Moving out of the USA

[Squirt]

-

We have differing views regarding the radical Islamic movement and the Islamic culture in general. The politics of a people is not the core from which they function, rather a sword used to enforce their moral beliefs, not vice versa. You cannot have a group of people united under politics without them first having a common vision ( moral beliefs ).

Islamic immigrants to western societies are a type of modern day colonization that mimics what Christians started long ago, and continue to this day. It's their form of pay back and trying to force their beliefs on our society as Christians have for hundreds of years throughout the world.

Marginalized immigrant communities can only be created when an immigrant chooses to live in that community, forcing themselves to be separated from mainstream western society.

Your correlation in regards to Irish Italian immigration to American society in the 19/20th century and modern day immigration of Muslims in Western culture isn't valid as Italians weren't terrorizing Americans because of a war in, or near, their homeland. There was no fear of Americans dying from Irish or Italians immigrating to America, there is with the Muslims, because of a fundamental difference in moral values.

To say that Muslims who hang homosexuals in public, cut off the hands of thieves, have multiple wives, perform female circumcision and sew the vagina shut to ensure virginity ( Pharaonic is their term for it ), etc. etc., are going to "fit well" in American society, and if they don't it's possibly our fault, borders on insanity. The above examples are the MAINSTREAM Muslim beliefs, not the radicals.

There's a fine line in a society of accepting people who are different, and protecting the good of society as a whole. All of us have our differing beliefs, that's part of a free society, but unless you want the radical beliefs of the middle east forced on you then you have to draw the line somewhere. If you think Bush and his administration are bad just imagine being Muslim!

When speaking in terms of religion you have to make generalizations based on the majority. Just like Christians, Catholics, Jews, etc. there are varying degrees of loyalty to the religion, thus not all members of the religion are the same, but for the sake of discussion just the basics of a typical follower are represented in this discussion.

[BDBionic]

We have differing views regarding the radical Islamic movement and the Islamic culture in general. The politics of a people is not the core from which they function, rather a sword used to enforce their moral beliefs, not vice versa. You cannot have a group of people united under politics without them first having a common vision ( moral beliefs ).

Well we definitely disagree with you there.
And I'm not talking about the core from which people, in general, function. I'm talking about the core from which militant extremists function. There's a massive distinction between the two. To suggest otherwise would suggest that Northern Ireland is representative of Catholics and Protestants in general, that US slavery and the KKK were representative of Protestantisms flaws, that militant Jewish organizations (the Jewish Defense League, it should be pointed out, consistently in the decades leading up to and even in to the 1980s accounted for more acts of domestic terrorism in the United States than any other group).

I think also you're working from the false assumption terrorism didn't exist before Sept. 11th, 2001 or whatever acts of terrorism there were before that, committed by Islamic extremist groups, only targeted the West.

Secular regimes in the Middle East and Arab world have been targets of terrorism long before these terrorists attentions were turned towards the West. And the experiences of countries like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia (yes, even Saudi Arabia), Bahrain, Algeria and Morocco - where Muslim (in faith, tho secular) governments have been under assault by groups that want the power for themselves and seek to usurp authority, among others make glaringly obvious the political motivations behind even self-professed religious extremist groups. The end-goals are political. The initial, motivating spark is political. The power sought is political. Religious extremism is a tool to achieve political ends. Not the other way around.

A casual, unaware observer would see the Muslim Brotherhood's attacks against tourists in Egypt throughout the 1990s and in to the current decade as attacks on foreigners, mainly Westerners, who were coming in to Egypt and wearing unIslamic clothing, drinking alcohol, violating tennants of Islam, and corrupting the Islamic morals of society. But in actuality, the truth behind why they target Western tourists in Egypt is because tourism is a vital, central part of Egypt's economy. To destabilize the tourism industry is to destabilize the economy, which in turn is to destabilize the secular regime and open the door to the accomplishment of the militants' political goals. Political.

Likewise in Algeria, when a democratic election delivered significant victories to Islamic political parties. The secular regime threw out the election results, and a wave of violence followed in that country under the apparent guise of a religious extremist movement. But when you consider that the religious conservatives won the election and only resorted to violence when an authoritarian, secular regime ignored the will of the people, the political nature of that uprising is plainly apparent.

