authority to (finally) back Western values and law more emphatically, and this seems like a good step in that direction to me. Getting the clerics on the side of whichever nation they're in is essential in preventing radicalism and showing that yes, they are a part of Western culture and need to adjust.
I agree, but with one reservation.
The point is to get the wayward extremists to see that Western culture has laws that don't conflict with Islamic law.
Geoffrey S
10-23-2007, 23:28
I agree, but with one reservation.
The point is to get the wayward extremists to see that Western culture has laws that don't conflict with Islamic law.
Not even necessarily extremists, but definitely alienated youths who assert their muslim heritage in opposition to a perceived hostile Western culture. I'm not convinced extremists can be reached and that anything except strong measures work against them, but at least reaching that stage can (and should) be prevented. Western nations have offered plenty of chances, now it's time for community leaders to show that it is not against Islam to accept those chances and offer something in return.
InsaneApache
10-23-2007, 23:40
I see Frags is on the ol' Columbian marching powder.
:thumbsdown:
Papewaio
10-23-2007, 23:46
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. ”
—Mike Godwin <godwin@eff.org>
I've just realised that Godwin's law doesn't really explain anything. If a thread went to infinity it would have every kind of conversation in it. So as a thread grows the probability of any statement being made approaches one.
ie
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Rome approaches one. ”
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Spongebob Squarepants approaches one. ”
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Octosquids approaches one. ”
I've just realised that Godwin's law doesn't really explain anything. If a thread went to infinity it would have every kind of conversation in it. So as a thread grows the probability of any statement being made approaches one.
ie
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Rome approaches one. ”
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Spongebob Squarepants approaches one. ”
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Octosquids approaches one. ”
Indeed. :yes:
Reminds me of a calculus or statistics theorem.
Banquo's Ghost
10-24-2007, 07:30
I've just realised that Godwin's law doesn't really explain anything. If a thread went to infinity it would have every kind of conversation in it. So as a thread grows the probability of any statement being made approaches one.
ie
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Rome approaches one. ”
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Spongebob Squarepants approaches one. ”
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Octosquids approaches one. ”
Surely though, a thread can reach infinity while discussing just a single issue? You've read enough gun control threads to have that proven. :wink:
If it works I'm happy. The whole point is getting muslim religious authority to (finally) back Western values and law more emphatically, and this seems like a good step in that direction to me. Getting the clerics on the side of whichever nation they're in is essential in preventing radicalism and showing that yes, they are a part of Western culture and need to adjust.
It's insane, the law is the law if they don't respect and don't recognise the authority as such something is very very wrong and you have to show musscle not hide behind imam so they don't throw stones. Maybe it will work and but is next? There will be something next because this is a downward spriral, state can't outsource it's responsibilities to religious groups we have seperation of church and state. We have to respect the law because the imam says so? How can we tolerate that? They have to respect the law because it is the law. They should bend to us not the other way around we will keep bending one insanity at the time.
HoreTore
10-24-2007, 07:46
Uhm.... When did we europeans become law-abiding citizens with the utmost respect for the police...?
Uhm.... When did we europeans become law-abiding citizens with the utmost respect for the police...?
Since when does the police tolerate that? If we start messing they bring the military police and we get clubbed, if they start messing they bring the imam, nothing wrong with that? Law should be colorblind, the same for everyone. All the same rules all the same rights, if they can't respect that they should get the hell out of our countries.
Addition, the rather explicite message is that the imam is a higher authority then the police, absolute madness.
Tribesman
10-24-2007, 08:32
It's insane, the law is the law if they don't respect and don't recognise the authority as such something is very very wrong
Well respect for the law , thats very good .
Now then Fragony , have you had any more run ins with the police lately because you thought the law about bicycles in pedestrianised areas was a stupid law and shouldn't have been applied to you ?
Addition, the rather explicite message is that the imam is a higher authority then the police, absolute madness.
If they were Quakers who would be the higher authority ?
Common Tribes, if they only listen to the police because a higher authority (the imam) tells them to, and we allow the imam to be the higher authority the state loses every legitimacy. This is a dangerous development.
PanzerJaeger
10-24-2007, 08:50
Sieg Heil :shame:
Forget the imam, bring bigger clubs and riot gear and beat them into submission. The law must be respected in a democratic system. :smash:
Sieg Heil :shame:
Forget the imam, bring bigger clubs and riot gear and beat them into submission. The law must be respected in a democratic system. :smash:
wow...I agree with Panzer....I´ll go lie down now....I must be coming down with something...
more seriously now....a democratic government having to hide behind the pseudo-authority of some religious figure is unacceptable.
these guys don´t respect the police?....I suggest the police employ the proper force to encourage them to do so.
