Cable Forum - Multiculturalism is dangerous

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Multiculturalism is dangerous (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33712009)

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36165612)

Agreed.

Two exceptionally informative and well-argued posts from Rough Beast.

l fully concur.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36165611)

I’m sure I’ve asked this before, didn’t get a straight answer then and I doubt I’ll get one now.

Why did I never get any hassle from the many many Muslims I lived and worked alongside when I lived in Leicester for 4 years?

Maybe I intimidated them too much do you think?

Narrow instances do nothing to invalidate my arguments. The 300,000 marching through London were not the opposite of hassle nor non-intimidation.

---------- Post added at 14:59 ---------- Previous post was at 14:56 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36165612)

Agreed.

Two exceptionally informative and well-argued posts from Rough Beast.

Smell the coffee. Virtue signalling will end up badly for us.

And yes, Roughie did provide a well researched account. But it was not relevant to today's situations.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36165616)

Narrow instances do nothing to invalidate my arguments. The 300,000 marching through London were not the opposite of hassle nor non-intimidation.

---------- Post added at 14:59 ---------- Previous post was at 14:56 ----------

Smell the coffee. Virtue signalling will end up badly for us.

And yes, Roughie did provide a well researched account. But it was not relevant to today's situations.

So you are saying the 300,000 marching through London are all terrorist sympathiser's?

Take away several hundred marchers and l suspect the vast majority were marching for peace which when l last looked does not make them a terrorist sympathiser.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36165618)

The marchers were certainly not sympathising with Israel.
How about a march against what Hamas did? Which of those 300,000, the first 100,000 of which were on the streets before Israel started its retaliation, held up a banner criticising Hamas?

'From the river to the sea' meant what?

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36165608)

@ROUGHBEAST

I'll single out just three of your paragraphs on which to comment. My reading of your post suggests that those three paragraphs covers the full sense of your response.

I know Islam no better than having read the Koran twice and what I observe with my own eyes. As with all cultures, there are wings, and I have observed that there is an obvious plan for Muslim population growth in Europe and that eventually the militant wing(s) will dominate the rest.

You then pray in aid to your example of the Christian/Muslim institutions living together well in the past. But time have changed in at least two meaningful ways (in this oil money era that have altered the dynamic you have described: (1) Sunni vs Shia power play/consequences; (b) Israel.

Although your historical account may be true, it no longer applies (9/11, 7/7, Yemsn, Sderot, etc).

There's no doubt that both religions have their roots in the shared scriptures of the OT. Fat lot of good that does. Sharing the long dead prophets, whose exploits are described in the politically written testaments of their time has no meaning now. The nearest we have now is the Ten Commandments that make up a large chunk of of our culture and protections in law. The militant Muslims have no regard for the Ten Commandments and in order to maintain power in the UK when the Muslims have 51% in Parliament, it will be the militants who will be calling (and issuing) the shots.

You are comparing the Catholic sub-culture (which dominates across much of Europe) with a culture that demonstrates different values. Today's Catholics are part of our cultural family. But then you argue that 2nd/3rd generation 'Muslim immigrants' fertility will narrow and thus, by implication, their birth rate will fall - in 50 years time when it's too late. Maybe - but only if their children attend Madrasas in significantly lower numbers. I'm a conspiracy theory person who believes that Saudi Arabia is busy paying for this religious attendance.

You've sort of blamed the Blair years for the birth rate now being seen. The point is that immigration, part of the Saudi plan, has led to the dangers we are now seeing here, in France, in Germany and Sweden.

The 2.8 million Muslims in the UK can turn out 10% of their number in demonstrations that cannot be safely policed. These demonstrations hardly hide their aim of wiping Israel out. Is this a case of multiculturalism working?

You have said a lot of stuff that misappropriated what I said.

