Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8738 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-26-2017 12:10 AM
400 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,268 Year: 9,874/21,208 Month: 2,961/2,674 Week: 385/961 Day: 1/114 Hour: 1/4

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
4Next
Author Topic:   What Do Europeans Think About Muslim Immigration?
bluegenes
Member
Posts: 2994
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 31 of 50 (803759)
04-04-2017 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Modulous
03-29-2017 1:28 PM


Pillage and Prejudice
Modulous writes:

bluegenes writes:

No faking required because converts are part of the minority

Are they? It seems reasonable but without evidence, it's just saying something.

I meant that the converts were part of the ~8% minority of the society as a whole (by definition, they are Muslims).

Modulous writes:

Are the prison population mostly migrants or have they been in France most of their lives? Again, without contextual numbers the reality could be being obfuscated by a biased presentation.

Indeed. Selection of actual facts is what news sources do, but that's not actually fake news, which is deliberate falsehoods. (They are mostly immigrants, the children of immigrants + some grandchildren).

Mod writes:

bluegenes writes:

But none of that supports frako's view that most of the 55% are victims of fake news, and that they would be insane not to change their minds if they had an accurate view of Muslims in relation to crime

I wasn't trying to supoprt Frako's view,.

Good.

Mod writes:

I was pointing out that your counterargument against it was potentially grossly misleading. This ironically, does support Frako indirectly if the only counterargument that could be raised could be characterised as 'fake news' or better, deceptive statistics.

"Potentially grossly misleading" doesn't mean anything, as most facts can be so, and if you need to hope that the only "counterargument" to Frako's unsupported, unargued claim was that fact, and you need to incorrectly characterise the fact as fake news, then it could sound as though you're clutching at straws in order to support Frako, while you claim to be not even trying to do so!

Here's another "potentially grossly misleading" fact for you: ~0.5% of the U.K prison population comes from the U.Ks ~1.3% Hindu minority.

Obviously, our Hindus must be very good at bribing the police and judges, because we shouldn't let ourselves be misled into thinking that they might actually have a significantly lower crime rate than average, should we?

Mod writes:

bluegenes writes:

We could present socio-economic data which shows that French Muslims are much more likely to be unemployed than non-Muslims, which is certainly true, but in what way would that persuade the 55% to import more Muslims? That fact could be presented alongside research which shows that French Muslims face considerable negative discrimination in employment, but in what way would that persuade the 55% to import more Muslims?

It's not about convincing people to 'import more' - a distasteful turn of phrase. All that is needed is to remove the desire to ban them from migrating here by reminding people that it isn't because they Muslim, but because they are discriminated against as Migrants. If you imported Sikhs, Hindus, and treat them like shit - you'll have much the same kind of problems.It has happened before and being Muslim is irrelevant to it.

Do you think that Muslims in Europe are more likely to be treated like shit than Hindus and Sikhs? If that is the case, then why would that be, and how could being Muslim be irrelevant?

There's a theory called "contact theory" about immigrant minorities and their host cultures. Basically, as the minority grows in numbers, negative prejudice in the host culture reduces due to familiarity overriding irrational prejudices, myths etc. It appears to makes sense intuitively if the bias is aginst "race", if that's understood as meaning physical appearance due to region(s) of ancestry, and it seems to fit the change in the U.K. in attitudes towards people given a description like "black" over the last ~70 yrs or so, with the arrival of considerable numbers. However, it may not always fit cultural descriptions, and particularly religions, which are great separators of people.

There's good evidence that while bias against people who are non-European in appearance has reduced over time, bias against Islam has increased.

Modulous writes:

Once we untie being Muslim from 'being a problem', we can potentially discuss sane migration policies. Education is likely to reduce any tendency people have towards the notion of 'banning Muslims' as this would be increasingly seen as a futile piece of bigotry.

See contact theory. The education isn't happening by increased familiarity. Also, a comment on general education in relation to immigration. Currently in the UK, opposition to general immigration is higher amongst the working class because they are more likely to feel in competition with the newcomers for jobs and housing. In the O.P. article stats, it shows that people higher up the education scale are apparently less opposed to Muslim immigration than those lower down. But that could be accounted for by the fact that the same thing applies for questions on general immigration, so there may not actually be much difference in any added opposition to Muslims across the class/education structure.