Geoffrey S
10-24-2007, 10:15
It's insane, the law is the law if they don't respect and don't recognise the authority as such something is very very wrong and you have to show musscle not hide behind imam so they don't throw stones. Maybe it will work and but is next? There will be something next because this is a downward spriral, state can't outsource it's responsibilities to religious groups we have seperation of church and state. We have to respect the law because the imam says so? How can we tolerate that? They have to respect the law because it is the law. They should bend to us not the other way around we will keep bending one insanity at the time.
It is insane. Large portions of the population have closer ties to their religious authority, the imams, than to the state they're living in. That's damaging and has been shown to be so; using imams in this way to tie them to the state is a step in the direction of placing authority over these youths where currently there is far too little.
You say this implicates that the imams are above the law? I see it more as implicating that even the imams are subject to the law and showing that using faith as any kind of excuse is not tolerated; that faith and Western law certainly aren't mutually exclusive, which is what seems to be common sentiment right now.
And if it doesn't work? It shows clearly to all parties that such youths respect neither law nor faith, and may finally lead to the (majority) law-abiding muslim community to finally realise that they have no reason to tolerate such behaviour.
You say this implicates that the imams are above the law?
No, it implicates that they are a higher authority then the police.
Rodion Romanovich
10-24-2007, 10:42
I wonder how long it will take before Godwin's law comes into effect in this particular topic?
Didn't the very first post already make such a comparison?
Tribesman
10-24-2007, 11:07
No, it implicates that they are a higher authority then the police.
How ?
If they were a higher authority than the police then the police would be joining Iman patrols , the police would be following iman orders and the imans laws ... as the case is the opposite of that then the implication is the opposite of what you claim it to be .
*sigh* they are a higher authority because they don't listen to the police unless the imam tells them to do so. So, the islam comes first for them, the laws of the country second, quite unlike how we, well some of us, like to see it.
Tribesman
10-24-2007, 12:15
*sigh* they are a higher authority because they don't listen to the police unless the imam tells them to do so. So, the islam comes first for them, the laws of the country second, quite unlike how we, well some of us, like to see it
Ah so the Iman is there with the police to explain local laws and Islamic laws to the truculent youths who don't understand either the local laws or Islamic laws .
Hmmmmm .....and you are against this ?
I see your point now Fragony and have to say it's valid.
But it also won't happen, I don't know why, I never understood it either, but policemen have a tendency to avoid certain problematic areas, it's the same in almost every country. Instead of going there and beating the :daisy: out of certain criminal kids, they rather hide.
This is an attempt to get the policemen back into such areas without using force, maybe my initial reaction comes from the fact that I have almost given up hope that policemen will ever walk into such areas not fearing a bunch of teenagers. :shrug:
They can gather a lot of men to protect a neonazi march but they cannot get enough men to make some teenage gangs obey the law. Whenever I hear about that I feel like we don't have a nanny state but a sissy state, or maybe a combination of both.
Another thing comes to mind though and that's how Europe developed in that respect, we started out with priests telling the people to obey their landlord because God wants it and ended up as whatever we are now(seperation of state and church, thought five minutes but the word escapes me).
Also note that as I said before, clubbing them will only make them hate the police more.
Ironside
10-24-2007, 12:28
wow...I agree with Panzer....I´ll go lie down now....I must be coming down with something...
more seriously now....a democratic government having to hide behind the pseudo-authority of some religious figure is unacceptable.
these guys don´t respect the police?....I suggest the police employ the proper force to encourage them to do so.
Since when does beatings increase the respect? The only thing it does is increasing fear and as it isn't a police state, the police encounters won't be common enough to make the fear permanent.
So you'll end up with people that hates the police and disrespects them even more. Atleast the police can show thier might in the following riots. :shrug:
*sigh* they are a higher authority because they don't listen to the police unless the imam tells them to do so. So, the islam comes first for them, the laws of the country second, quite unlike how we, well some of us, like to see it.
Ghetto areas where the police have very little control? :inquisitive:
Point is that the police needs to regain respect to get authority in such areas. And if the imams already got authorites in these areas and are working with the police, the police will eventually gain respect by themself. The only thing the imams can get is legitimation, but those people willing to listen to an imam has already recognized this status before that.
What you're focusing is another issue. Yes this solution wouldn't exist without that issue, but if anything this reduces it (by closing the gap between islam first, laws second, as you put it).
Ah so the Iman is there with the police to explain local laws and Islamic laws to the truculent youths who don't understand either the local laws or Islamic laws .
