IMMIGRATION thread

[AE Bravo]

no democracy, no freedom (religious or political), wealth inequality that make Europe look like Marx's dream, horrific oppression of women, criminalisation of the poor, non Muslims literally being worth 1/3 of a Muslim…

no democracy - the general consensus does not support democracy, not yet. our education is low but it’s getting better through spending.

no freedom - you have to be behind the regime yes, most are on the same page

wealth inequality - yeah this is huge for KSA and bahrain in particular, the rest of the countries compensated by setting really high wages and benefits for nationals. i get paid to go to school. everyone is also rich, and this is what really matters in the end as crazy as it sounds. you would understand if you grew up in this region. I think these nations need someone calling the shots just like Iraq needed someone like Saddam.

oppression of women - i honestly don’t see that besides in wahhabi nations, which are only two right now.

non-muslims being… - that’s true unfortunately. post-ww1 super-state super-people ideas that make us deplorable. this is very strong in the gulf but not to the extent of hating white people.

I realise that not all of that is true of every Gulf State but it still looks like hell from where I'm sitting.

if you ever do decide to visit the only ones worth considering are UAE and oman. i’d say these two also have the nicest people (towards foreigners and muslims alike) in the middle east. Morocco for culture trip.

I gave up when your definition of "Arab" became so wide it encompassed the Jewish Diaspora whether you realised it or not.

Hyperbole. I tried to tell you it’s not propaganda but a widely accepted historical view according to the academic sources I linked to.

And for this reason Europe should take in millions of immigrants? The Arab world is currently exporting its problems to Europe - why should we let it happen?

You’re pretending that this is all a result of Arab incompetence when it is the west cooperating with that incompetence that led to this. You have chips in the middle east and all of a sudden you want your money back.

Personally i have no problem with granting a selection of Syrians citizenship. I’m no ultranationalist unlike most gulf so i think we need these people because we are generally naive people, we need them. The regime sees this as a threat to them long-term so it's not happening. The ethnic tension that it would produce would be huge and would disrupt the current flow of wealth nationals enjoy. Add that to the fact that nobody in the west is really making an effort of making these so-called powerless countries take responsibility for it. Sorry but this is what makes your argument a fantasy afaic.

You also forget that many Syrians have pride and will not even want to be equal to us camel herders. There is racism ingrained in these societies. Syrians are uppity stingy conniving con artists and gulf people are dumb diaper head robe-wearing cultureless slaves. It's not THAT serious but it will be once you give out passports.

An Englishman can't trust someone who doesn't drink - or someone who drinks and lies about it. All of the most disgusting people I have met, physically and morally, have been Arabs. Added to that you have political Islam and the mess that Arabs have made of the Middle East and the Levant through bad politics and miss-management.

I drink. I know a lot of people that do and lot that don’t big deal. Politicized ideas is no reason to carry a grudge towards an entire people.

I also don't lie about it unless I'm at my grandma's house or some shit.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

no democracy - the general consensus does not support democracy, not yet. our education is low but it’s getting better through spending.

"Not yet" is relative - you may wish to look at Arab discourse at the turn of the last Century whilst still under Ottoman rule. You are of course correct that the lack of democracy is partly because they general populace not enamoured of it, and don't appear to understand the concept. Libya was a good example of this, there were real democrats in the country but many militias, particularly those out of Misrata, were calling for power based on the number of fighters they had, or had lost in the fighting.

Now, perhaps you can see why I don't want people like that in my country, because my country is weak in many ways. Civil society in the UK and much of Europe is already fractured, we're just about holding it together here but if you look at our history over the last fifty years we're in danger of entering systemic decline.

Like I said - fall of Rome - it only takes a generation.

no freedom - you have to be behind the regime yes, most are on the same page

To this I should have added "acceptance of maintaining or changing the regime through violence". We put a huge amount of effort into stopping suicide attacks here but we know that many of our current second generation immigrants want to kill us - that's why Europe is a major recruiting ground of ISIS.

wealth inequality - yeah this is huge for KSA and bahrain in particular, the rest of the countries compensated by setting really high wages and benefits for nationals. i get paid to go to school. everyone is also rich, and this is what really matters in the end as crazy as it sounds. you would understand if you grew up in this region. I think these nations need someone calling the shots just like Iraq needed someone like Saddam.

