who wad have thought. The Tory party promised Independent Islamophobia Inquiry has been downgraded to a 'general investigation'. People will remember that all of the wannabees agreed when Saj Javid asked that they would agree to have an Independent Inquiry into the Tory Party and Islamophobia. It will come as no surprise that when asked in the Conservative Home interview, Johnson claimed he had spoken with Javid and agreed it would be better to have a general investigation. When asked whether this would still be independent he first said 'Yup' but then immediately repeated he would need to speak to that with Saj first, indicating it would not be so. (see beginning of guardian link below for more on this) So now instead of an Independent Inquiry into Islamophobia in the Conservative Party, we are looking at an investigation into prejudice in general to be held by the Tories themselves. https://www.theguardian.com/news/20...neral-investigation-boris-johnson-sajid-javid Oh Boy!
Your thinking and understanding need a good wash. Points of the post. Party with well known strong Islamophobia put on the spot in leadership meeting and all agree if they become PM they will have an Independent Inquiry into Islamophobia in the Tory Party. Boris asked at a meeting if he is still going to do this. He says not really. It will be a general inquiry. He has already gone back on his promise for an Islamophobia inquiry. He is asked whether the Independent bit still stands. He says 'Yup' and then indicates he will not be doing that either. So from a promise of an Inquiry into Islamophobia which sounded like it was going to be a deep one, he has moved to a general inquiry on prejudice. On this alone he has shown he will not keep his promise. Second he has indicated it is not going to be an Independent Inquiry. Do you know what an Independent Inquiry is? Independent Inquiry - that is an Inquiry fro people who do not have a boat to float with the Tories, People who have nothing to gain or lose by the result. Clearly an Independent Inquiry is much more likely to give an unbiased result. One would expect people doing this to have a knowledge of the subject and not to themselves be racist. So the Guardian decided to check out how likely that would be for the Tory Party to be able to achieve and gave information from research done by Hope not Hate which said not likely. That you reply to this with says a lot more about you and frankly nothing about what you were replying to which put simply is Boris will not go by his promise of an Independent Inquiry and given the known Islamophobia of the Tory Party do not expect anything of merit.
@alexa But why should islamophobia being investigated ? Islamophobia has nothing to do with racism. I have more problems with politician lying on their word, a promise is a promise. I wouldn't like to see fundamentalist christian or a scientologist to become a leader of my country either. How can a country pretend to have any freedom of speech when they try to turn into a criminal act the fact to criticize a religion ? Blaming him for breaking his promise yes, the rest it's just tyranny.
Well you support the far right and so it would be expected you would have that view. Whether Islamophobia is racist or not is something which tends to be the argument of those who like to rage against Muslims, indulge in Muslim hate. Certainly racism experts would include it using the term in a generic way covering stereotyping and hatred towards people due to their race or ethnicity, gender, sexuality or religion and so on. It is hate against an Identifiable group based on the identifiable feature. In the UK Islamophobia was recognizable racism towards Pakis or Bengalis which then turned to Muslim hatred. It is hatred of the other. As to why it should be investigated well someone came on the tv debate and asked that it was particularly due to the smear campaign against the left calling them antisemetic. Something I deal with in the thread on Momentum second post. Corbyn has hardly been able to get a word in in Parliament without the Prime Minister snearing antisemitism at him. This has become the way our MP's like to communicate with each other in Parliament. This has happened to Boris himself but I will say it happened to him after he agreed if he became PM to set up an Independent Inquiry into Islamophobia in the early debates though realising he may well be found guilty of it may well be the reason he has decided not to. As far as you believing it is wrong for Governments to try to stop Islamophobia, well of course there you are coming to your feeling that people who indulge in Islamophobia are comparable to the Nazis. To you blaming Islamophobia and presumably other forms or racism is Tyranny. In reality it is obvious and proved that the opposite is the truth. Jews were hated for their religion before anyone tried turning them into a race. British Muslims were hated for their race before it was turned into hatred of their religion. It is hatred of an other. In a democracy all people have the same rights and it is the duty of the government to make sure that is so. This stops the majority being able to tyrannise the minority. The Labour Party is currently being investigated by the Equality and Human Rights Commission on antisemitism in the Labour Party. If the Tories had nothing to hide it would be expected that they had asked them to do such an investigation into Islamophobia in the Tory Party.