Hmmmmm .....and you are against this ?
absolutily yes, do you think they don't know it when they are being a nuissance? Of course they know it. If they thow a stone at the police they know they are breaking the law so whack them around the ears with a club. There is no such thing such as islamic law here, just guidelines for your private life, we have the law and nothing else.
Ghetto areas where the police have very little control? :inquisitive:
Loss of soevereign territory we have a perfectly fine army for that if it's too much for the police. I think much more effective in raising some respect for the status quo. Peace today vs inevitable further escalation tomorow, if it has to escalate now so be it but bloody deal with it.
Tribesman
10-24-2007, 13:06
If they thow a stone at the police they know they are breaking the law so whack them around the ears with a club.
Good idea , that way next time they throw a stone they will either run or make sure they use the club first .
Peace today vs inevitable further escalation tomorow, if it has to escalate now so be it but bloody deal with it.
Have you been reading David Copelands diary again ?
Who?
You see Tribes I was talking of a downward spiral, today they don't recognise the police, the reaction, tag along a imam. Tomorow they won't recognise the courts, maybe we should install a commision of wise men? Or even judge muslims by sharia law, or allow them the option? Or was equal treatment and equal rights the best option to begin with? Be a bad boy and get spanked, and if the police have lost control of some area's yes send in the army. If that leads to further escalation bring a bigger army.
Tribesman
10-24-2007, 13:22
You see Tribes I was talking of a downward spiral, today they don't recognise the police, the reaction, tag along a imam.
The perfect reaction isn't it , now I wonder who they could get to tag along to tell other youths to obey the police ?
The perfect reaction isn't it , now I wonder who they could get to tag along to tell other youths to obey the police ?
The military police, like they are already doing, unless, of course.....
And no it isn't the perfect solution it's a precedent for sharia, because the same multicultists trying to preserve the peace today with their completily moronic ideas like will do the same thing tommorow, when the situation, is yet again a little graver.
Haudegen
10-24-2007, 14:08
Fragony, when you talk about authority, I think you´re mixing up two different things. The authority to enforce the law the hard way is still in the hands of the police/government. On the other hand we have the moral authority of religious representants, in this case the imams. Although our state considers itself to be based on moral, moral is a thing that lies in the eye of the beholder. If young muslims fail to recognize the state´s morality, maybe they can be taught to do so with the help of these imams. And: A state that allows religious freedom must accept that its inhabitants consider their respective reiligions as the highest source of moral authority.
Which leads me to another issue here. Some members seem think that brute force is the only reason why people follow the laws. While that is true in some cases, I think in most cases it is because people believe it´s the right thing to do (moral!).
Ironside
10-24-2007, 14:14
Loss of soevereign territory we have a perfectly fine army for that if it's too much for the police. I think much more effective in raising some respect for the status quo. Peace today vs inevitable further escalation tomorow, if it has to escalate now so be it but bloody deal with it.
So the solution to the ghetto problems are to send in the military? :inquisitive:
Killing a few people? Check
Destroying property making the area poorer and less popular? Check
Reducing jobs in the area? Check
Making the people living there hate the goverment even more? Check
Making that babbling fool that speak of Allah and the better afterlife through matyrism making much more sence? Check...
All Americans of the board, how's the inevitable further escalation going on at the ghettos atm? :book:
You see Tribes I was talking of a downward spiral, today they don't recognise the police, the reaction, tag along a imam. Tomorow they won't recognise the courts, maybe we should install a commision of wise men? Or even judge muslims by sharia law, or allow them the option? Or was equal treatment and equal rights the best option to begin with? Be a bad boy and get spanked, and if the police have lost control of some area's yes send in the army. If that leads to further escalation bring a bigger army.
The difference is that the streets are their home-field, the courts is ours. :yes:
Moral authority? You mean morality, our laws evolved from that and we have the authorities to make sure everybody lives by these pretty basic rules. Religious leaders have no moral authority, they have guidelines, which you can live within the framework of law.
Which leads me to another issue here. Some members seem think that brute force is the only reason why people follow the laws. While that is true in some cases, I think in most cases it is because people believe it´s the right thing to do (moral!).
you are quite right that most people follow the law out of a moral reason....but if they do not do so the state should ensure by force that the law is followed....not go asking an external entity to make the state seem "moral".
It´s a stick and carrot situation.....if you don´t follow the carrot you get the stick....you don´t get offered another carrot to sweeten the deal.
rory_20_uk
10-24-2007, 14:27
religious figures have no palce with the police. Else why just Imans? Why note a Christian priest as well?
If people can't obey the secular law of the country there is secular justice fr them. If they want a system that is based on religious laws, then get the hell out of the country and go elsewhere - there are loads of countries in the middle east that operate in that manner, and where non - Muslims have to obey.