Much of the welfare in gulf states is subsidised by oil and it's not an arrangements Europe cares to mimic, or has the means to. We guarantee enough to keep body and soul together, not to live well. One of the most distasteful things about these immigrants is their clear sense of entitlement, their lack of gratitude for safe harbour and insistence that we let them reach Sweden or Germany, or even the UK.

oppression of women - i honestly don’t see that besides in wahhabi nations, which are only two right now.

Matter of perspective - I assume in most Gulf states that if a woman wears a knee-length skirt and has her their unbround there'll be mutter of "deserved it" if she's raped.

One thing I've come across talking to Turks, Arabs, and Africans is that a woman's hnour is protected by the men in her family, rather than by society in general. So a woman needs an escort in certain situations even in public lest she be assumed to be "fair game".

This is an idea we abandoned a century ago.

non-muslims being… - that’s true unfortunately. post-ww1 super-state super-people ideas that make us deplorable. this is very strong in the gulf but not to the extent of hating white people.

As I recall the Koran, or the Hadith, specifies that a Christian man's word is worth 1/3 of that of a Muslim man's in court - a woman's word is worth nothing - I believe this is actually a fact of law in states other than Saudi Arabia. The problem with this is obvious as soon as a Christian man tries to bring a prosecution against a Muslim for raping his daughter.

if you ever do decide to visit the only ones worth considering are UAE and oman. i’d say these two also have the nicest people (towards foreigners and muslims alike) in the middle east. Morocco for culture trip.

I doubt I'll ever make it to the Gulf, Libya and Syria were on my list but IS et al have destroyed a lot of the interesting stuff.

Hyperbole. I tried to tell you it’s not propaganda but a widely accepted historical view according to the academic sources I linked to.

Matter of perspective, and I think your perspective is outmoded by roughly a century.

You’re pretending that this is all a result of Arab incompetence when it is the west cooperating with that incompetence that led to this. You have chips in the middle east and all of a sudden you want your money back.

Me personally, I have no chips, and I never voted for a government that had chips - I was too young and then it was Labour you fought wars in the ME when I was an adult. Also, you have to consider that it's been a century and a lot of places in the Gulf have backslid. This is a major difference between the Gulf and the Levant, where there is historically a different, more Urban, society that has developed Civil Institutions.

You are correct that the US etc. has propped up some dictators but those dictators overthrew more moderate monarchs installed by the British who were more inclined toward a more open society. About the only post-WW1 monarchy from that settlement to survive is Jordan.

Jordan is also arguable the safest and most progressive country in he Middle East.

As a subject of Elizabeth Regina I'm biased though.

I drink. I know a lot of people that do and lot that don’t big deal. Politicized ideas is no reason to carry a grudge towards an entire people.

I also don't lie about it unless I'm at my grandma's house or some shit.

See - I don't get this. Isn't not consuming alcohol a major element of Islam, I get that it's not THE defining feature but I still don't understand how it is that so many Muslims in the ME seem to drink so much - certainly Muslims I have met in the UK generally don't.

[AE Bravo]

"Not yet" is relative - you may wish to look at Arab discourse at the turn of the last Century whilst still under Ottoman rule. You are of course correct that the lack of democracy is partly because they general populace not enamoured of it, and don't appear to understand the concept.

The concept is understood but it is feared. This democratic peace theory destroyed Iraq. It requires changing of norms and the implications of that are unknown and should be feared across the middle east. Constitutional monarchy is the best one can hope for right now and it's the only realistic reform.

Now, perhaps you can see why I don't want people like that in my country, because my country is weak in many ways. Civil society in the UK and much of Europe is already fractured, we're just about holding it together here but if you look at our history over the last fifty years we're in danger of entering systemic decline.

Just because democracy may not be appealing to them at home doesn't mean they won't like it in an environment like Europe. The EU masses need to recognize that this is nothing more than gang culture and social isolation. Two Somali girls tried to join ISIS a few months ago in this state (colorado), but Islam is not the problem here. Yes it can be a source of violence for people with years of pent-up aggression or ignorance but condemning the belief system in its entirety is totally useless because fifty years from now the belief system will not be the same. 200 years ago my ancestors were worshipping the moon or venerating sacred trees while calling themselves Muslims, it keeps changing for better or worse.

Like I said - fall of Rome - it only takes a generation.

Crack down on the angry beards. They are the ones preaching the Islamization of the world and that the Syrian war is god's plan to biologically replace the infidel offspring with Muslim ones (this was actually the sermon in Medinah last week, again shows this is all ksa). They are successfully intimidating you, this is what they expect it's Jihadi trolling 101.