Islamic immigrants to western societies are a type of modern day colonization that mimics what Christians started long ago, and continue to this day. It's their form of pay back and trying to force their beliefs on our society as Christians have for hundreds of years throughout the world.

Sounds a bit too much like some elaborate and lofty conspiracy theory. What you seem unable to appreciate is that so many of the Muslims that come to the United States do so because they want to get away from oppression and religious conservativism. Not bring it here. I think the assumption you make is pure xenophobism.

Further, to suggest that Muslim immigrants moving to the west are the modern day equivalent of Christian crusaders or colonists assuming "the white man's burden" and spreading their beliefs throughout the world is a flawed comparison. With Christianity, its spread across the globe on behalf of any deliberate effort was genuinely official and highly organized and supported by governments. Which is to say that conquistadores in the service of Spain conquered the Americas, merchants in the service of England colonized India, and so on. Agents of King, Queen, and/or Pope. With respect to immigration, you just don't see that. You don't see President Fox mobilizing a crusade of immigrants in to California and Texas for sake of his glory, and you don't see Muslim immigrants colozing the Americas for sake of the House of Saud. There's a reason there is a term for immigrants and a term for colonists. Because they are two very different things.

I don't think it unreasonable to suggest that a Muslim immigrant coming to the United States or Western Europe is far more likely motivated by a pursuit of greater academic freedom, economic prosperity, freedom from political persecution, and other such reasons that have been at the root of immigration for decades. The very fact that Muslims move to the West to enjoy greater freedoms and continue to practice Islam peacefully in the West is further proof that its all about politics and not religion (the political manifestations of religious extremists in their homeland made living there as moderate practitioners of the religion incompatible with safety and security).

Marginalized immigrant communities can only be created when an immigrant chooses to live in that community, forcing themselves to be separated from mainstream western society.

I don't believe this to be true. Immigrant populations have always had a period of integration that can often last a generation and you only need look as far as the Little Italy's and Chinatowns and Little Armenias and Little Tokyos and all those other examples to see this. Integration in to society as a whole can still be achieved in concert with immigrant predominance in certain neighborhoods. There's a vast difference between it taking people some time to integrate and their being relegated to the ghetto by the prevailing forces and prejudices of the society in which they now find themselves.

Your correlation in regards to Irish Italian immigration to American society in the 19/20th century and modern day immigration of Muslims in Western culture isn't valid as Italians weren't terrorizing Americans because of a war in, or near, their homeland. There was no fear of Americans dying from Irish or Italians immigrating to America, there is with the Muslims, because of a fundamental difference in moral values.

Ah but it is true, because it's all about perception. In decades past, Irish immigrants were considered a threat to the American way of life. Just as you consider Muslim Americans to be today. And faced intolerance as a result. As did Italian immigrants. As have Hispanic immigrants. As have Japanese Americans. It's the native population perceiving threats that are more often than not, if not exclusively, the source of any notion of threat. Not the immigrants actually posing such a threat. Japanese Americans didn't pose a threat to us during World War 2, but we perceived them to be doing so. And so we through them in to internment camps in one of this nation's history's darkest events. I don't remember any immigrants flying planes in to buildings on September 11th.

To say that Muslims who hang homosexuals in public, cut off the hands of thieves, have multiple wives, perform female circumcision and sew the vagina shut to ensure virginity ( Pharaonic is their term for it ), etc. etc., are going to "fit well" in American society, and if they don't it's possibly our fault, borders on insanity. The above examples are the MAINSTREAM Muslim beliefs, not the radicals.

What's insane to me is the suggestion that any and all Muslims either commit or condone the things you mentioned above or attempt to justify bigoted statements with the idea that your motivations are benevolent and progressive. "We must fear all evil Muslims to save the children."

There's a fine line in a society of accepting people who are different, and protecting the good of society as a whole. All of us have our differing beliefs, that's part of a free society, but unless you want the radical beliefs of the middle east forced on you then you have to draw the line somewhere

Actually thanks for bringing up another point. The mischaracterization of Muslims and Middle Easterners as being one in the same. I think this generalization and your inability to distinguish makes clear where many of your comments and beliefs come from. Fact of the matter is that the majority of Muslims don't live in the Middle East. The most populous Muslim nation is not an Arab nation. A majority of the world's Muslims are not Arab or Middle Eastern, and so on. You'd like to paint them all with this same brush, ignoring the fact that there's so much more to the Muslim world than what you care to see.