~:smoking:
Haudegen
10-24-2007, 14:53
Moral authority? You mean morality, our laws evolved from that and we have the authorities to make sure everybody lives by these pretty basic rules. Religious leaders have no moral authority, they have guidelines, which you can live within the framework of law.
Moral authority in my book is the ability to convince other people of my ideas of "the right thing to do". If someone rebels against the moral authority, that makes him a sinner, a nasty person in the eyes of the followers of that moral authority. But that´s all.
I think your statement about the guidelines means basically the same. So if the imam uses his guidelines/moral authority to encourage people who respond to his guidelines/moral authority to follow the law, what´s wrong?
It´s a stick and carrot situation.....if you don´t follow the carrot you get the stick....you don´t get offered another carrot to sweeten the deal.
That´s right! It´s a stick and carrot situation, not a stick or carrot situation. While the stick option (criminal court) is always on the table, why not add a carrot by giving some people additional reasons to stay on the good side of the law? IMHO the police has nothing to lose if they give it a try.
That´s right! It´s a stick and carrot situation, not a stick or carrot situation. While the stick option (criminal court) is always on the table, why not add a carrot by giving some people additional reasons to stay on the good side of the law? IMHO the police has nothing to lose if they give it a try.
If it´s a democracy then you use the same carrot for everyone.
what do they have to lose?......state-religion separation for starters.
Do you stop for a red light because it is the right thing to do? Or because we have police? Now if there was no police would you still stop? What is wrong is that they don't respect the law unless the imam tells them to, so the imam is the highest authority, it's a negative not a positive.
The problem is that beating them up isn't really a better solution, it can easily make the situation worse.
Sending them to another country/their home country is a possibility but not always useful, it also requires quite a lot for someone to be expelled as it is now, though it does happen at times.
Haudegen
10-24-2007, 19:26
If it´s a democracy then you use the same carrot for everyone.
Well, if we had reasons to believe that it would help in any way, I see no problem if, say, catholic priests accompany the police in a similar manner.
what do they have to lose?......state-religion separation for starters.
A bit exaggerated, I think. Separation doesn´t mean that there can be no cooperation at all. Especially if it serves the purpose of the state (crime prevention).
Do you stop for a red light because it is the right thing to do? Or because we have police? Now if there was no police would you still stop? What is wrong is that they don't respect the law unless the imam tells them to, so the imam is the highest authority, it's a negative not a positive.
I, for one, stop for red lights because I don´t want to get killed. And driving home and knowing that I haven´t killed any other people on my way gives me a nice feeling, too. :2thumbsup: But that´s not a good example. Stopping for red lights is self-rewarding.
Imagine a suitcase full of money. You are sure nobody would find out if you stole it. Why wouldn´t you steal it? If moral was irrelevant and should be abolished then the only thing that could prevent the crime is an almighty police state that searches your house for stolen things on a daily basis.
The point I am trying to make is that punishment is never the answer to prevent all crimes. Some crimes can only be prevented if people can be taught to do the right thing. And if that involves the preaching of bearded men, that´s a fair price. Why should we care from which religion or philosophy the morals of an individual are derived, as long as they are willing to live within the laws? It looks like these Imams are willing to cooperate.
Imagine a suitcase full of money. You are sure nobody would find out if you stole it. Why wouldn´t you steal it?
I would. But only because I have absolutily no reason to trust the state handling my afairs, and because we live in a world where some have rules and some have rights.
Boyar Son
10-24-2007, 23:06
All Americans of the board, how's the inevitable further escalation going on at the ghettos atm? :book:
Meh... not so good....but they wont attack you immediatly, unless it was night...or none watching.
AntiochusIII
10-25-2007, 02:08
No offense, but from this thread it seems to me as if Europe is still a very closed-minded continent here (I really, really don't want to use the r-term).
Get the hell out? Most of those ghetto youths are your citizens! Born there and lived there, they have the right to stay where they are as much as any other 18-years-old citizen no matter the skin color, the religion, or the wealth bracket. Unless you do it the old Cuban way and extradite your own citizens to frickin' Florida, that's a very xenophobic point of view: that because of who they are, they're not your fellow citizens. According to some people here, if a ["normal" European] kid commits a stupid crime, he should go to jail; and if a ["Muslim"-looking] kid commits a crime, he gets thrown out of the country or subjugated by the military police...
:wall:
Moreover, since when does the term "multiculture" becomes an insult?