You spoke of the the scriptures. Firstly, reading ancient scriptures to get a full sense of what modern religious devotees think, will only give you part of the picture, because, as you say, they were written and adopted then in the cultural and political context of the times. Regardless what the scriptures say, there will be constant revision of what is written when it comes to living life by them or acting upon them. This can be a good or a bad thing. (How else can a Buddhist commit a terrorist act?) So, in modern contexts, most modern Muslims in the west have moved away from literal interpretations of the Quran and the Hadiths. They just want to live their lives and be good Muslims, not wishing to upset the apple cart in their adopted countries. They play down, out of pure pragmatism, the brutal or judgemental aspects of Islam, but rather dwell on the peace, love, neighbourly and charity parts. The Prophet said that a good Muslim, when living in another land, should abide by the rules and conventions of that land. A caveat to that is that a small minority of western Muslims have been infected by the radicalism that we observed developing in other lands.

You dismiss the words of the shared scriptures, but for Jews that is all there is, so the Old Testament lives. For Christians and Muslims the words of Jesus (Eesah) were an update of the shared Old Testament and much revered in both worlds. The Virgin Mary (Mariam) has Muslim places of pilgrimage devoted to her. The Quran was a further revision. Yet, modern Evangelical Christians put a lot of store in the Old Testament, not just the words of Jesus and the Apostles. They find affinity with the Jews when it comes to stories of the Exodus and the Promised Land, one of the roots of US and bible belt support for Israel. Modern Muslims believe that God gave Moses divine revelation. Interestingly, the Torah (the Pentateuch) and the Talmud which set out how a Jew should live and pray are remarkably similar to their Islamic counterpart Sharia. Christians just adopted 10 of those hundreds of rules.

You then point out that times have changed. They certainly have, but mostly because the pressures that have born down on the Muslim world from the oil hungry west from WW1 onward, not because of anything inherent in Islam that isn't in any Ibrahimic religion. So, there's tension between varieties of Islam? I suggest you take a look at conflict between Protestant sects and Rome since Tudor times and the days of Calvin. Even the conflict between Orthodox and modern Jews had led to deaths. Under the Ottoman Empire Christians, Jews and different Muslim sects had autonomy in their own principalities. Secure people tend to be relaxed and get on with each other. The Sunni/Shia conflict in in Iraq and elsewhere in the old Levant was aggravated by the imposition of those badly drawn countries I spoke of, shoving cultures together in one state that were better living separately. That conflict has spilled over into Europe where Muslims now live. Encouragingly, mosques like the Grand Central Mosque in Birmingham are shared by the four main Muslim groupings. Islam, like Christianity, wants to bring its warring sects together.

Why would a fall in Muslim birthrates in Europe from low to very low be too late? You say 50 years time, but the third generation are already in schools and colleges soon to have children. That's now, not 50 years time. We shall see. I didn't blame Blair for high population. You misappropriated my commentary. I pointed out the surge in births under New Labour to demonstrate that indigenous birthrates can also rise if circumstances are right. Birth rates plummeted after the global crash of 2008. Newly built school expansions became redundant. Perhaps we should hope for financial misery all round! lol

You then proceed to misrepresent Muslim voices in UK demonstrations calling for ceasefire in the Israel/Palestine War. 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.', refers to a wish for peace, freedom and at least a restoration of the pre-1967 borders where the West Bank of the River Jordan and Gaza, by the sea, were joined by a land corridor. The phrase does not presume an end to Israel, a two-state or a single-state solution. I guess that most Israelis and Jews would like peace, freedom and equality between the river and the sea too.

You then continue to cite a conspiracy theory regarding a Muslim plan for a European takeover, but with no actual evidence that cannot be explained much more plausibly. There are 4 million Muslims in the UK. A huge number turned up to a peace demonstration on Armistice Day, well away from the Cenotaph. It was wholly peaceful and as easy to police as the 1 million Remainers who turned up to call for a second referendum in 2019. The only trouble was caused by fascistic conspiracy theorists who turned up at the Cenotaph to defend it from imaginary enemies and ended up injuring a number of police and getting themselves arrested in numbers for violent behaviour.