When Saudi Arabia becomes weak and its international standing lowered, they will harvest the rewards of students of this hate speech in Europe to maintain its religious power. Ideological leverage this is how they do it's been causing chaos on a regional level for 60 years.

To this I should have added "acceptance of maintaining or changing the regime through violence".

In Saudi probably, nowhere else I could think of. Violent human rights abuses are pretty unheard of, its mostly imprisonment and at the worst deportation. These people have families so you wouldn't want to alienate them, saying they broke the law and exiled them is already overboard.

We guarantee enough to keep body and soul together, not to live well.

When I look around I see the body doing well. People are happy and see the change over the years. It's interesting to witness what will become of it because right now it is the beacon of civilization in the middle east and I hope it keeps it up so everyone can eat their words. These countries have much to prove and one day hopefully they can distance themselves from the kingdom.

Matter of perspective - I assume in most Gulf states that if a woman wears a knee-length skirt and has her their unbround there'll be mutter of "deserved it" if she's raped.

Whoa. No. Cultural shaming on the rapist actually for being a thirsty loser with no pickup game.

One thing I've come across talking to Turks, Arabs, and Africans is that a woman's hnour is protected by the men in her family, rather than by society in general. So a woman needs an escort in certain situations even in public lest she be assumed to be "fair game".

This is a family thing. Rich people in Asia or the west have the same attitude. Kuwait and Oman don't care about this much, neither does the UAE as long as the family is okay with it.

As I recall the Koran, or the Hadith, specifies that a Christian man's word is worth 1/3 of that of a Muslim man's in court - a woman's word is worth nothing - I believe this is actually a fact of law in states other than Saudi Arabia. The problem with this is obvious as soon as a Christian man tries to bring a prosecution against a Muslim for raping his daughter.

1. Not the Qur'an

2. The Hadith tells me to drink camelpiss, I'd like to see all the clerics do this.

And I don't think what you said is true anyway.

Matter of perspective, and I think your perspective is outmoded by roughly a century.

Back up your updated perspective with sources.

installed by the British who were more inclined toward a more open society. About the only post-WW1 monarchy from that settlement to survive is Jordan.

Jordan is also arguable the safest and most progressive country in he Middle East.

But Britain installed all Gulf monarchs. I've been to Jordan, I love the people and the political system but that country is a joke in hindsight. It's just there. I think some British guy accidentally poured some coffee on the map and wala there it is JORDAN. Out of all the arbitrarily drawn borders...

See - I don't get this. Isn't not consuming alcohol a major element of Islam, I get that it's not THE defining feature but I still don't understand how it is that so many Muslims in the ME seem to drink so much - certainly Muslims I have met in the UK generally don't.

Those same people won't tell you that the companions of the prophet used to drink all the time before it was regarded as a sin, and even then Islam's birth still had Muslims that drink. I pray for a day that these people realize that these were laid-back dudes who were sinners and human, and they were not persecuted for it until uptight caliphs came along.

All you have to do to be a Muslim is declare your faith.

[Pannonian]

Whoa. No. Cultural shaming on the rapist actually for being a thirsty loser with no pickup game.

They can have cultural shaming in their own country. Over here, we expect it to be backed by the law. No doubt there are other things than rape that are culturally shameful in the UK, but backed by the law in the ME. That's ok. They can have their world, and we'll have ours.

[AE Bravo]

Don't get me wrong it is backed up by the law of course.

[Viking]

Poland is not ex-Soviet.

Yeah, well.

But it doesn't really matter. All of those have a far more ancient history than, say, the USA and their previous spell of independece was not that long ago. So their traditions of statehood (especially the Baltic ones) had just to be restored.

From an organisational point of view, there doesn't have to be much difference at all between regaining independence and establishing it.

Islam (as well as any religion in any post-Soviet state) isn't really that important in secular Middle-Asian countries. And except for it Arabs won't have anything in common with the Turkic (in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaidjan, Turkmenistan) or Iranean (in Tadjikistan) population with their own unrelated languages and different cultures. Besides, there is a sizable Slavic population (especially in Khazakhstan) who will have still less in common (and will consequently display less welcoming attitude) with the would-be immigrants than the locals of other ethnicities.

