Did Zeus never teach Athena to have some tolerance with Muslims?

Christians made Zeusism and Athenaism disappear before the Muslims could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cute Wolf

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AF2HM20101116

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Article

Dozens of far-right activists and local residents threw eggs and taunted hundreds of Muslim immigrants as they gathered to pray in a central square for Eid al-Adha surrounded by a protective cordon of riot police.

---

A few local far-right nutjobs is not = "The Greeks".

That's like insinuating that all Flemings are nationalists and seperatists because some 50 flag waving idiots threw rotten eggs at some Walloon provocateur or like insinuating the Walloons want civil war because some drunk Walloon low life beat up a Flemish politician.

Meh. Sensationalism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

The natural tendency to not harm women and children?

lol. Women and children are most commonly those getting the tom kicked out of them, because men who use violence are generaly cowards. People who start/go looking for fights are generaly cowards. These Greeks are cowards

See the trend?

---

This isn't chauvinism, I remember a feminist teacher went crazy when one guy suggested mean should be able to hit women in retaliation if they are equal.

Also, men that use violence are not cowards, that is pc bs since for some reason nowadays we call everyone cowards when we don't like them/disapprove of what they do. Taliban? Cowards. Guy tops himself? Coward. Guy goes looking for a fight where he could get hurt? Coward... yeah, whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Also, men that use violence are not cowards

---

No, he de big Boss an no-one gonna risk gettin dere skull broke. /Orc

Wife beating is cowardly.

If violence per se is not cowardly, it is pretty prehistoric and should be obsolete in a civilised society. If it's seen as nesseccary, then things have clearly degenerated too far.

I am rather concerened about how this episode will go down overseas. It will easily be inflated into some sort of further evidence that Europe and Christians hate Muslims.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

A few local far-right nutjobs is not = "The Greeks".

That's like insinuating that all Flemings are nationalists and seperatists because some 50 flag waving idiots threw rotten eggs at some Walloon provocateur or like insinuating the Walloons want civil war because some drunk Walloon low life beat up a Flemish politician.

Meh. Sensationalism.

---

Oh common they live in Greece that makes them Greeks. Everybody understands that it weren't all the Greeks doing this there is no need to be so specific.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

This isn't chauvinism, I remember a feminist teacher went crazy when one guy suggested mean should be able to hit women in retaliation if they are equal.

---

....And in your opinion, feminists are always right....?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alh_p

I am rather concerened about how this episode will go down overseas. It will easily be inflated into some sort of further evidence that Europe and Christians hate Muslims.

---

Ditto, idiots. Lunatics handing lunatics a stick. These people who got attacked aren't a problem.

Quote:

---

Ditto, idiots. Lunatics handing lunatics a stick. These people who got attacked aren't a problem.

---

Exactly, I can add very little to this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

....And in your opinion, feminists are always right....?

---

Nope, just sheltering myself from the inevitable leftist moral outrage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alh_p

No, he de big Boss an no-one gonna risk gettin dere skull broke. /Orc

Wife beating is cowardly.

---

Cos that's really what I'm saying yeah if you hit someone you're a hard man wth...

I agree wife beating is cowardly (they only do it behind closed doors, plus they wouldn't take on someone their own size), didn't say it wasn't, I was just asking why people think any sort of violence is cowardly, strangely the sort of people that say that sort of thing tend to be liberal types that would probably conscietiously object if they got called up. Doing the noble thing I don't think thouhg, covering their own arse more like.

I have had female friends who think that men should never hit women - even if they hit men first. Equality = men are punch-bags... Feminists often appear to want to keep all the historic "ladies first" / "women and children first" aspects and in the next breath be equal in everything else that they've not got an advantage in.

I'm sorry, but regardless of who hits me I am allowed to defend myself and yes in some cases that would include violence to almost any sub-group of individuals. I'm not going to look to beat up women, nor look to pick on persons in wheel chairs, but if there were two attacking me with knives I'd undertake measures to protect my own well-being before hangups about their gender. If that ends with bruises or broken bones so be it - as long as it doesn't end up with my liver skewered.

Violence is prehistoric. And civilisation is a thin veneer (a few thousand years tops) over a hell of a lot longer where the world is simply two camps - your friends / tribe and targets / resources to be killed and/or taken. Anyone who has played a contact sport knows the adrenaline high prior to the match starting and the way one can jog off with narry a twinge yet wake up the next morning with agony from aches and hitherto-unseen bruises. We're built to fight. Sure, we can think a bit more these days, but when the stress hormones kick in, we brain redistributes blood to the more "ancient" areas of the brain where introspection = death.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Nope, just sheltering myself from the inevitable leftist moral outrage.



Cos that's really what I'm saying yeah if you hit someone you're a hard man wth...

