Europe is a fool
-
You're right; I must have left out the 'sarcasm'/'irony' indicator on this. My apologies. Whether anyone likes it or not, a person born in the UK is a natural-born citizen of the country. While there may be a legal case for revoking the nationality and deportation of a naturalized terrorist, I don't see how you could do this for native-born ones.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Nuke Mecca and Medina and tell the Mozzies they can pray to a glass parking lot! Tell them "What goes around, comes around" and point to the innumerable shrines of other religions they have demolished, including, in the most recent past, the Bamiyan Buddha. Shut down all mosques. Impose a ban on assembly of Mozzies. Make sure you have butchers selling only pork in Muslim neighbourhoods. If they want civil rights when they are in a minority, they should be prepared to grant civil rights to others in countries where they are in a majority. Reciprocity. Otherwise known as payback. It is a bitch, I know.
The problem with your suggestions is that they are contrary to the most basic principles of Western Civilization. The biggest problem with Europe is multiculturalism, i.e. the idea that all cultures are equal. They obviously are not. If someone brings his custom of child marriage from the Third World to the UK, it should not be excused on the grounds of "cultural diversity"; he and his accessories (the girl's parents) should be prosecuted for statutory rape. If a girl's family think that "honour killings" are acceptable, perhaps a life sentence bunged up with their own chamber pots will teach them differently. And if some murderous bastards even think of planning terrorist actions, the laws designed to handle the IRA are still on the books; lock them up until they're too feeble to even lift a knife, to say nothing of stabbing someone with it!
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
The first thing to do is outlaw halal meat production. It is illegal anyway, under EU and UK law.
Are you also going to ban Kosher meat production? It's very similar to Halal.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Then ban the burkah, and all head coverings, as being representetive of women repression.
I think you might have some problems with this. Are you going to ban the wearing of long-sleeve dresses? Scarves? How exactly do you define a "burkah"?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Then lets empty the prisons and repatriate all muslim inmates.
What about Muslim criminals born in the UK? Are you going to strip them of their citizenship based on their religion?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Any book that does the same. Illegal. SO the koran and hadith are banned. ANyone holding one is locked up. ANd deported.
There are plenty of things that would probably be classed as "hate speech" in the Bible, and many other books. Are you going to ban them all?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Even you did not ask me, I feel free to give my comments
Quote:
Are you also going to ban Kosher meat production? It's very similar to Halal.
From my point of view yes, if we have better possibilities. The question is, are the new possibilities really better?
Quote:
I think you might have some problems with this. Are you going to ban the wearing of long-sleeve dresses? Scarves? How exactly do you define a "burkah"?
"burkah"::= hiding the face. Even I'm not allowed to do this under some circumstances.
-
Even you did not ask me, I feel free to give my comments
Quote:
Are you also going to ban Kosher meat production? It's very similar to Halal.
From my point of view yes, if we have better possibilities. The question is, are the new possibilities really better?
Quote:
I think you might have some problems with this. Are you going to ban the wearing of long-sleeve dresses? Scarves? How exactly do you define a "burkah"?
"burkah"::= hiding the face. Even I'm not allowed to do this under some circumstances.
0x01AA wrote:
Quote:
Are you also going to ban Kosher meat production? It's very similar to Halal.
From my point of view yes, if we have better possibilities. The question is, are the new possibilities really better?
The question is - are you banning the practice of religiously-acceptable animal slaughter because it is excessively cruel to animals, or are you banning it because of anti-{Jewish, Moslem} sentiment? From the cruelty point of view, I doubt that a Kosher/Halal slaughterhouse is any less cruel than a "modern" slaughterhouse. If you are of the opinion that vegetarianism is morally better than meat eating, that is a different debate.
0x01AA wrote:
"burkah"::= hiding the face. Even I'm not allowed to do this under some circumstances.
So, will ski masks be illegal, too? Or will there be a special dispensation for using them on the ski slopes? How about cross-country skiing?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
0x01AA wrote:
Quote:
Are you also going to ban Kosher meat production? It's very similar to Halal.