"Educating" people might include persuading them that people in Muslim majority countries don't have a high rate of bigotry themselves. So, more facts for Frako!

~90% of Muslims in Muslim countries are against the acceptance of homosexuality in society, and less than 5% are in favour of it. The most liberal is Turkey with 78% against and 9% for.

Also, because we're on EvC, ~90% of Muslims believe in a literal Adam and Eve.

So, it might be perfectly reasonable for some infidel Europeans to have serious worries about Muslim immigration when they know very well that there aren't hordes Muslims raping and pillaging all over the continent, and without any distorted view of their own likelihood of dying from "terrorism" at all. How many more "Faiths" do we need in Europe, and when will we see the first Halal gay wedding cake shop?

Mod writes:

If people want to halt immigration that's one thing. It's the continuing immigration but specifically denying Muslims that's a particular problem. And unfortunately - the survey question doesn't seem to be able to separate the people that think we should inhibit or forbid any further migration from those that think we should only do so for Muslims. Maybe the study you cite goes into this: How many of those 55% are also saying 'stop Polish immigration, stop Canadian immigration, stop Indian immigration, stop African immigration'?

Excellent point, and one I was going to bring up for Frako if he'd replied. In the UK particularly, there's currently very high opposition to immigration in general. From memory, in one survey in 2013, 56% wanted very tight restrictions, and 75% wanted them to be tighter than they are now. So, it's possible that there isn't too much of an added Muslim factor there anyway. And the Brits know that Poles, Latvians and Romanians aren't raping and pillaging all over London. Just Slovenians, of course.*

*Real fake news.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Modulous, posted 03-29-2017 1:28 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Modulous, posted 04-04-2017 2:30 PM bluegenes has responded
 Message 33 by Davidjay, posted 04-05-2017 1:54 AM bluegenes has responded
 Message 34 by caffeine, posted 04-05-2017 11:06 AM bluegenes has responded

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7407
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 32 of 50 (803760)
04-04-2017 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by bluegenes
04-04-2017 1:42 PM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
I meant that the converts were part of the ~8% minority of the society as a whole (by definition, they are Muslims).

I have no idea what you are trying to say here. I simply said ' the statistic suggests that the 8% of Muslims are committing crimes at such a rate so as to be 60% of the prison population, but that isn't actually represented in the numbers you present' . If it transpires that crimes weren't committed by Muslim migrants in a wildly disproportionate manner, this is important and the statistic you cited didn't take this factor into consideration.

They are mostly immigrants, the children of immigrants + some grandchildren

Well the statistic you cited doesn't mention any of this, and besides - I am the grandchild of a migrant but people seldom think of me as anything to do with migrants (Some of my ancestors fled the Nazis east, then fled the Communists west in the 40s and 50s). If I ended up in prison, I'd be surprised if my being a third generation migrant would enter into many people's mind as particularly significant. Given my name, some people may assume I'm a more recent immigrant of course, but that's another matter.

"Potentially grossly misleading" doesn't mean anything,

And neither, my point goes, does the statistic you cited.

and if you need to hope that the only "counterargument" to Frako's unsupported, unargued claim was that fact, and you need to incorrectly characterise the fact as fake news, then it could sound as though you're clutching at straws in order to support Frako, while you claim to be not even trying to do so!

I didn't characterise the statistic as fake news. I said: 'This ironically, does support Frako indirectly if the only counterargument that could be raised could be characterised as 'fake news' or better, deceptive statistics.'. My counterargument was only that your statistic may not meet the standard of 'statistically accurate picture of European Muslims in relation to crime'

Do you think that Muslims in Europe are more likely to be treated like shit than Hindus and Sikhs?

I don't know, it may well be the case, though. Seems like a distinct possibility.

If that is the case, then why would that be, and how could being Muslim be irrelevant?

A fine question, one that the statistic you cited doesn't go into. Which is rather my point.

There's a theory called "contact theory" about immigrant minorities and their host cultures. Basically, as the minority grows in numbers, negative prejudice in the host culture reduces due to familiarity overriding irrational prejudices, myths etc. It appears to makes sense intuitively if the bias is aginst "race", if that's understood as meaning physical appearance due to region(s) of ancestry, and it seems to fit the change in the U.K. in attitudes towards people given a description like "black" over the last ~70 yrs or so, with the arrival of considerable numbers. However, it may not always fit cultural descriptions, and particularly religions, which are great separators of people.