Maybe we should have an investigation into the activities of religions, including the oppression of women and gay people by Islam and some christian sects like the RCC, plus child abuse by priests, sharia courts in Britain, the teachings of fundamentalist sects of all religions, their funding etc etc. Religion stinks, period.
@alexa I'm "far right". Well, I'm rather an UFO. I'm for degrowth, I'm against EU, I don't trust any media, I'm an ethnic nationalist, I'm for direct democracy. I have a deep aversion of medias owned by billionaire or ruled by blinded militants. Part of my political positions come from the far left, part of the far right. You only categorize me on the far right, because we only spoke of migration/cultural issues, on which points, I'm closer to the FR. There is one thing that should be absolutly forbidden it's call for violence. The second thing where I accept that freedom of speech could be obvious lie and things that go against the honnor of an individual. For instance, if someone says "black people are thieves", "white people are murderer", I think that a black individual which never stole something or a white individual which never killed someone should be able to prosecute someone which soil your honnor. I'm quite worried of what's happening right now. For me it's quite obvious that migrants, muslims and non ethnic europeans are the innocent pawn of the billionaires. It's clear that remigration would be necessary for a part of them. The fact to use psychiatric terms, to put the debate on emotions "hate" speech, it's something that was used both in the USSR, which used psychiatry as a repressive tool or anti-revolution militants that always depicted supporter of the revolution as bloodthirsty people. That alliance between islamists and the left isn't something new either. During the iranian revolution, communist and islamist militants united, then the ayatollah got rid off the commies. Today, the left have been the objective allies of the billionaires, they always encouraged free trade agreement, the EU, and everything that removed to the people their power, everything that put every people on earth on a constant social and ecological competition. There is a reason why the left abandonned manual worker for muslim, transexual, homosexual and feminist. They abandonned the poor. I don't have antipathy of any of those categories, even if I might stay criticfull for their ideologies, but for me they're tool of the ennemies of the poor. Both Immigration of non ethnic british people and free trade remain the tool of the oligarchy to lower the cost of the work, to put poor people on a position of weakness, where they could not negociate the price of their labour. In that system, the use of the notion of islamophobia is just the tool of the powerfull and the rich to make shut the mouth of the poor ethnic british people. Most tories are evil corrupted people, traitor to their people, don't think I have any sympathy for that kind of traitor.
Your ethnic nationalism and all that goes with that is what makes me view you as far right. You have also said to me that you do not think democracy is a good way of Government and you support people who are perceived as far right though they are trying to present a different picture like Le Pen. However I agreed with most of what you said there. Direct Democracy does not work in large countries like France or the UK as we saw with the EU referendum. You have also made clear before that you do not support violence. Where I believe you are wrong or possibly naive is that you do not understand that that is where what you support ends up. When people have enough money they can sue them through libel and slander laws for deformation of character or honour as you say. Not so easy for those without the money. From a democratic point of view this would not be possible unless they chose that themselves if they are citizens. If they are citizens they have as much right to be in France as you and that is particularly so if they were born there. Well that is not what I am talking about. However I do believe in the UK there is at the moment an abuse of laws against prejudice going on but it is not about Muslims. I am not aware of any alliance between Muslims and the left. Possibly this is something particular to France. I do not know enough about what is going on in France at the moment so I can only talk about France in very general terms. What we are seeing in some places at the moment though is a big increase in the far right. They possibly are those who ten years or so ago would have seen themselves as center right but they have moved past the values of democracy to the far right. Now there is the extreme right acting as such always has and from where I see it the new far right are moving right beside them. It is just a case of a little more psychological manipulation. They are still holding back from where they really are but they are there. There are plenty of documentaries on them available now. I suspect who you are