This is beside the point, as should be obvious when I just wrote that Syrians ≠ Kazakhs. The point is that Syria has something in common with Kazakhstan, namely Islam as the dominant religion (Syria is/was a relatively secular state, anyway).

In non-Muslim Europe, there is even less in common. Still no language, still no ethnicity - and no religion, in common. There's almost nothing. In Kazakhstan, there is something; something not insignificant.

That's a rather low bar, isn't it?

Given the context, it isn't. We could set the bar so high that no existing country would qualify; but there would be no point in that, either.

Religion is not the key here. Inasmuch as they would be quicker or more likely to integrate, it would be because of, for instance, similar institutional culture and economic development. Indonesia is Muslim but it is demonstrably easier for Europeans to assimilate in Indonesia than it is for most continental Muslims.

Any group with a high level of education (relative to the rest of the world) could integrate almost anywhere. Assimilation is another matter.

I have never heard of Europeans assimilating in Indonesia; could you elaborate?

They could not have accomplished in Libya what they did in Syria.

Bold statement. There are many scenarios I don't think you are giving serious consideration. Returning to this below.

There are also a lot of inter-state projects that will aim to further unify the GCC as an economic force

Will this prove adequate to bribe the population from having political opinions?

All a sham

Not a sham, but the militias had most of the brute force power; not any government institution, including the military.

All the weapons are in Islamist hands since NATO got involved.

That's certainly not the case, but even a milder version of this statement is likely to be inaccurate, at best.

Turkey had a lot to do with it and the weapons fell into Islamist hands anyway with or without foreign training of these militias.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/wo...ands.html?_r=0

They were Islamists right from the get-go and have been infesting eastern Libya for years with pent-up aggression for the regime. LIFG and AQIM affiliates/admirers saw the spring as an opportunity to hijack everything mid-revolution rather than Egypt’s post-revolution hijacking. These are armed Islamists that were trained by Turkey and funded by pretty much everyone including ksa and qatar. Everyone turned against Ghaddafi in support of Islamist militias that were entrusted with regime change.

Then blame these countries for the arming, not NATO in general. One would have to ask how much of a difference these weapons made, anyway, considering that the rebels got control over military bases right from the start and could loot equiptment from these; including heavy artillery and tanks.

Ghaddafi could have cracked down on these movements if not for nato advocating total regime change, as if anything can possibly be guaranteed in a movement filled with affiliates of known transnational jihadi movements.

Gaddafi didn't manage to prevent half of the country from slipping out of his control in the first place - without any foreign intervention. The faith in this deluded narcissist seems rather misplaced.

Actually, ISIS is already in multiple fronts including yemen, sinai, tunisia, algeria, and libya.

Yes, they have smaller presences there. Imagine if Gaddafi's offensive failed to regain all territory, and the original war in Libya kept going on in parallel to IS' growth in Syria. IS could have united a lot of disillusioned Libyan rebels under their wealthy banner; now IS doesn't have much to offer in Libya in comparison.

Even if Gaddafi did manage to retake all lost cities (cities which, again, he didn't have to lose in the first place), cities could still be lost again with rebels regrouping (the more Gaddafi reconquered, the more his forces would be spread thin), perhaps with support from foreign jihadists and/or islamists Or, yeah, maybe even with some sophisticated weaponry received from Gulf states. In many scenarios, the war would go on; even with zero Western military intervention.

[Montmorency]

I have never heard of Europeans assimilating in Malaysia; could you elaborate?

The Dutch language in Indonesia died shortly after independence. In fact, there is no longer a native ethnic-Dutch population in Indonesia. This is not the case simply because some native ethnic-Dutch left the region after the war and independence. It is because they mixed and assimilated so thoroughly that they simply stopped passing on their Dutch language and culture within a single generation.

Admittedly, the role played by population proportions is large. After independence, only a few tens of thousands of "full-blooded" Dutch remained in the long-term. There were already some hundreds of thousands of Indo-Dutch (i.e. "mixed"), but their assimilated identity had already been forming for centuries. Nevertheless, it is one of a few notable cases of entire European colonial populations 'going native', so to speak.

IS could have united a lot of disillusioned Libyan rebels under their wealthy banner

They could do that in Libya, even though they never even accomplished it in Syria - their backyard?

Even if Gaddafi did manage to retake all lost cities (cities which, again, he didn't have to lose in the first place), cities could still be lost again with rebels regrouping (the more Gaddafi reconquered, the more his forces would be spread thin), perhaps with support from foreign jihadists and/or islamists Or, yeah, maybe even with some sophisticated weaponry received from Gulf states. In many scenarios, the war would go on; even with zero Western military intervention.