There's good evidence that while bias against people who are non-European in appearance has reduced over time, bias against Islam has increased.

A simplification of course. Large influxes of immigrants from a group can temporarily inflame tensions before 'contact' lowers them again. See the tensions during the large scale immigration of Caribbean folk to the UK in the post war era and the problems that followed in economic down periods during the 60s and 70s.

And the Brits know that Poles, Latvians and Romanians aren't raping and pillaging all over London.

Depends who you ask, I suppose. Before Muslims were the targets of so much attention, that is to say - in the 90s particularly, the Slavs got a lot of flack in Britain for their crimes. But that was a time when there was a fairly large influx of Slavic folk into the country so as I mentioned above, tensions often follow.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by bluegenes, posted 04-04-2017 1:42 PM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by bluegenes, posted 04-06-2017 3:24 PM Modulous has not yet responded

    
Davidjay
Member
Posts: 383
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004


Message 33 of 50 (803795)
04-05-2017 1:54 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by bluegenes
04-04-2017 1:42 PM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
Forced immigration into European countries, is basically refugees trying to survive the Western sponsored wars and its prochurch prowar alignments...... putting them in racist countries hurts the immigrants and the citizens of that country. Its a ploy to weaken countries, all countirees in advance of the ultimate one man rule.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by bluegenes, posted 04-04-2017 1:42 PM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by bluegenes, posted 04-06-2017 2:49 PM Davidjay has not yet responded

    
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1252
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 34 of 50 (803858)
04-05-2017 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by bluegenes
04-04-2017 1:42 PM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
Do you think that Muslims in Europe are more likely to be treated like shit than Hindus and Sikhs?

Sikhs are also overrepresented in the UK prison population compared to their proprotion of the overall population. Buddhists are overrepresented in the prison population at a similar rate to Muslins.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by bluegenes, posted 04-04-2017 1:42 PM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by bluegenes, posted 04-06-2017 3:02 PM caffeine has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member
Posts: 2994
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 35 of 50 (804037)
04-06-2017 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Davidjay
04-05-2017 1:54 AM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
Davidjay writes:

Forced immigration into European countries, is basically refugees trying to survive the Western sponsored wars and its prochurch prowar alignments...... putting them in racist countries hurts the immigrants and the citizens of that country. Its a ploy to weaken countries, all countirees in advance of the ultimate one man rule.

Will that be Sauron or Voldemort?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Davidjay, posted 04-05-2017 1:54 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member
Posts: 2994
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 36 of 50 (804038)
04-06-2017 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by caffeine
04-05-2017 11:06 AM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
caffeine writes:

Sikhs are also overrepresented in the UK prison population compared to their proprotion of the overall population. Buddhists are overrepresented in the prison population at a similar rate to Muslins.

I know, but the Buddhists are mainly British converts and nothing to do with immigrant background Buddhists, who are probably under represented. Buddhism has been popular in prisons for a long time, and apparently the meditation helps people through long hours in their cells. Apparently a lot of the converts are serious offenders with long term sentences, so Buddhism might have gained a much higher proportion of murderers and rapists in Britain than anywhere else in the world.

We'd better not bring back the death sentence, because it would speed up reincarnation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by caffeine, posted 04-05-2017 11:06 AM caffeine has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member
Posts: 2994
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 37 of 50 (804045)
04-06-2017 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Modulous
04-04-2017 2:30 PM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
Modulous writes:

bluegenes writes:

"Potentially grossly misleading" doesn't mean anything,

And neither, my point goes, does the statistic you cited.

Yes it does mean something. It tells you that the migration of group A (Muslims) into host culture B (France) and the resulting relationship of the two groups has some serious problems. From the fact itself, there's a range of possibilities that can be deduced. Without further information, we don't know anything about actual crime rates amongst the minority, so we could speculate that they could match the national average, and that the prison fact is a result of very strong bias on the part of the police and the courts, so strong that it could be reasonably described as heavy persecution. That would be sinister and very bad news. On the other extreme, we could speculate that the effect of police and courts is negligible, and the group actually does have a crime rate about seven times the average. Then there's the whole range in between, where both factors play a role. Wherever the truth is on the range, we've identified a serious symptom of problems in the relationship of A to B without added facts.

The option of a temporary halt on immigration from Muslim countries to France while attempting to reduce the annual prison intake proportion down towards normality isn't insane.

