The importance of muslim immigration to Europe.

that's not really true, the "left" are more accepting of Mexican immigration in contrast to the right for example.. and the Mexican culture is OVERWHELMINGLY Christian... even more so than the US as a matter of fact

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_by_country


I think the issue here is actually based on the fact that the Mexicans and the Muslims don't vote for Republicans... and why would they when they hold attitudes like yours?

 

Like whom? Mixed race people don't count.

That egalitarian. There is nothing unfair about only favoring certain groups. Nobody has the right to go to your country and you have the right to choose whoever you want. If you want to let in non-whites I think that is a little bit silly because it condones racemixing and risks racial division. You admitted yourself non-whites are hard to assimilate so why bother?

Can we at least agree the majority of immigrants should be European or do you not care?

The immigrants live in ghettos and burn cars. The Muslims want Sharia Law.

I need to go back to school when I pointed out Swedes and Germans are racially indistinguishable?

A breeding program will be voluntary. What right will it violate?

Right.

And you want to do that why?

You'd have more success with converting Nazis if you proved that you aren't a Jewish Marxist. This will weaken their arguments and make it look like you are not a hater.

 

Ah yes, I was waiting for the Daily Mail to show up. You do know that it's possibly Britain's least respected 'newspaper' which has been compared to the New York Post as a purveyor of unsubstantiated sensationalism, lies and distortion? And while we're talking about agendas it might be worth mentioning that it's a far-right tabloid rag.
Oh, and proseletizing is forbidden in Islam. When did you last find a Muslim knocking on your door on a Sunday, grinning at you like an imbecile and asking if you spoke to 'god' that day?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
http://www.mailwatch.co.uk/
http://boingboing.net/2014/01/03/lies-of-the-daily-mail.html

I suggest in future you at least try to find a credible source.

 

Why? Because Nazis are pig-ignorant racist scum, that's why. And I'm neither Jewish nor a Marxist. I follow no faith or political philosophy. Oh, and by the way you do realise that your distant ancestors were little black Africans, don't you? You're as mixed, racially, as everyone else my little Aryan friend

 

Nazis want to live by themselves away from other races. Are you against that?

 

I'm against stupidity, and Nazis are very stupid indeed-especially if they consider themselves to be a race. They lost their little war by being very stupid, and they continue to be laughed at for their epic stupidity wherever they appear. Now, how about you run along back to Storm Front or wherever else you find that nice, stirring Gothic script on the forum banner. There's a good chap.

 

Yeah, they failed and conquering Europe and exterminating 4 million Jews?

 

Yeah, failed. Dismally-unless I'm deluding myself and they did actually win the war. Do I see a Swastika flying over any government building anywhere on the planet? Do you? Tell me Herr Ubermensch, where are your all-conquering, strutting Nazis now?
Want to talk about epic stupidity leading to epic failure? One word-Barbarossa-look it up and explain how successful that was, and how it led to the Greater Reich your hero fantasised about. How did that work out for him, eh?

 

ok, attack the source, not the info. good one

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...d-zone-uk-group-to-wage-islamic-law-campaign/

Proseltyzing is forbidden only if by force. Learn something before you speak like an ignoramus. http://www.meforum.org/2104/muslim-strategies-to-convert-western-christians

 

The Blaze? A right-wing blog site funded by Glenn Beck? And you have the gall to whine about attacking sources!
I did suggest something with a little non-partisan credibility and you come up with Glenn Beck!
And then, as if that wasn't enough, you offer a pro-Zionist right-wing site as further supportive 'evidence'. I'm speechless.
http://www.meforum.org/governors.php Do you see any non-Jewish governors listed?

 

you were wrong on the agenda, you were wrong on proselytizing, and you are wrong on this, so you attack the source, you have no traction in the argument so you attack the source, it's that simple. Debate tactics for 7th graders.

Any idiot knows that there are muslims ghettos across Europe that have declared Sharia, not that they can necessarily enforce it, but they have declared. Any idiot also knows Islam would like to spread itself.

 

Sharia? you mean like Beth Din.....?

Sharia is only applicable in civil matters between Muslims.. its voluntary arbitrage.

 

no it isn't just matters between muslims, it's their law of the land, and if 'matters between muslims' happen to be against the laws of the host country then you have a problem. For instance they have a habit of marrying 14 year olds. In the 'no-go' zones of Europe, they won't even let infidels in without a problem.

 

In Greece we had sharia law for muslims only and for family / inheritance issues only .
It didn't violated any of our laws but then silly EU told us to stop it because it was against their "values" (like they have any....)

 

Sharia law cannot supersede British law.

Its voluntary arbitrage between Muslims in civil matters. Don't let idiots suck you in.

 

Of course I'm going to attack the source if it is obviously agenda-driven, biased and partisan. Would you accept Mein Kampf unquestioningly for an unbiased treatise on Judaism, for example, or would you look to something balanced and neutral on the subject?
Any idiot can cite a source which echoes his own standpoint.

 

I'm afraid you are the one who has been suckered. In the mind of any muslim, the laws of god supersede British law.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/british-muslims-child-marriage_b_4310440.html

Sharia is not simply 'civil affairs between people', it is the basis for the constitution of many Islamic countries

 

but if the information is corroborated with multiple sources, and you can't refute it, then attack the source is not valid. Muslim ghettos exist throughout Europe, it is well known that many have declared sharia law. That information is so well known that it can now be regarded as fact. I would educate you, but I think it is time you learned how to use google.

 

LOLOL.. Its NOT the basis of US law or British Law..

Sharia law is different in every Muslim country.

If you want to worry, be my guest.

 

didn't say it was British law, read slower, try and think a little this time

 

What Muslims assume and what they can actually do under British law, in Britain, are two distinct matters. British Law is clear on the subject; Sharia tribunals are voluntary arrangements where both parties agree to arbitration. Furthermore any rulings are not legally binding under British Law which will act as the ultimate arbiter if the Sharia decision is unacceptable to either party.
I live in Britain, you don't, so please don't presume to lecture us on British jurisprudence.

 

I wasn't born yesterday.. I have a lot of experience and I have been watching this for over 50 years.

 

if things are so dandy, why is huffpo writing about underage brides?

- - - Updated - - -

so what? you still misquoted me

 

To sell ink.


What is the age law for marriage in the UK?

 

The legal minimum age to enter into a marriage in England and Wales is sixteen years although this requires parent consent if a participant is between the ages of sixteen and eighteen.