calling the left largely consists of people who still believe in western liberal democracy and do not see the world in the way you do. They support the rights of everyone and that makes it more difficult for the far/extreme right but it is more an alliance to democratic values and I guess they do not share your negative views on minorities. No this sounds like some kind of propaganda you are following. It is how the American Right here speak of democrats who they call the left. Again this sounds like propaganda based on the intent to create negative feelings against these people. I have many times criticised 'New Labour' for walking away from its base. That however does not make this a 'left' thing It was born by the right. What you are really talking about is the effect of our Governments moving to Neo Liberalism. This can no longer work. Labour under Corbyn intend to move away from this. This is not the first time we have been in this situation. We were also in it prior to WW2. Economics were working much the same. It may be that neo liberalism and trust me neo liberalism is not a Left orientation. I do agree with you that they took away the base of workers working together and left particularly the poorest with no support. However I believe that it is this very same Corporate Power which is what is currently running our countries that presents these other groups to other working people in order to control them by getting them against an 'other' rather than against the real problem which is neo liberalism - absolutely nothing to do with the left. Yes, there is some truth in this. They also tend to encourage people to not have prejudice when they want workers in and not when they do not. Currently then do not. The 'left' has no difference with you on the argument that people need to come together and work together. Where they have a difference is that they believe in including all these minorities in this where you do not. This isn't true. It would be more true to suggest that they are manipulating people like yourself right now so that instead of getting together with everyone to fight the real problem, Neo Liberalism, you are working on going against some sections of society while accepting the economic environment which is exploiting you and them. They vary enormously. There are quite a few who have a social conscience as well as their beliefs on making money. The Problem is neo liberalism. That is where positive change can happen and a sense of community return including all people.
The fact is that I don't like democracy, but I don't support either royalty or authoritarism. I just went full disgusted when I red about the Syrian war, the Lybian war or the war in Iraq. I was disgusted by all the lies our politician made and how the medias supported those lies. I was disgusted when the french people said "no" to the european constitution and we got it anyway, I was disgusted when they started to sign free trade treaties when most of us was against that. The more I read about what my government is doing in our name in Africa and in middle-east, the more and more I'm disgusted by this "democratic republic" and those "medias". I don't have any better option. I agree that authoritarian government either communist or fascist are evil, but what can do our "democratic" government is aswell evil. It's maybe less evil, but it remain evil. About the fact that direct democracy doesn't work, it's not because a referendum goes against your convictions that it mean that direct democracy doesn't work. Beyond that, there is not only referendum from popular initiative. There is a huge problem with medias, and I don't know how we could do to make the media indenpendant. In a democracy, the power is hold by the one which own the medias, even if there is some failure to that power like Trump or the Brexit. Furthermore, there is something interesting about the random draw that used athenian democracy. There is something fair on random, it's that nobody can have power on it. You would understand that I don't have the republic very close to my heart, even if Robespierre remain a reference for me, so the "citizenship" of the republic doesn't mean a lot to me. It's just a consideration about the term of "islamophobia". The use of that term is about assimilating the critics of islam with an irrational fear. I am not aware of any alliance between Muslims and the left. Possibly this is something particular to France. I do not know enough about what is going on in France at the moment so I can only talk about France in very general terms. What we are seeing in some places at the moment though is a big increase in the far right. They possibly are those who ten years or so ago would have seen themselves as center right but they have moved past the values of democracy to the far right. Now there is the extreme right acting as such always has and from where I see it the new far right are moving right beside them. It is just a case of a little more psychological manipulation. They are still holding back from where they really are but they are there. There are plenty of documentaries on them available now. I suspect who you are calling the left largely consists of people who still believe in western liberal democracy and do not see the world in the way you do. They support the rights of everyone and that makes it more difficult for the far/extreme right but it is more an alliance to democratic values and I guess they do not share your negative views on minorities. [quoteNo this sounds like some kind of propaganda you are following. It is how the American Right here speak of democrats who they call the left.