Apparent success in moving a group A to B would be an argument in favour of continuing the movement. Hindus in the UK have about the average national income, a probably lower than average crime rate, their kids do better than average in school, none of them have committed any terrorist acts in recent years on our soil that I know of, and they are more likely to become multi-millionaires than average. It looks as though someone arguing for a ban on them would struggle to find anything to support the idea.

Modulous writes:

I didn't characterise the statistic as fake news. I said: 'This ironically, does support Frako indirectly if the only counterargument that could be raised could be characterised as 'fake news' or better, deceptive statistics.'.

"If". if! And a correct statistic isn't in itself deceptive. Characterising one as "fake news" would be false.

No-one, including Frako, has said anything that supports Frako.

Mod writes:

My counterargument was only that your statistic may not meet the standard of 'statistically accurate picture of European Muslims in relation to crime'

"May not"? Of course one stat about French prisons is unlikely to give an accurate picture of European Muslims in relation to crime. I wouldn't try to do that with one stat. That was meant more to give Frako an example of how true facts rather than fake ones could be shaping peoples opinions. When I said this:

bluegenes writes:

If the 55% who said "yes" had a statistically accurate picture of European Muslims in relation to crime, do you think it would change their replies?

It was hypothetical. If someone from the 55% had a guesstimate of the general crime rate of Muslims that happened to be fairly accurate, even though we don't know exactly what it is, and not wildly distorted (as in hordes Muslims raping and pillaging) why would that lead them to change their minds? Although most may be primarily concerned about general immigration and about Islamic terrorism, a view that crime is higher than average will be correct (socio-economic circumstances alone mean we can be confident of that) so a fairly accurate guess would probably not lead to most of the 55% changing their minds.

Mod writes:

bluegenes writes:

Do you think that Muslims in Europe are more likely to be treated like shit than Hindus and Sikhs?

I don't know, it may well be the case, though. Seems like a distinct possibility.

In the UK, I think it was hardly the case in the sixties and seventies. Bias against immigration from South Asia wouldn't distinguish much on those lines. However, over time, I think your impression is right, and Muslims certainly are often singled out now. I read something recently by a white English guy who converted to Islam in the mid-seventies, and he said at the time it didn't cause any negative reaction amongst people he knew, and he had no real problems. However, over the decades, he experienced ever increasing antipathy. That fits my memory. Some Muslims cite specific events in the last century as influencing change, like the 1989 Salman Rushdie Satanic Verses affair, for example.

Elsewhere, a negative view of Muslims is considerably higher in Eastern and Southern Europe than it is in the Northwest. That may be partly to do with proximity and history; the fear of the other who could (and did) invade and occupy and make slave raids.. Here, all our ancestors had to complain about was a bit of enslavement hassle from Barbary pirates in the 17th and 18th centuries when they ventured this far north. So we tend to see Muslims as receivers of imperialism, rather than givers.

I think most people up here would be surprised to know that there wasn't a single year between 711 and 1919 when parts of Christian Europe weren't ruled by Muslims.

In the 1980s, I lived in Crete for a while, and I remember talking to a very old man who had fought for independence against the Ottomans. No-one alive will remember the occupation now, but many will have known people who did. A majority of Greeks have a negative view of Muslims, and it may be deep rooted. After all, Constantinople was Constantinople for 1000 years!

Mod writes:

bluegenes writes:

If that is the case, then why would that be, and how could being Muslim be irrelevant?

A fine question, one that the statistic you cited doesn't go into. Which is rather my point.

I wonder. Why is there bias and discrimination against Muslims in all countries where they live as minorities, and why is there bias and discrimination against non-Muslim minorities in Muslim majority countries? Why, when Islam has been present on the Indian subcontinent for ~1200 years, did I meet so many non-Muslims on the subcontinent who were suspicious of it or hostile towards it? Why, when the Coptic Christians in Egypt will soon be celebrating perhaps a record 1400 years survival of Islamic conquest, do they still face discrimination and attacks? Contact doesn't seem to work too well with religions. To know the "other" is not necessarily to love them. I think Jews had been present in central Europe for at least 1500 years before the holocaust.

Religions make in-groups and therefore out-groups. Is it really surprising that the infidel, the kafir, the "baddies" of the Koran might develop biases against the Ummah?