No doubt you imagine that the boat people and asylum seekers arriving at the gates of the EU are part of the plan. The fact that most of them happen to be Muslims probably acts as proof for you. However, most of them have come from Muslim countries radicalised by pressures from the west we both acknowledged, or they come from Muslim countries destabilised and made unliveable by climate change. Some are Afghanis who helped us out in Afghanistan but missed the last plane out. An increasing number are from places such as the Mekong Delta which is becoming unlivable due to rising sea levels and increasing storm surges. None of this is under the command of Saudi. These are desperate people acting independently, seeking a new safe life. If you want to reduce the predicted exodus of billions by 2050, then I suggest you join with those who are clamouring to bring about Carbon Zero.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36165619)

Shit, I just realised that when well over a million people marched to stop the war we were actually sympathisers to Saddam Hussain, why did no one tell me this at the time, I mean I was under the impression at the time that support for one didn't automatically equate to support for another but clearly we were all wrong

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36165616)

Smell the coffee. Virtue signalling will end up badly for us.

And yes, Roughie did provide a well researched account. But it was not relevant to today's situations.

I meticulously applied my observations of past events and scriptures to the present, pointing out where they still applied and where they didn't.

"virtue signalling"?

I am surprised to see you come out with the standard right-wing accusation lazily aimed at any principled statement they disagree with.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by roughbeast (Post 36165623)

I meticulously applied my observations of past events and scriptures to the present, pointing out where they still applied and where they didn't.

"virtue signalling"?

I am surprised to see you come out with the standard right-wing accusation lazily aimed at any principled statement they disagree with.

You shouldn’t be…

"Woke", "wokerati", "remoaners", "out of your minds", "critical mass", etc. will probably be along soon.

As was stated in the 8th post in this thread

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36155560)

Definite whiff of the Great Replacement Theory here. Lovely

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

"Virtue signalling" was addressed to Andrew who so signalled when he wrote "agreed". Specifically, not lazily, aimed.

Past events certainly contribute to where we are now. But they have little bearing on current go-politics.

None of you answer my basic question: What would happen to us if there was a Muslim majority in Parliament?

On the Scriptures, in the Judeo-Christian world, they are fast becoming an irrelevance. See the Archbishop of Canterbury for details. The nearest we have to valid scriptures is what is interpreted into criminal law from the Ten Commandments.

Let's face it, there is no god that is good, and if there ever was, then he's long been dead.

---------- Post added at 16:42 ---------- Previous post was at 16:38 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36165624)

You shouldn’t be…

"Woke", "wokerati", "remoaners", "out of your minds", "critical mass", etc. will probably be along soon.

As was stated in the 8th post in this thread

WOKERATI: Generally those who can't call a woman "a woman" and who would call a fisherman "a fisherthem".

REMOANERS: Those who consider the democratic majority who voted in the Brexit Referendum to be total fools.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36165609)

Quoted in full because everyone here should read it at least twice. Thank you.

Judaism and Christianity were there before Islam came along, so of course Churches existed in those areas.
Islam took over areas by force in the Mediterranean area, including parts of Spain, France, Italy, and south eastern Europe. Then came along the Ottoman(Turkey) Empire which expanded and only ended after WWI.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36165625)

Made up, false definitions

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone (Post 36165618)

Just look a the numbers that cheered after 9/11. Just look at the number of them that went off to join Bin Laden,IS, etc. Just look at the poll where only 4% that believed Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11 or the 43% that believe there should be some sort of Sharia Law or the 15% that believe music shouldn't be taught in schools.
Have a read.

Quote:

7. Pakistan must mobilize and deploy its tactical nuclear weapons within the battalions of the Muslim armies and ready its strategic nuclear arsenal to deter the Zionist entity from even thinking about utilizing nuclear weapons.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36165633)

Cracking post mate, well said.

Re: Multiculturalism is dangerous

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad Max (Post 36165641)

Cracking post mate, well said.

Not really, what’s the sample set ?

Here’s one for you 1 person out of 1 surveyed think you two are a pair of dimwits who want to feel oppressed.

Must be true….