I agree wife beating is cowardly (they only do it behind closed doors, plus they wouldn't take on someone their own size), didn't say it wasn't, I was just asking why people think any sort of violence is cowardly, strangely the sort of people that say that sort of thing tend to be liberal types that would probably conscietiously object if they got called up. Doing the noble thing I don't think thouhg, covering their own arse more like.

---

Violence isn't cowardly you can get hurt, abuse is cowardly, they can't/won't hurt you back . Got little problems with ending a dispute violently mamma didn't raise me all that well, but it's not my first choice, but if you are really asking for it be my vict- guest

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

...I was just asking why people think any sort of violence is cowardly, strangely the sort of people that say that sort of thing tend to be liberal types that would probably conscietiously object if they got called up. Doing the noble thing I don't think thouhg, covering their own arse more like.

---

Do you conscientiously object to conscientious objectors? probably not your style, given the above.

I completely agree that we have bred/evolved in a way that suits us to violence but if civilisation means anything, it is that we try to supersede the more survivalist tendencies. I'd agree that civilisation itself rests, in no small part, on violence -but it is the creation of that non-violent space at its core, which defines civilisation for me.

Sad events.


Greece sees a lot of (illegal) immigration. Much of it passing through to go to Europe. Erm...to go further into Europe I mean. Little is done for these people. They are neither properly kept out by Greece (which the EU has now taken upon itself to an extent), nor properly taken care of. Whatever one may think of an illegal immigrant, he is a human being and this is Europe.

The result is that many Greek cities have squatter camps of (illegal) foreigners. (Not unlike the forests near Calais...) They hang out a bit, some have local jobs during the day. But most just sit there. They've ran out of money, they can't afford to travel further to Germany or Britain, they can't afford their return home.

The local Greeks get restless. The little square where their children played five years ago is now unsafe, unruly. Groups of Afghan men get picked up every night, by a van driven by two Albanian or Bulgarian mobsters, off to do something unclear. There is mutual aggression between the locals and the foreign squatters.

It is a nasty situation. Then occasionally hell breaks lose....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Greece sees a lot of (illegal) immigration. Much of it passing through to go to Europe. Erm...to go further into Europe I mean. Little is done for these people. They are neither properly kept out by Greece (which the EU has now taken upon itself to an extent).

The local Greeks get restless. The little square where their children played five years ago is now unsafe, unruly. Groups of Afghan men get picked up every night, by a van driven by two Albanian or Bulgarian mobsters, off to do something unclear. There is mutual aggression between the locals and the foreign squatters.

---

makes schengen seem like a thoroughly stupid idea, pity we joined it............... no wait, we didn't!:balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

makes schengen seem like a thoroughly stupid idea, pity we joined it............... no wait, we didn't!:balloon2:

---

Not sure that's really the point... The UK's non-membership of Schengen is why there are seperate camps near Calais. If the UK were part of the Schengen agreement, it would just mean there would be fewer people camped out near Calais. All you really have to feel smug about is the channel :grin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

makes schengen seem like a thoroughly stupid idea, pity we joined it............... no wait, we didn't!:balloon2:

---

Neither did we.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alh_p

Not sure that's really the point... The UK's non-membership of Schengen is why there are seperate camps near Calais. If the UK were part of the Schengen agreement, it would just mean there would be fewer people camped out near Calais. All you really have to feel smug about is the channel :grin:

---

but that is exactly the point.

while they are camped outside calais they are not in dear old blighty!

the border-hoppers are prevented from hopping the border, the channel on makes the legal enforcement more effective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Neither did we.

---

that was mainly because ireland didn't want to threaten the open-borders business with the UK was it not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

but that is exactly the point.

while they are camped outside calais they are not in dear old blighty!

the border-hoppers are prevented from hopping the border, the channel on makes the legal enforcement more effective.

---

...but is France, or would the UK be, more awash with immigrants? Especially if the UK got more involved in EU external border policy and support, which it would have to have done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alh_p

...but is France, or would the UK be, more awash with immigrants? Especially if the UK got more involved in EU external border policy and support, which it would have to have done.

---

pardon?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

that was mainly because ireland didn't want to threaten the open-borders business with the UK was it not?

---

Correct the common travel across the border between the North and the Republic is far more economically important than any EU travel arrangement.

I laugh anyway at the people who hold up Shengen as some great moral force, when it came to it actually allowing people to work in EU only Britain, Ireland and Sweden allowed the Poles and other Baltic peoples in straight away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Correct the common travel across the border between the North and the Republic is far more economically important than any EU travel arrangement.

I laugh anyway at the people who hold up Shengen as some great moral force, when it came to it actually allowing people to work in EU only Britain, Ireland and Sweden allowed the Poles and other Baltic peoples in straight away.

---

and we were right to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

and we were right to do so.