Modulous writes:

A simplification of course. Large influxes of immigrants from a group can temporarily inflame tensions before 'contact' lowers them again. See the tensions during the large scale immigration of Caribbean folk to the UK in the post war era and the problems that followed in economic down periods during the 60s and 70s.

Certainly a simplification, and I'm glad you mentioned the Caribbeans, because in relation to crime police prison stuff, there's an obvious similarity to the Maghrebeans in France, but there's one important difference. Although there are differences in the religious make up of the Caribbeans and rooted Brits, there's no strict religious divide. Although the average time of arrival of the Caribbeans is only about fifty years ago, currently, amongst children under ten, there are twice as many with one Caribbean parent and one white one as there with two Caribbean parents. That fits the pattern of earlier migrations, like the waves of working class Irish (probably traditional major contributors to the prison population!) who mixed in with the mainstream over several generations, and even the original "refugees", the French Huguenots (most English must have some Huguenot ancestry by now).

Having said that, the French Muslims are actually notable for their relatively low levels of religiosity, and I think they do have a higher out marriage rate than most Muslim minorities in Europe, including our own. I lived and worked in France alongside French Muslims in the late seventies and again in the late eighties, and I knew quite a few mixed couples. I also knew a quite a few criminals!

There's a difference between migrant minority cultures that are rapidly assimilated, and more separatist or separated groups. Romany Gypsies may have started arriving in Britain at about the same time as the Huguenots, yet they're still with us as a subculture, although they now report an out marriage rate of 50%, which means assimilation, and they won't last much longer at that rate. Because Judaism was banned from around 1300 to ~1650, the Romany may be the oldest continuously existing immigrant minority in Britain to keep its separate identity. Can you think of another? Maybe we should put them in a museum.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Modulous, posted 04-04-2017 2:30 PM Modulous has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by caffeine, posted 04-06-2017 4:00 PM bluegenes has responded

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1252
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 38 of 50 (804049)
04-06-2017 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by bluegenes
04-06-2017 3:24 PM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
I am mulling over your ideas, and don't have a clear response yet, but here are my disconnected thoughts without conclusion:

Firstly, about Jews. Jews did not only move to Europe in the early medieval period. They also went to China. But the Jews in China did not maintain their unique ethnic identity. They blended with the Muslim community initially*; and over time the Muslim-Jewish (Abrahamic?) population mostly assimiliated to the dominant culture. A religion by itself is clearly not enough to maintain a sense of difference; they can assimilate and be absorbed just like other cultural markers.

*I am here thinking specifically of Jews and Muslims in Henan province in east China - I am sure things were different in the west nearer to majority Muslim areas. I don't know much about the relevant history.

The other thought was about the Romany in much of Eastern and Central Europe; as you also mentioned Romany in Britain. Here we have a difference that is not religious, but where assimilation has been slow despite centuries of co-existence. Based on personal experience living in Central Europe for a decade, the majority culture would describe this as a refusal to assimilate; but to me it seems that the Romany are not permitted to assimilate*; which leads to a vicious cycle as those who are not allowed to participate in society engage in anti-social behaviour by necessity; which leads to further marginalisation ad infinitum.

*The only gypsy I know who has succeeded in business did so by working for an American company which didn't see his ethnicity in the same way as Czech employers would, and then got posted abroad at the first opportunity. He's now a manager somewhere in South America.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by bluegenes, posted 04-06-2017 3:24 PM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by bluegenes, posted 04-06-2017 5:12 PM caffeine has responded

  
bluegenes
Member
Posts: 2994
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 39 of 50 (804056)
04-06-2017 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by caffeine
04-06-2017 4:00 PM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
caffeine writes:

Firstly, about Jews. Jews did not only move to Europe in the early medieval period. They also went to China. But the Jews in China did not maintain their unique ethnic identity. They blended with the Muslim community initially*; and over time the Muslim-Jewish (Abrahamic?) population mostly assimiliated to the dominant culture. A religion by itself is clearly not enough to maintain a sense of difference; they can assimilate and be absorbed just like other cultural markers.

That's interesting about the Chinese Jews, and I entirely agree with the point you're making. Of course religion isn't a permanent barrier, and of course people change their religions. The Vikings arrived here as pagans, did considerable conquest and settlement, but then converted to Christianity, and over time mixed in with the already Christian Saxon population. It's just that religions act as brakes to assimilation.