Multiculturalism should be able to cope with scorn just like any other religion. And no they aren't our citizins, in our case they have dutch nationality but also maroccan, if they are unwilling to reap the benefits of the civilised world and settle for robbing grannies and throwing stones, yeah, they have perfectly fine deserts for that back at home. Why should we feed it. And the thing is that when muslim youth cause trouble the es-muss-sein reflex of fundamentalistic multicultists comes in effect, talk, tea, more talk, festival, more talk, more tea, more money, while natives are struck down with the hammer of the apocalypse when they do. Government has a double standard, immigrants have rights and natives have rules, and that has to stop.
Tribesman
10-25-2007, 09:40
No offense, but from this thread it seems to me as if Europe is still a very closed-minded continent here (I really, really don't want to use the r-term).
Are you by any chance making a reference to posts like the one that follows yours ?
Hey Frag ...muslims gonna get ya muslims gonna get ya:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
They get everything they want so why not me, of course they won't have to 'get' me, the socialists probably have little trouble finding me a seat on the es-musssein-express towards halalistan, old habits never die ~;)
ha godwin
Tribesman
10-25-2007, 10:05
multiculturalism is a religeon ?
Fragony doesn't that put you on the same page as the cretininsts who say that evolution is a religeon :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Yep, it's a religion, absolute faith in the highest that never ceases to get in the way of rationality and complete denial of negatives that aren't in line with the ideoligy.
Why would citizens of a democratic country need a religious figure to explain the law to them?
Whatever happened to "Nemo est censetur ignorarem legem" ? :inquisitive:
Kralizec
10-25-2007, 23:08
And no they aren't our citizins, in our case they have dutch nationality but also maroccan,
At first I coudl see where Wilders was coming from when it comes to ministers, but really, this is the biggest non-issue yet in Dutch politics. People born with Maroccan nationality can't recind it.
What's stupid though, is the whole name-list things most municpalities use when a Maroccan-Dutch person gets their child registered. But that's somethig else.
It's fine but they can't work for the government. For example; http://www.elsevier.nl/opinie/weblog/asp/artnr/176271/weblogid/59/index.html
HoreTore
10-26-2007, 21:28
Why would citizens of a democratic country need a religious figure to explain the law to them?
You don't think we need people to explain the law to us? :inquisitive:
rory_20_uk
10-27-2007, 12:19
Secular figures - NOT religious figures. If you need to learn about the law ask a lawyer or a policeman.
~:smoking:
Geoffrey S
10-27-2007, 12:34
Secular figures - NOT religious figures. If you need to learn about the law ask a lawyer or a policeman.
~:smoking:
If muslims place their faith higher than the law, I think it can be productive if imams tell them that is wrong and that their faith gives no justification for breaking the law in the country where they are living.
Seamus Fermanagh
10-28-2007, 03:57
Interesting discussion. Fragony, you seem to spark any number of these.
Taking this to a larger level:
Does the inability to enforce the law effectively using their own resources invalidate the authority of a governing body?
Should the authority of a secular state supercede the authority of a religious belief system?
Good questions.
I would suggest that authority exists to the extent that those under that authority -- whether through coercion, persuasion, or choice -- agree to accept that authority. Less than a millenia ago, most Europeans were willing to accept that the authority of the Holy Father (even in secular matters) exceeded that of their own "sovereign" leaders. A leader excommunicated by the Pope faced a palpable diminishment of his authority. That situation no longer obtains.
Political authority derived from a secular state is no different -- in practice -- than authority derived from religious belief. If the audience is willing to accord you that authority, then the power is yours to wield.
Another thought is that policing isn't really about the law, per se, but about enforcing order. Police have, throughout history, used third parties as a means of persuasion etc. -- as a tool to maintain order. I am not sure whether this augments or undercuts their authority. An interesting point to ponder.
Tribesman
10-28-2007, 10:25
Another thought is that policing isn't really about the law, per se, but about enforcing order. Police have, throughout history, used third parties as a means of persuasion etc. -- as a tool to maintain order. I am not sure whether this augments or undercuts their authority. An interesting point to ponder.
So to ponder your point in a different context , if there was a strike and the strikers were breaking some laws , if the police went along with a union leader to attempt getting the strikers to stop breaking the law would they be undercutting their authority ?
How about if they went along with some parents whose kids were breaking the law ? .....what about if they went along with community leaders ? ....the local priest ?
the only difference would appear to be that Frag would object if the union representative , community leaders , parents or priest happened to be Muslims .
I am not too proud just admit that that is true, but that has everything to do with the nature of the islam we have in europe.
Tribesman
10-28-2007, 12:16
I am not too proud just admit that that is true
Well it would be very funny if you tried to deny it.
rory_20_uk
10-28-2007, 13:52
If muslims place their faith higher than the law, I think it can be productive if imams tell them that is wrong and that their faith gives no justification for breaking the law in the country where they are living.