When speaking in terms of religion you have to make generalizations based on the majority. Just like Christians, Catholics, Jews, etc. there are varying degrees of loyalty to the religion, thus not all members of the religion are the same, but for the sake of discussion just the basics of a typical follower are represented in this discussion.

I don't think anyone ever has to make generalization. And further, I think your erroneous generalization that the majority of Muslims are violent extremists is precisely why what you're saying is so flawed. In my opinion.

[BDBionic]

Well the convos are always stimulating. Nice to cover some non-porn stuff on the boards every once in awhile. Keep them synapses firing

But I gotta get goin. got a plane to FL to catch in 7 hours. Later all!

[Squirt]

--

Let's just call it a day regarding this topic. You've read a lot into what I've said and labeling me bigotted is way off base.

Goto http://answering-islam.org.uk and read the answers from Muslims themselves. More of my Middle Eastern knowledge comes from my Iranian friends I grew up with which taught me Farcie ( most of which I've forgotten :high: ) and also my Muslim professor in college. She was one of the most inspirational women I've met in my life. She is the one who initially opened my eyes to the ways the mainstream Muslim religion oppresses women and partakes in Pharaonic ( cutting the clitoris and vaginal lips off ) In her case her clitoris and vaginal lips were cut off, and her vagina was sewn shut except for a whole the size of her pinky finger. You see a virgin is required at marriage and this is the only way they can guarantee the woman is a virgin. Some muslims don't sew the vagina shut, but the woman is examined before marriage to make sure she is a virgin. Some women go to underground doctors to create a fake hymen, if they've lost their virginity, to ensure a good marriage and out of fear of an honor killing if the husband feels dishonored at marrying a non virgin.

I'm not coming from an ignorant, or bigoted place. Remember I'm an ex pat living overseas, not to mention a Gay pornographer. You seem to be lumping me into this preconceived notion of the close minded American stereotype, of which I am not.

I'm speaking from first hand knowledge, from my own personal experience, and the experience of my close friends and a mentor, who are all part of the Muslim community.

"And further, I think your erroneous generalization that the majority of Muslims are violent extremists is precisely why what you're saying is so flawed."

I never said that, I said "To say that Muslims who hang homosexuals in public, cut off the hands of thieves, have multiple wives, perform female circumcision and sew the vagina shut to ensure virginity ( Pharaonic is their term for it ), etc. etc., are going to "fit well" in American society, and if they don't it's possibly our fault, borders on insanity. "

Those are not the extremist ways.. they are the mainstream muslim beliefs. Again goto http://answering-islam.org.uk and get answers from them yourself.

If the middle east was full of peace loving Muslims then their society would reflect that, and it doesn't, it hasn't for hundreds, no thousands, of years. Learn Middle Eastern history from the people themselves at http://www.mideastweb.org/history.htm

We're both good people.. let's just let this one go and move on. It's all good. Just saw your message on leaving to Florida.. have a good time! Will be nice to meet you in person some day where we can understand each other better face to face :high:

[BDBionic]

I came back cuz I was gonna make a post askin what the differences are between "strike anywhere matches" and "safety matches" because the FAA says I can't take the former on the plane with me but I can take the latter. Then I found out the lil ones in the booklets like you'd get at a bar are "safety matches" because they can't be struck anywhere.

But as long as I'm here, I think you and me get in a lotta heated arguments . Usually though about pretty intense subjects. Which makes sense, really. Cover stuff like that and firm statements come across. I dig ya tho and don't at all disrespect ya. Still gettin' the hang of typing stuff in discussion forums without the advantage of inflection and tone like we'd have face to face in vocal discussion hehe.

Anyways, definitely be cool if you made it to a show up here soon! Or you Oz fellas threw one together down there!! 8) ok, armed with my 4 books of safety matches, I'm off!

[longboardjim]

if this keeps up i'm going to have to get a dictionary! , "xenophobism?" , "pharaonic?" :goof:

sincerely ~ ..."your bandwidth is set too high , adjust for all users!"...

p.s ~ and i thought i was complicated!