The Jewish population here has a 50% out marriage rate. The decline in religiosity amongst both Jews and Christians has helped that now rapid rate of assimilation.

caffeinne writes:

The other thought was about the Romany in much of Eastern and Central Europe; as you also mentioned Romany in Britain. Here we have a difference that is not religious, but where assimilation has been slow despite centuries of co-existence. Based on personal experience living in Central Europe for a decade, the majority culture would describe this as a refusal to assimilate; but to me it seems that the Romany are not permitted to assimilate*; which leads to a vicious cycle as those who are not allowed to participate in society engage in anti-social behaviour by necessity; which leads to further marginalisation ad infinitum.

You could be right. I used the phrase "separatist or separated minorities" for that kind of reason.

I'll look up the Chinese Jews though, because I didn't know about them. Thanks for that. I knew there were ancient communities in India, because I remember visiting one in Kerala.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by caffeine, posted 04-06-2017 4:00 PM caffeine has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by caffeine, posted 04-07-2017 2:57 PM bluegenes has not yet responded

  
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1252
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 40 of 50 (804169)
04-07-2017 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by bluegenes
04-06-2017 5:12 PM


Re: Pillage and Prejudice
I'll look up the Chinese Jews though, because I didn't know about them.

The book Jews in Old China is interesting, though I am a little sceptical of the conclusions since the Chinese authors seem heavily concerned with demonstrating that Chinese are better than Europeans - hence the greater ease of assimiliation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by bluegenes, posted 04-06-2017 5:12 PM bluegenes has not yet responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 811
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 4.2


(2)
Message 41 of 50 (804455)
04-09-2017 7:10 PM


Go that woman !
I am from Birmingham, and I am immensely proud to call this lady a fellow Brummie. Good on her !

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-39545256


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2017 10:23 AM vimesey has not yet responded
 Message 45 by Faith, posted 04-11-2017 3:10 PM vimesey has not yet responded

    
Davidjay
Member
Posts: 383
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004


Message 42 of 50 (804552)
04-11-2017 2:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by bluegenes
03-22-2017 8:27 AM


The war refugees fleeing the mercenary war in Syria, historically are Muslim. So the title should reflect that rather than labeling them Muslims. Muslims are just people no different than church people and Jews, Hindu and Buddists etc etc...

All people flee wars that are started by those countries wanting more resources and power.

Europe is not innocent because they have been involved in these wars but not just this one war.

Forced immigration Yes is poor policy but again that is a way of getting people and races and religions to hate one another and fight more wars....

Qui bonon who does it help, it helps the final one world wrulers to rule in the end. Think darn yas thinks


.
The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK.

.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by bluegenes, posted 03-22-2017 8:27 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5754
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


(2)
Message 43 of 50 (804575)
04-11-2017 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by vimesey
04-09-2017 7:10 PM


Re: Go that woman !
I think I am in love. Showed it to my wife and she felt the same way. This young woman did an amazing thing. You should be very proud of this woman. She is showing the world how to deal with these purveyors of hate.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by vimesey, posted 04-09-2017 7:10 PM vimesey has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by jar, posted 04-11-2017 10:27 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28667
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


(2)
Message 44 of 50 (804576)
04-11-2017 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Theodoric
04-11-2017 10:23 AM


Re: Go that woman !
That she is looking down at him and with the smile that is normally reserved for kids when they just do the cutest thing is great. It places the guy and that whole culture in the proper perspective, little playground kiddie bluster.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2017 10:23 AM Theodoric has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24406
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 45 of 50 (804605)
04-11-2017 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by vimesey
04-09-2017 7:10 PM


Re: Go that woman !
She's obviously charming, one would like to have her for a next-door neighbor. But I'm not sure what the point is here? What exactly did she say to the protestors? I don't see that reported though maybe I missed it. It's great if she's being a peacemaker but I can't tell just from her pleasant attitude. Depends on what she said and what she thinks. She joined in when another woman yelled "Islamophobe" so she shares that attitude? Yet she's not wearing a hijab. She was born in the UK, identifies with the UK, she's not a recent immigrant. What is she representing? What are the protestors representing?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by vimesey, posted 04-09-2017 7:10 PM vimesey has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2017 4:01 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 47 by DrJones*, posted 04-11-2017 4:08 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 48 by Tangle, posted 04-11-2017 11:28 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Prev12
3
4Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017