Immans are welcome to do that in mosques. They have no place on the streets with the civic police.
Does every group that states they value someone other than the police get special treatment? No. So why should they? If they don't like it, leave. If they continue to break the law incarcerate them. Same rules as for everyone else.
~:smoking:
Tribesman
10-28-2007, 14:32
Does every group that states they value someone other than the police get special treatment? No. So why should they?
The problem with that assertion Rory is that other groups do , so your arguement falls flat on its face .
rory_20_uk
10-28-2007, 14:59
As far as I am aware, the police don't have any one else except police performing their rounds.
If you would like to provide examples of where there are Anglican vicars doing the rounds or the odd Rabbi I'd like to hear of it.
Else your comment is sadly lacking substance.
~:smoking:
Tribesman
10-28-2007, 15:21
As far as I am aware, the police don't have any one else except police performing their rounds.
If you would like to provide examples of where there are Anglican vicars doing the rounds or the odd Rabbi I'd like to hear of it.
Else your comment is sadly lacking substance.
well I don't know about Anglicans , but would Methodists from Darlington be sufficient substance for ya ?:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
KukriKhan
10-28-2007, 15:32
If these joint Polizei-Imam patrols were using truncheons to whack women who failed to wear a burqua, that would be a whole different thing.
But that isn't what's happening there, right? Rather, the police are using a local resource to reinforce their law-and-order mission.
The only down-side I see is the possibility of dimishing the Imams' esteem in the eyes of local muslim youth, they becoming the equivalent of "Uncle Tom" 's for working with the infidels.
Does the inability to enforce the law effectively using their own resources invalidate the authority of a governing body?
Oh yes. In a democracy those that represent us are getting a mandate to rule, and the first priotity of the state they are supposed to govern is protecting national borders and safety, that is the most basic reason for them to exist. If they insist one being nothing more then an administrator, they should leave protection open to privitisation.
LeftEyeNine
10-28-2007, 16:56
Ah, I need to cash in my two cents to this hot topic. Nice read everyone, thanks.
Well it is quite weird for the police to operate with imams to shape up the order in areas more potent of public order violations. I can see how some of you look at it. "An imam? WTF ?"
Since the focus point is the concerns over it, not the benefits, I think I'd better use my first cent on that.
As KukriKhan-sensei pointed out, there is a possibility of imams losing their prestige and value in the local muslim youth's eyes, in case some law they find frank needs to be imposed. Also such coordination is always under the threat from terrorist de-stabilizator factors. "Someone" will constantly be trying to convince that "Imams are working for the infidels".
Another potential problem, which I find more probable is the imams' intentions.The government should find the best way possible to assure the good will of the imams they are working with; such imams should agree on the fact that they will be under surveilance to make sure the cooperation is not working for someone/something else rather than the muslim folk and the european folk they are trying to integrate, with the least damage possible.
Also there are some concerns on the European side of this. As every police is a human being as well, some of them will see this project from Fragon-ic eyes for sure, and such personal failures at compromisation may go popular or rise as a general disturbance among the policemen, dragging such enforcement to be modified or get completely overridden.
Government, putting such social project into action, has another job at nullifying or decreasing the Germans' reaction to ensure this new law's success.
On the bright side, where I'll be out of my cents after, such cooperation may be dramatically useful since the BIG problem is that Muslims and European non-Muslims are definitely failing at understanding each other (Charicatures of Muhammed was a great example to prove that, provided not being not the only one).
So, the integration of a religiously-oriented society into a democracy-oriented society (which obviously and contradictively drags the religion's influence to minimum/personal) needs to be treated somehow and such mutual attempts at compromisations had better be experienced rather than putting up back at the shelf, provided the threats being closely examined as the cooperation proceeds.
Now that is how I like to disagree with people, great post.
Adrian II
10-28-2007, 21:07
If they were Quakers who would be the higher authority ?How would you feel if Irish police were accompanied by Roman Catholic priests with the task of pointing out your religious duties to you, Mr Tribesman? A ridiculous proposition, I hear you say. And how right you are. I'm with Fragony and Panzer. I will go wash my mouth now. :sweatdrop:
So basically shooting, stabbing and beating them is a lot less ridiculous and generally to be preferred? :sweatdrop:
Papewaio
10-28-2007, 23:10
In Western Australia this has been happening for years and years. No outcry here.