[/quote] Is it ? The left supported the EU that caused factories to move out to eastern europe, the left supported immigration that caused the creation of ghettos where insecurity reigned. After mass migration, unemployement exploded too. The far right said in the 70's that mass migration and EU would cause only poverty and insecurity. The far right has a lot of flaws on many point, like their unhealthy obsession with gays, obession they abandonned recently, but they managed to predict that. I don't have a negative feeling about those people, about the SJW policies and the "oh it would be so wonderfull to have for the first time a lesbian black transgender woman" yes. Everybody has the right to security, transgender muslim lesbian like the rest. They don't have neither more or less that right. Yes corporate power used people like Hitler or Mussolini to keep poor people in line prior to WW2, now they use EU, and they stilll use mass media. The fact that corporate power try to fight so much people like M Le Pen (that I don't like) and support so much EU mean a lto. I don't agree on the left on one point. But for me, to each own their nation. There is many problems, like many abusive industrial property, intellectual proprerty that prevent poor countries to develop. I'm not delusionnal on one point : there would be one day a truth work to show all the dirty work the "elite" used against poor people and poor countries, as well finding way to allow africa and middle east to developp. You can't hope for peace and prosperity in your country when greedy corporate do everything to create chaos on another place of the world. False dillema. Neoliberalism, "free" trade, consumption society are problematic, that doesn't mean that multiculturalism isn't a threat aswell. Multiculturalism is a tool of the "elite" to subjugate people. How many people where ready to vote for Clinton because she was a woman ? How many voted for Obama because he was (half) black ? That's a consequence of that fraud called multiculturalism (and there isn't even cultural enrichment). I can agree on that on neo liberalism. I'm not opposed of a part of liberalism inside a country. Avoiding too much taxes, letting a freedom of business in essential, the demon for me is mostly freetrade. Furthermore, there is a global corruption of politician. Apparently people can be addicted to power like people can be addicted to gambling, porn or cocain. Robespierre was right on many points, one was that if politician become a job, that would cause corruption.
I do not know about France. In the UK, New Labour working under Neo Liberalism brought in masses of immigrants because at the time people were saying that if we did not we were going to suffer massively with a proportionally small population needing to provide the cash for looking after a vastly growing older population. In the UK the Government also took in new to the EU people in numbers which it did not need to possibly for the same reason. Tabloids like the Mail blamed it on the EU but it was not, it was our Governments choice. The fact that our Government did not take care to make sure these people could not be hired at a lower rate than the people of the UK and did not take care to make sure that areas where the jobs were had extra money to look after extra needs re schooling medical help and housing was them working on a neo liberal agenda, nothing absolutely nothing to do with a genuinely left position. I think you are talking about the effect of the 2007/8 Crash. You are blaming that on the left too. nonsense. I am not sure what you are talking about. Would it be something like Enoch Powel's speech which has become so popular among the extreme right. No they were not right. You are being sarcastic which does suggest prejudice which is a negative feeling. The people you support also support misogyny and strongly oppose LGBT - in the extreme supporting the killing of them in addition to their disapproval of people whose skin is not white. Sorry it is a nazi style fascism just like we have seen before so possibly that answers your question. Dealing with Islamophobia which this thread is on is the first stop. If that is not allowed to grow then likely the rest will not grow. I will say that I do think to some extent you have it right in your initial complaint, it is just that is not what it is now but as you have described what it could grow into