Islamists and jihadists have and have had a relatively-negligible presence in Libya. The conflict there is far more tribal than even one such as Syria's.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The concept is understood but it is feared. This democratic peace theory destroyed Iraq. It requires changing of norms and the implications of that are unknown and should be feared across the middle east. Constitutional monarchy is the best one can hope for right now and it's the only realistic reform.

People only fear what they do not understand.

I'm not sure you understand, you seem to think that "Constitutional Monarchy" is different to democracy. It's not - I live in a democracy which is simultaneously a Constitutional Monarchy and under the Constitution the Monarch's power is absolute - the Saudi King wishes he was as powerful as my Queen who rules by the Grace of God.

Yet, we are a democracy.

Just because democracy may not be appealing to them at home doesn't mean they won't like it in an environment like Europe. The EU masses need to recognize that this is nothing more than gang culture and social isolation. Two Somali girls tried to join ISIS a few months ago in this state (colorado), but Islam is not the problem here. Yes it can be a source of violence for people with years of pent-up aggression or ignorance but condemning the belief system in its entirety is totally useless because fifty years from now the belief system will not be the same. 200 years ago my ancestors were worshipping the moon or venerating sacred trees while calling themselves Muslims, it keeps changing for better or worse.

So, socially maladjusted gang-bangers who are afraid of democracy? Are you sure that's how you want to paint Arabs?

Crack down on the angry beards. They are the ones preaching the Islamization of the world and that the Syrian war is god's plan to biologically replace the infidel offspring with Muslim ones (this was actually the sermon in Medinah last week, again shows this is all ksa). They are successfully intimidating you, this is what they expect it's Jihadi trolling 101.

*Strokes beard*

Seems to me, there are an AWFUL LOT of what you are calling extreme Islamists in Europea already - if there were so few to start with then I can't see how there would be any left in the ME with all the ones in Europe.

When Saudi Arabia becomes weak and its international standing lowered, they will harvest the rewards of students of this hate speech in Europe to maintain its religious power. Ideological leverage this is how they do it's been causing chaos on a regional level for 60 years.

When the Gulf States run out of oil everybody will suffer horribly - about rhe only up side would appear to be that with all the oil fields empty they won't be able to set them on fire.

In Saudi probably, nowhere else I could think of. Violent human rights abuses are pretty unheard of, its mostly imprisonment and at the worst deportation. These people have families so you wouldn't want to alienate them, saying they broke the law and exiled them is already overboard.

Syria, Libya, Yemen, Tunisia, Iraq, Iran...

Whoa. No. Cultural shaming on the rapist actually for being a thirsty loser with no pickup game.

So you're so regressive you think that rapists do it for sexual gratification? "Oh, you couldn't get her you had to rape her?"

That's worse!

This is a family thing. Rich people in Asia or the west have the same attitude. Kuwait and Oman don't care about this much, neither does the UAE as long as the family is okay with it.

In the West a woman's honour is protected by society in general, not by her father or husband - we have immigrants here who kill their daughters for perceived slights that even the most zealous and blindsighted European would consider minor.

1. Not the Qur'an

2. The Hadith tells me to drink camelpiss, I'd like to see all the clerics do this.

And I don't think what you said is true anyway.

From what I have read the Koran instructs you to refrain from gambling and intoxicants - which is why Muslims don't drink and why we no longer play Chess with dice.

Back up your updated perspective with sources.

I lost interest, from where I'm sitting your argument made no sense - I demonstrated that the original inhabitants of the Alluvial plane were neither Arab nor Semitic, I could dig up something showing the people in Caanan originally spoke a non-Semitic language, but would it matter?

But Britain installed all Gulf monarchs. I've been to Jordan, I love the people and the political system but that country is a joke in hindsight. It's just there. I think some British guy accidentally poured some coffee on the map and wala there it is JORDAN. Out of all the arbitrarily drawn borders...

We created Trans-Jordan to limit Jewish territorial expansion by dividing Palestine in half. Originally what is now "Israel" and "Jordan" would have been "Palestine" because Classicists drew that may and divided it into the old Roman provinces. Joradn is also not a joke, the fact that you think it is speaks volumes.