"Misunderstandings can all too easily arise in cross cultural settings. Police Liaison Officers foster positive relationships between the Police Service and communities."
seireikhaan
10-28-2007, 23:32
How would you feel if Irish police were accompanied by Roman Catholic priests with the task of pointing out your religious duties to you, Mr Tribesman? A ridiculous proposition, I hear you say. And how right you are. I'm with Fragony and Panzer. I will go wash my mouth now. :sweatdrop:
Okay, I think I need to step in here. Adrian, did you even check what the Imam's are doing? They aren't going around telling women to wear veils or telling men to grow their beards or whatever. They're basically saying to the Islamic youth in Germany "Follow German law. Following it doesn't make you an infidel. It won't send you to hell, etc..." That's not quite what you're insinuating, so you're whole point is essentially null and void. Please make a better argument that doesn't reek of Islamophobia.
Also, in the beginning of this, Fragony questioned the purpose of this, saying they shouldn't need to do this. Does that ultimately matter? This is better than doing nothing about the apparent situation. Now, please correct me here if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm not. The people are there, they're rightful citizens, and deporting them is a grave violation of their rights, and it would be based purely on their religion. Now, I was under the impression that the west was supposed to be tolerant, no? Now, if they're breaking laws, then indeed they should be punished, just like any other citizen. Last I checked, Germany doesn't deport people to another country they've never been to for theft or vandalism, assault, or even murder.
Banquo's Ghost
10-29-2007, 11:15
How would you feel if Irish police were accompanied by Roman Catholic priests with the task of pointing out your religious duties to you, Mr Tribesman? A ridiculous proposition, I hear you say. And how right you are. I'm with Fragony and Panzer. I will go wash my mouth now. :sweatdrop:
As has been noted, I don't think the partnership is to enforce religious laws, but to engage disaffected youth.
That happened all the time in Ireland, and still does so quite frequently here in my backwater. The Gardaí will often bring along a priest to help deal with young people - not to tell them that by kissing that convent girl they are going to Hell (well, maybe, depending on the priest) but as a recognised moral authority not seen as "the enemy" - a characterisation of formal police authority not uncommon among youths.
Certainly during the Troubles in the North, we (the policing authorities as the Army) would engage the services of divines from both sides to help "interpret" a law.
The Police also engage a range of secular support personnel to help with particular groups. Do we have a problem with a key worker from a housing charity coming along to help with a homeless chap in danger of breaking the law? Or is it just religious workers?
Finally, when I ran my training business in the UK which taught citizenship and English to refugees and migrants under the New Deal, we had a fairly large Muslim contingent in several offices. We would often bring in imams from different sects to guide on how to reconcile faith with law. Most often, it was to over-rule objections that a devout person couldn't get a job or attend training because of prayer needs. That would always be slapped down by the imam as the Koran clearly allows a fellow to skip prayers while engaged on important business - and the truly devout would catch up on his prayers later.
I really don't see the problem here. If the police were enforcing the veil, for example, by direction of an imam, I'd be seething too, but that's not what is happening as far as I can see. If we want people to integrate, we need go-betweens (social, cultural as well as religious) that will help with cultural "translation", rather than leave them to the tender mercies of the extremists from both sides.
Tribesman
10-29-2007, 11:30
How would you feel if Irish police were accompanied by Roman Catholic priests with the task of pointing out your religious duties to you, Mr Tribesman?
I would have no problem with it at all Adrian . Two posters have already written why it would not be a problem .
Anyway , think about what you quoted ~;)
For a criminal the the police should be the enemy, easy as that. No moral authority required.
Tribesman
10-29-2007, 11:40
For a criminal the the police should be the enemy, easy as that.
Yet problems arise when ordinary people see the police as the enemy , easy as that .:idea2:
Yet problems arise when ordinary people see the police as the enemy , easy as that .:idea2:
Agreed, so they better start treating everybody in the same way.
For a criminal the the police should be the enemy, easy as that. No moral authority required.
Frag, the purpose of most law enforcement here is not to punish people but to make them good members of society again. And despite some scary stories where it failed, it seems to work in many cases as well. Without morals and a perspective for a better life, this is hardly achievable. If you want a police state where everybody is punished harshly for not following the law, you can try certain disctatorships around the world and enjoy their "low" crimerates. :sweatdrop:
Frag, the purpose of most law enforcement here is not to punish people but to make them good members of society again. And despite some scary stories where it failed, it seems to work in many cases as well. Without morals and a perspective for a better life, this is hardly achievable. If you want a police state where everybody is punished harshly for not following the law, you can try certain disctatorships around the world and enjoy their "low" crimerates. :sweatdrop:
The degree of punishment is not the issue here. You don't stop for a red light because it is the right thing to do, moral authority has nothing to do with it.
PanzerJaeger
10-29-2007, 19:59
Do Europeans(Germans to be precise) want the state reinforcing the belief that muslim authority is higher than that of the state?... that the law should be followed only if approved by imams?
To increase stability now, are they sacrificing authority later?