if we allow prejudice against the chosen group which this time is Muslims to grow unchallenged. Yes that is sort of true and what they are protecting is Neo Liberalism. Neo Liberalism is finished. It cannot provide for all the people a decent life. By its nature it provides more and more inequality and the wealth of the world belonging to an ever tinier group of people who due to this have enormous power. Because Neo Liberalism can only now provide an ever decreasing standard of living for most people what they are doing is using people like you. Instead of people looking where the real problem is which is with this Corporate Power basically ruling us, having taken the power from our democracies...they do the old trick and through their media encourage hatred of the other. You do not know it but you are supporting them. From here we either move to fascism or we move to social democracy and work inclusively for positive change for everyone. The choice you are making is the road which leads to fascism and everything that entails. That may not be your intention but it is reality. People still have their own nations and the EU is not taking their sovereignty away. Neo Liberalism is a dead man walking and the EU needs to change from that. Again I think you would find a lot in Diem25 that you agree with. I agree with the rest of what you say there. anyone who would have voted for Clinton because she was a woman would be someone incapable of thought. Feminism is not multiculturalism. Multiculturalism was a term created when we were dealing with racism the intention being to create the kind of society the US use to boast of - cannot remember the term. Our countries have used and abused others and that has allowed us a far higher standard of living and quality of life than those we took it from. We invited them into our countries because they were needed. The Corporate Media work to get people to blame them rather than Corporate Power for the poor state of our countries now. They encourage people to be apart. Have you not heart the old saying, 'United we stand , Divided we fall' ? That is what Corporate Media is doing now, turning a large portion particularly of the WC against people because they are different when the only way out, the only possible way to create a decent future is to work together, to recognise those of a different race or religion or gender or sexuality as with us and work together to create a society for everyone. Fascism which is where the alternative lies promises far worse oppression, inhumanity and violence than is around us now and you should have noticed by now that the ones who support this do not even believe we are heading for climate destruction and human extinction. so move towards Social Democracy. Create a Democracy where the Government needs to listen to the will of the people and where the Government works for the well being of all the people not the 1%. VotreAltesse it has been nice to chat with you but I have a massive amount of things to do and do not think I can offer too much more on this at the moment. I certainly may take time to answer and tbh it is pretty off topic.
Islamophobia is the same as antisemitism ... worse and evil! No one demands that amn like or even love Islam. It's about respect and acceptance! I am atheist and I do not like Islam any more than I do not like any other religion. But I respect every religion and the people who belong to a religion. My respect ends abruptly as soon as people of a certain religion start to put their religion above another religion and / or abuse the religion! All that dumb talk about what's going on with evil stuff in the Koran is mostly nonsense. It is often wrong translations or misguided suras changed by some parts of the Muslims ... and quite crazy, if the Islamists use the same lies and forgeries of the Koran as the people who use them to justify their hatred of Islam. The fact is that most Muslims are normal people. Yes, there are also cultural differences that are incomprehensible to us, or even repugnant ... but the same applies vice versa. A good example is the concealment of women. A lot of Turks live with me in Cologne ... most Turkish women do not even wear a headscarf, let alone a total concealment like the burka! But they are also here ... if only 20-30% of women at best! Opposite me lives a young Turkish family with 2 children and they are dressed like all Germans and behave no differently. But when the elves come from him, you see the difference directly. He is traditionally dressed in Turkish and of course she has a koftuch and is ... let's say Muslim dressed. But is that why all Muslims are bad now? These Turkish families are not Islamists or like Islamic terrorists ...
VotreAltesse something happened there. I appeared to have two copies of the first part of my reply so I cut one to put the second part in and now I have lost the first part. I am really sorry but I do not have the time or discipline to think it all out again so it will have to not be answered for now.