---

My brother married a Polish lady so he got a good deal at least :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alh_p

...but is France, or would the UK be, more awash with immigrants? Especially if the UK got more involved in EU external border policy and support, which it would have to have done.

---

Are you seriously saying that IF the UK had joined somehow they'd be able to police the Greek / Italian / Maltese borders so well that the problem of illegal immigrants would all but disappear? That's a flattering statement to make, but sadly it's not the case.

Think of a submarine. All those separate compartments so if there's a leak somewhere, the boat stays afloat. Maybe we could employ this somehow in the EU... Some soft of borders that were internal to prevent immigrants traipsing across Europe. We could check some sort of paperwork that proved who a person was and where they were from against a sort of searchable electronic list. Those that weren't on it could be detained and removed.

Just an idea...

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

My brother married a Polish lady so he got a good deal at least :beam:

---

i'm practically in the same boat five years in.

my boss has married a finnish girl
a work-mate is going out with a polish girl
another mate is also going out with a polish girl
my brother is going out with a Venezuelan yank.

it's all the rage these days.

The riot police should have given some food back in the form of pepper spray though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

makes schengen seem like a thoroughly stupid idea, pity we joined it............... no wait, we didn't!:balloon2:

---

Well, may I be allowed to channel a call for “bollox! :laugh4: etc.” here and point out:
(1) Schengen is for members of Schengen countries. I.e. those immigrants got nothing to do with that: they are a different problem. (One of housing and some sort of supervision so they don't go “missing”.)
(2) Schengen further lowers barriers among Schengen members which means the cost of doing business that involves crossing borders on a routine basis is lowered substantially. Time is money, remember?
(3) And purely subjectively it's plain awesome I can just go where-ever I want to in Schengen countries without being interrupted by some bored and short-tempered sod in a high visibility jacket. You might never leave the shores of the UK, I would not know, but I can trivially step on a train to visit Hussar or Louis should I chose to without somebody asking for my passport then handing it straight back to me without even looking at me. (Which is what it is like when you exit the ferry from Calais in Dover; the French don't even bother asking for anything.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios

Well, may I be allowed to channel a call for “bollox! :laugh4: etc.” here and point out:
(1) Schengen is for members of Schengen countries. I.e. those immigrants got nothing to do with that: they are a different problem. (One of housing and some sort of supervision so they don't go “missing”.)
(2) Schengen further lowers barriers among Schengen members which means the cost of doing business that involves crossing borders on a routine basis is lowered substantially. Time is money, remember?
(3) And purely subjectively it's plain awesome I can just go where-ever I want to in Schengen countries without being interrupted by some bored and short-tempered sod in a high visibility jacket. You might never leave the shores of the UK, I would not know, but I can trivially step on a train to visit Hussar or Louis should I chose to without somebody asking for my passport then handing it straight back to me without even looking at me. (Which is what it is like when you exit the ferry from Calais in Dover; the French don't even bother asking for anything.)

---

i'm afraid the bollox is all yours.

schengen's primary benefit of no internal borders only 'works' if the external border functions. it doesn't.

because we do not share schengen then people inside who shouldn't be cannot jump on eurostar or a plane and end up in britain.

as to my travel, i will be spending:
1. xmas in poland
2. next week in nuremburg
3. fortnight in poland back in august
4. week in berlin a year ago
5. fortnight in poland in july 09
6. weekend in spain in march 09

shall i go back any farther? and no, none of those border crossing was a real inconvenience.

so bollox indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

the external border functions. it doesn't.

---

That, together with “we got illegal immigrants, now what?” is the real problem here. Schengen is not.

Quote:

---

because we do not share schengen then people inside who shouldn't be cannot jump on eurostar or a plane and end up in britain.

---

Except that plenty often they manage it anyway.

Quote:

---

as to my travel, i will be spending:
1. xmas in poland
2. next week in nuremburg
3. fortnight in poland back in august
4. week in berlin a year ago
5. fortnight in poland in july 09
6. weekend in spain in march 09

---

Exactly the point! Schengen makes it that bit easier, especially for companies because they can simply send in their employees without having to worry/wait for any of that anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

I have had female friends who think that men should never hit women - even if they hit men first. Equality = men are punch-bags... Feminists often appear to want to keep all the historic "ladies first" / "women and children first" aspects and in the next breath be equal in everything else that they've not got an advantage in.

---

I remember this off-duty police officer who got beaten up by a bunch of kids (13-15 year olds, a group of them) in the middle of the street and ended up in hospital. The thing was, he wasn't allowed to fight back or he would have lost his job.

Sad times.

well, hitting a teenager who can hit you back is "definitely had more risk", and they are borderline of the "children" definition.

the problem is they hit 4-5 years old children, and women who don't put a fight back...

well... I was rather surprised when some comments here implies : women equality = they are equal to be hit and assumed they can fight back...