And for every imam supporting this, how many are saying sharia is the only law?
This is not Northern Ireland or a labor strike and it is certainly relevant to take into consideration the unique position of the muslim community in Europe and who they see as authority figures.
I still say heads need to be bashed to show these people from the outset that, in Europe, muslims, Christians and atheists alike do not get special treatment under the law and there are consequences to breaking said law despite what the local imam says. You cannot beat your wife at your whim, you cannot kill your daughter for being raped, and violence toward police will get at least the same in return.
Then again, I might be predisposed to wanting certain heads bashed... :smash:
And for every imam supporting this, how many are saying sharia is the only law?
That's the part I didn't want to touch here because I wanted to keep it to the diffusion of authority as something damaging enough by itselve, but yeah. This gives those imams a lot of power, kindly granted by the authority. One very very dangerous leap of faith of people looking no further then today.
Do Europeans(Germans to be precise) want the state reinforcing the belief that muslim authority is higher than that of the state?... that the law should be followed only if approved by imams?
To increase stability now, are they sacrificing authority later?
And for every imam supporting this, how many are saying sharia is the only law?
This is not Northern Ireland or a labor strike and it is certainly relevant to take into consideration the unique position of the muslim community in Europe and who they see as authority figures.
I still say heads need to be bashed to show these people from the outset that, in Europe, muslims, Christians and atheists alike do not get special treatment under the law and there are consequences to breaking said law despite what the local imam says. You cannot beat your wife at your whim, you cannot kill your daughter for being raped, and violence toward police will get at least the same in return.
Then again, I might be predisposed to wanting certain heads bashed... :smash:
keep....agreeing.....with....PanzerJager...there must be something wrong with me...
*runs out the house looking for a doctor*
but yeah...no special treatment...you respect the legal authority in a country..fine...you don´t....well that´s what the nightsticks are for.
Papewaio
10-29-2007, 23:42
"Misunderstandings can all too easily arise in cross cultural settings. Police Liaison Officers foster positive relationships between the Police Service and communities."
So what. In Western Australia the liaison officers get paid about 80% of what a Police Constable does. While a senior liaison officer gets paid on par with a PC.
So here we pay for the community liaisons. The imans seem to be providing a free service.
Adrian II
10-30-2007, 13:02
As has been noted, I don't think the partnership is to enforce religious laws, but to engage disaffected youth.Engage them as believers, not as citizens. There's the rub, my friend.
Engaging disaffected youth from a religious point of view is fine, but not through, or parallel to, the police. Public officials should address citizens as such, not as believers. Any confusion in this area should be avoided. It leads to skewed perceptions and abuse.
The whole notion of automatically addressing people from Turkish or Maghreb descent as muslims is an aberration. The underlying message is that Islam is somehow (part of) their unalienable identity, which is dangerous nonsense.
The Police also engage a range of secular support personnel to help with particular groups. Do we have a problem with a key worker from a housing charity coming along to help with a homeless chap in danger of breaking the law? Or is it just religious workers?Religious workers? You mean preachers.
There is an essential difference between a secular housing charity and a mosque. One is a public service and as such ideologically neutral, the other is an immediate exponent of a particular ideology.
So yes, I take exception to the imams in this role, just as I would take exception if police brought along a Communist to address these youth as proletarians and read them the Marxist Levites.
On the other hand I don't object at all to imams and other authority figures in muslim communities becoming more active in guiding (and containing) unruly youth of muslim descent in European countries. This seems to be a trend and I applaud it, as long as it doesn't lead to the skewed perceptions I mentioned above.
One skewed perception, for instance, has it that muslim communities are primarily responsible for the (mis)behaviour of their youth, as if all problems relating to their young can somehow be traced to them and to their culture of origin. In reality most of these problems arise, I think, as the result of a clash between that culture and the modern western environment in which the youth grow up. In short: they are our juvenile delinquents, not theirs, and muslim parents and leaders shouldn't be made to feel uniquely responsible for them.
Do Europeans(Germans to be precise) want the state reinforcing the belief that muslim authority is higher than that of the state?... that the law should be followed only if approved by imams?Another skewed perception of the kind I mean. So yeah, I have to check my blood pressure just like Ronin, for I think the Panzerman is right on the mark on this one.
Seamus Fermanagh
10-30-2007, 22:06
Another skewed perception of the kind I mean. So yeah, I have to check my blood pressure just like Ronin, for I think the Panzerman is right on the mark on this one.
First Ronin, now Adrian :inquisitive: ....If Kafirchobee and Red Harvest start backing Panzer', then I'll have to start craning my ears for the sound of Gabriel blowing the trumpet.....:end:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.