Hmm I have just found Part one on another version of this forum. I won't be able to put it on from there, it would just update and disappear but I will see what I can do I don't believe we are democracies any more. I believe we are plutocracies - that is our Governments answer to the most wealthy elite not us. This is basically inherent in Neo Liberalism where they demand that there be no regulations on money and where all Government is interested in is money. Capitalism and democracy are not easy bedfellows. In order for the two to work it is essential that Government holds Capitalism in line, that is by regulations, so that it does not become so powerful we move from a democracy to a Plutocracy. It also means we need regulations to stop monopolies. This was understood after ww2 which we went into with economics similar to today and today we find ourselves in a political position very similar to the one then. I have come to the conclusion that probably social democracy is the only sort of Capitalism which allows democracy as it does not let Capitalism get out of hand. In my childhood if anyone mentioned the word 'Monopoly' they had to bring out the smelling salts. People were determined to keep them at bay in order to keep democracy from falling again into Plutocracies which we have. I didn't give enough information there. Direct Democracy does not work in large countries quite simply because people do not have enough knowledge to be able to give an informed opinion. Given that, on the referendum, the people were manipulated by lies to vote in a particular way. Some people did know what they were voting for and why but I'd say that was the minority. They voted on emotion on something which will have a massive effect on us and is likely to effect worse those who voted for it. People voted without knowing what they were voting for. In a large modern society people simply cannot know enough about everything to vote on it. That is why we have Representative Democracy. Even for Representative Democracy to work people ought to be able to get sufficient knowledge to vote for who they believe they can trust to represent them but since Neo Liberalism, which did not support democracy, political involvement and education of the general public has to any effect until very recently stopped. People felt they could do nothing. Thankfully the younger people who did not go through this have begun to get an interest again otherwise I suspect for most people in our increasingly unequal societies where most of the money is made by wars, where a tiny amount of people own almost all the wealth - 8 owning as much wealth as half the world, we would soon become serfs again. Political theorists are speculating that we are moving into a new kind of feudal society. Well I can't say for France but again Independent media is something which people who believe in Democracy take very seriously. In the 80's with half our papers being sold to Murdoch and particularly when the Times went people were rightly predicting that we would be in the situation we are in now. Thatcher encouraged our media turning into a semi monopoly so as to improve her power, the power of neo liberalism. However with the Internet we do now have the opportunity to find alternative news and there is a fair bit of it available. To not use that and then complain is laziness or ignorance. Needless to say our Governments are wanting to stop our ability to access this news. It is just that once someone is given citizenship they have as much right to live somewhere as anyone else. If you are born in a country and it is all you have ever known it is your country. That should be unquestionable in a 'democracy' or indeed in any country with any humanity. People are not cattle. You cannot take them when you need them and then just put them back where you got them from. That in itself is a kind of slave ownership mindset and certainly a fascist one. I am descended from people who have lived on these islands for thousands of years. Possibly I should start getting rid of people like Farage and Boris and see how they like it. I don't know what 'Robespierre' is. People argue about whether the term is appropriate but that is irrelevant. The term describes an attitude towards Muslims similar to that which racists show to non whites and antisemites show to Jews. In this you will see the regular tactics. Finding some negative thing which one or some Muslims have done and then using that against all Muslims. It is bullying and a very dangerous kind of bullying because if not kept in check it leads to violence. You can avoid this by dealing with a specific situation and making it clear you are not talking about all Muslims. Possibly some people need classes in this - shucks, I guess that is what they are taught when they are sent on ant racist training. ok then you put not in quotes me saying and respond with This just sounds bizarre. For a start who are these 'the left'. In just the same way as the far right lumps all Muslims together they appear to lump everyone who has a different opinion to them as 'the left' You will need to provide details of what you are talking about and explain who these 'the left' are. tbc