Those same people won't tell you that the companions of the prophet used to drink all the time before it was regarded as a sin, and even then Islam's birth still had Muslims that drink. I pray for a day that these people realize that these were laid-back dudes who were sinners and human, and they were not persecuted for it until uptight caliphs came along.

All you have to do to be a Muslim is declare your faith.

If you want Grace for your sins you might try Christianity, Islam is a religion of Kings and warriors and as such it is somewhat shorter on forgiveness.

[AE Bravo]

People only fear what they do not understand.

I'm not sure you understand, you seem to think that "Constitutional Monarchy" is different to democracy. It's not - I live in a democracy which is simultaneously a Constitutional Monarchy and under the Constitution the Monarch's power is absolute - the Saudi King wishes he was as powerful as my Queen who rules by the Grace of God.

Yet, we are a democracy.

different norms. as for the king of saudi arabia, he is the most powerful figure in the country unlike your queen. this is why she visits him and not the other way around.

So, socially maladjusted gang-bangers who are afraid of democracy? Are you sure that's how you want to paint Arabs?

that’s not what i said, but i can see how you in particular would infer this.

Seems to me, there are an AWFUL LOT of what you are calling extreme Islamists in Europea already - if there were so few to start with then I can't see how there would be any left in the ME with all the ones in Europe.

trolling.

When the Gulf States run out of oil everybody will suffer horribly - about rhe only up side would appear to be that with all the oil fields empty they won't be able to set them on fire.

not funny. i don't think you understand how horrible that is, we have family in yemen. but even then, suffer horribly is exaggerating. your just talking.

Syria, Libya, Yemen, Tunisia, Iraq, Iran…

talking about the gulf

So you're so regressive you think that rapists do it for sexual gratification? "Oh, you couldn't get her you had to rape her?”

uhh…. wasn’t being serious dude. the point you initially made about rape is stereotypical rubbish.

In the West a woman's honour is protected by society in general, not by her father or husband - we have immigrants here who kill their daughters for perceived slights that even the most zealous and blindsighted European would consider minor.

so what? do you feel I should defend these immigrants or are muslims regressive monkeys for the rest of their lives…

From what I have read the Koran instructs you to refrain from gambling and intoxicants - which is why Muslims don't drink and why we no longer play Chess with dice.

so what?

I lost interest, from where I'm sitting your argument made no sense - I demonstrated that the original inhabitants of the Alluvial plane were neither Arab nor Semitic, I could dig up something showing the people in Caanan originally spoke a non-Semitic language, but would it matter?

but why should anyone (not just me) take your word for it about anything? who are you to deny sources with your own words like they’re gospel

Joradn is also not a joke, the fact that you think it is speaks volumes.

and what does that mean

All in all cynical and mean-spirited post.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

different norms. as for the king of saudi arabia, he is the most powerful figure in the country unlike your queen. this is why she visits him and not the other way around.

Doesn't the Saudi King have to answer to the Imans or whatever they are? Here the Bishops ultimately answer to the Queen. Legally the Queen makes the law, passes judgement and controls the Church.

Yet we live in a democracy. HM Queen has only visited Saudia Arabia once in 1979.

On the last King's visit to the Queen in Scotland: http://i100.independent.co.uk/articl...ay--eJYX859rsl

So either you're ill-informed or you thought I wouldn't check.

There was also the time the Guards band played the "Imperial March" from Star Wars when his Highness arrived.

that’s not what i said, but i can see how you in particular would infer this.

No, that was in essence what you said, that these people fear democracy, are socially isolated and operate within a "gang culture". You may have meant something else, but that did not come across.

trolling.

You're dodging the point with an ad hominem - you want us to accept that the sorts of nutters we have in Europe are a minority in the Gulf and Levant, but the fact that they keep coming here AND they have created IS says otherwise.

not funny. i don't think you understand how horrible that is, we have family in yemen.

I was being completely literal - I have no faith in the Gulf States' ability to pacify their populations without oil money and about the only unside to that is that they will drain the wells and when it does all kick off we won't have burning wells ruining the climate of the planet for years.

talking about the gulf

Currently the Gulf is relatively quiet due to the aforementioned bribes being paid to the populace with oil money, I can't seem to keep up with your frame of reference though. One minute it's about the whole ME, then just the Gulf.

A good example of torture in the Gulf would be Oman though, although that was a few dcades back now (and the British helped with it).

uhh…. wasn’t being serious dude. the point you initially made about rape is stereotypical rubbish.