@Mandelus You're mixing up a lot of things, turks and muslims. A turk can be atheist and don't believe in god. Furthermore, there is a process among christian and muslims, it's that in a practical way, they're deist. Deist is a belief that there is a god, but no religion has the monopoly of the god. A lot of christian and muslims are much closer to deism than religion. I don't have any problem with atheist arabs, turks or deist atheist or turks. I know that kind of family you describe and here is the thing : often their children will be agnostic or deist. There is "brutal" atheism, when some people reject clearly the religion of their parents. But often there is something more "sweet" that happens. The generation of grandparents have a open vision of religion, go to church/mosque, the generations of parents slighty believe there is something, continue the rites but don't go to the temple/church/whatever, there is a third generation which is atheist. Considering antisemitism : I think that you should be able to criticize judaism aswell sionism. So, I'm not extremly sensible of that people screaming "antisemitism" every thirty seconds. There is clearly religions and cult I can't respect. I maybe can respect many muslims and jews, but can I respect their dogma ? No. Anyway, I never considered all muslims bad. In fact, recently I realized that muslims are maybe superior to my generation on one aspect : I see many people which could have been great being lost in alcohol, cannabis, pornography and addictive video games, and I have the feeling that it happen less among muslims, even if a lot of them are misguided aswell. But there is a fact : there is a number of muslim country that punish by death : blasphemy, homosexuality, apostasy. Even if there is some christian country that punish blasphemy or homosexuality, it's never by death. It's not simply religious fanaticism, it's the application of sacred texts such as hadith. People who believe that blasphemy, apostasy or homosexuality deserve death are dangerous. There is often an excuse used among some leftist atheist : "yes but christianity did". What do they mean by that ? They seems to see muslims as retarded christian (and christian as retarded atheist). I don't believe there is a fate to become a leftist atheist. There is a very important aspect to migration : mixed union. What does I mean by that ? I'm from a people, the norman, than managed to settle in a lot of place. They managed to dominate England, but not only. Their viking ancestor managed to not get rejected by the original population of normandy. Why ? Because they understood something : marry the locals. Basically, everytime they settled somewhere, they got mixed union as soon as possible, the result was that as soon the first generation they managed to mix up. That's where Islam is problematic. It's theorically forbidden by the quran, so Allah, that a muslim woman marry a non muslim. I don't say it never happen, but it's forbidden. I don't remember the exact verse, I can find it back if you need it. When we look at christian black people, there is already a little bit more difficulties to get interracial relationship. Not only some white people don't want mixed unions, but some black people, I heard many times some black women saying that their parents would accept anyone "as long he is black". Furthermore, we know that from a statistic point of view, black women tend to be considered as less attractive and to be less seduced (I'm not here to debate over the reasons of that). Yet, we manage to get mixed union but there is clearly difficulties to integrate black people than for instance polish or italian. The worst situation would be to be like in the USA where people tend to marry each other ethnic group or to consider that even mixed union people are black. It's absurd to call B.Obama or J.Smollett black. They wouldn't be called black in Africa. But for muslims ? There is furthermore this religious prohibition. By the way that mixed union between arabs and white or arabs and black may exist, but they're not religious arabic people most of the time. A young man was even murdered in France by the brother of his girlfriend, the reason, the brother didn't wanted that her girlfriend to date a whitey. A friend of mine got threatened with a weapon by his arabic brother in law, he had apparently difficulties to see his sister dating a non muslim. "Sexual integration" take time. Mass migration prevent any of this integration to work, and it's almost impossible for muslims to integrate htis way. @alexa I will try to answer you later. You get some good points. What is a "Robespierre". Robespierre was one of the greatest member of the french revolution. He ended to be guillotined, and he was unfairly blamed for the terror and the slaughter in southern France. He had some responsibilities in the terror, but he was never the "leader" of the terror as most people believe wrongly today. He fought against slavery, he predicted that if France entered in war against other countries to spread the revolution, that would make the revolution hated and that a general would take over the power. A few year after his death on the guillotine, his prediction would become true with Napoleon. He will die in a double way, as an intense campaign of lie would happen after his death, using him as a scapegoat of the horrors of the revolution.
Never mind. Those who wish to practice Islam have many countries to choose from but for some reason, they go to other countries to whinge why we're not like the Islamic countries they don't wish to live in.
There is a difference by the way between criticizing a religion and a community. However, there is some trend into some communities. That's a complexe topic on which it's necessary to be extremly nuanced. I think for my own country that people speak to much of Islam and not deeply enough. Muslims are too often mentionned in a negative way. I think that islam should be criticized without any concession for the horrible system it is. But based on facts (what actual policies follow muslim countrie)s, texts (hadith and quran). Most islam critics that go on the TV are just idiots usefull for their oppenents, they never quote the quran, never mention the hadith or the application of the shariah in countries like in Pakistan. You're right, what I reproach to the left, I would reproach it to most of the right, especially the "moderate" one. For me every political organization that tried to prevent mass migration and free trade treaties were always the most sincere defender of the people. You will guess that few people are left after that.