Again, "she was asking for it" is a claimpretty common to sexist pigs across the world, not just Arabs. Certainly, though, we hear a lot of it from Arabs and other Muslims here in the UK.

so what? do you feel I should defend these immigrants or are muslims regressive monkeys for the rest of their lives…

On the contrary I expect you to condemn them - I also expected you to condemn rapists but instead you make a joke of it.

so what?

So, if the Koran instructs you to do something, I was under the impression that was not negotiable - because the Koran is the infallible word of God as transmitted through His Prophet.

Correct me if I'm wrong - it's what I learned at school and university.

but why should anyone (not just me) take your word for it about anything? who are you to deny sources with your own words like they’re gospel

Who am I? A PhD candidate studying medieval Christian heresy with a side line the Classics who studied, among others, Alexander's Conquest of the Persian Empire and an amateur interest in Archaeology. I can also, as I said, read a map and a book. Give me a year and I'll write you a paper on all the people in the Levant who aren't really Arabs.

and what does that mean

It means that it's profoundly weird that when looking at Jordan, which is doing better than almost any other country in the region at almost everything, you decide to call it a "joke". You could have said it was an example for the other countries in the region to aspire to.

All in all cynical and mean-spirited post.

Stop excusing the failings of the people in the Middle East, a thousand years ago Babylon had street lighting and what was very nearly a public health service. You are basically characterising your own people as stupid and cowardly, unable or unwilling to realise that they have spent a century or so in a cultural and social backslide.

Reading your posts on this is like reading the posts of an American trying to deny a Public Health service would work in the US.

[AE Bravo]

1979? Look up more recent visits, the difference is the king is head of state (does not answer to clergy) and the queen is good at being admired for uselessness.

No, that was in essence what you said, that these people fear democracy, are socially isolated and operate within a "gang culture". You may have meant something else, but that did not come across.

The people who resort to violence. Obviously.

You're dodging the point with an ad hominem - you want us to accept that the sorts of nutters we have in Europe are a minority in the Gulf and Levant, but the fact that they keep coming here AND they have created IS says otherwise.

They are students of salafism. Your problem is salafism. The poor, oppressed, or uneducated are easy targets.

Again, "she was asking for it" is a claimpretty common to sexist pigs across the world, not just Arabs. Certainly, though, we hear a lot of it from Arabs and other Muslims here in the UK.

They can go to hell then. This is not how I was raised or most people I know were, you can believe what you want.

On the contrary I expect you to condemn them - I also expected you to condemn rapists but instead you make a joke of it.

The point is your initial point about rape is false. How can anyone not be offended by that especially when it isn't true. Disgusting.

So, if the Koran instructs you to do something, I was under the impression that was not negotiable - because the Koran is the infallible word of God as transmitted through His Prophet.

There are trends in Muslim countries, you get your shit together once you get old, but even that is totally up to you in a non-salafi environment. The Qur'an has regulations on how to treat slaves when they were socially acceptable. It says that adultery is a sin but if you think majority actually adhere to this than you are dehumanizing plain and simple.

Who am I? A PhD candidate studying medieval Christian heresy with a side line the Classics who studied, among others, Alexander's Conquest of the Persian Empire and an amateur interest in Archaeology. I can also, as I said, read a map and a book. Give me a year and I'll write you a paper on all the people in the Levant who aren't really Arabs.

Putting aside the douchey response I hope you do write that paper and come to realize you're wrong, but maybe you'll run with it anyway I imagine.

Please don't list your credentials again, it's embarrassing. How incredibly pretentious. This is a message board.

It means that it's profoundly weird that when looking at Jordan, which is doing better than almost any other country in the region at almost everything, you decide to call it a "joke". You could have said it was an example for the other countries in the region to aspire to.

It certainly is an example to aspire to which is why I said I love Jordan's political system. Kuwait is also very interesting. Jordanians would strongly disagree with you that their country is doing better "at almost everything." Jordan and Jordanians have the best relationship with the gulf (definitely in the UAE most of all), but the country doesn't come close to the gulf. They want to make their country better and Dubai serves as a model for all Arabs.

Stop excusing the failings of the people in the Middle East, a thousand years ago Babylon had street lighting and what was very nearly a public health service. You are basically characterising your own people as stupid and cowardly, unable or unwilling to realise that they have spent a century or so in a cultural and social backslide.

I am baffled that you came to this conclusion doctor.