From my point of view yes, if we have better possibilities. The question is, are the new possibilities really better?
The question is - are you banning the practice of religiously-acceptable animal slaughter because it is excessively cruel to animals, or are you banning it because of anti-{Jewish, Moslem} sentiment? From the cruelty point of view, I doubt that a Kosher/Halal slaughterhouse is any less cruel than a "modern" slaughterhouse. If you are of the opinion that vegetarianism is morally better than meat eating, that is a different debate.
0x01AA wrote:
"burkah"::= hiding the face. Even I'm not allowed to do this under some circumstances.
So, will ski masks be illegal, too? Or will there be a special dispensation for using them on the ski slopes? How about cross-country skiing?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Quote:
The question is - are you banning the practice of religiously-acceptable animal slaughter because it is....
No, I would banning it if there is a better way. BTW: Same praxis was common also in Europe before some "couple" of years.
Quote:
So, will ski masks be illegal, too
Stay serious! [Edit]And yes, if somebody feels to Need to wear a burka, please go to an area where it is common to do it. A Location where also wearing a Bikini by foreigns is not allowed...[/Edit]
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
The first thing to do is outlaw halal meat production. It is illegal anyway, under EU and UK law.
Are you also going to ban Kosher meat production? It's very similar to Halal.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Then ban the burkah, and all head coverings, as being representetive of women repression.
I think you might have some problems with this. Are you going to ban the wearing of long-sleeve dresses? Scarves? How exactly do you define a "burkah"?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Then lets empty the prisons and repatriate all muslim inmates.
What about Muslim criminals born in the UK? Are you going to strip them of their citizenship based on their religion?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Any book that does the same. Illegal. SO the koran and hadith are banned. ANyone holding one is locked up. ANd deported.
There are plenty of things that would probably be classed as "hate speech" in the Bible, and many other books. Are you going to ban them all?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
>Are you also going to ban Kosher Yes. The rules are the rules, period. >Are you going to ban the wearing of long-sleeve dresses? Scarves? sigh. the difference is pretty obvious you know. > Are you going to strip them of their citizenship based on their religion? Yes. Didnt I make it obvious enough that that was my intent? > Are you going to ban them all? The rules are the rules. Period.
-
0x01AA wrote:
Quote:
Are you also going to ban Kosher meat production? It's very similar to Halal.
From my point of view yes, if we have better possibilities. The question is, are the new possibilities really better?
The question is - are you banning the practice of religiously-acceptable animal slaughter because it is excessively cruel to animals, or are you banning it because of anti-{Jewish, Moslem} sentiment? From the cruelty point of view, I doubt that a Kosher/Halal slaughterhouse is any less cruel than a "modern" slaughterhouse. If you are of the opinion that vegetarianism is morally better than meat eating, that is a different debate.
0x01AA wrote:
"burkah"::= hiding the face. Even I'm not allowed to do this under some circumstances.
So, will ski masks be illegal, too? Or will there be a special dispensation for using them on the ski slopes? How about cross-country skiing?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
> are you banning the practice of religiously-acceptable animal slaughter because Because it is against UK law. If a religion practiced paedophilia would you permit it? Of course not. The law is the law. Period. > So, will ski masks be illegal, Dont be silly. The repression of women for religious reasons is what I am talking about, not head coverings persee, and it takes many forms, from head and body coverings to forbidding them to drive, and have freedom of choice.
-
An you say all that as 'a better person'... The problem with the (Islamic) religious war is that it makes no difference between soldiers and non-soldiers, between old and young... For that we call it terrorism... So what make you 'a better person' if you do the same? Regardless of age/deeds/sex/occupation - you transport them out of the country because they are Muslim... It has been tried with different interpretations if 'transport' and on different population... No much good in the long run... Isn't all this means that I (or anyone I know) have the answer, but it does not justify some wrong-doing...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
> An you say all that as 'a better person' No, as a DIFFERENT person. Western and Islamic values are too different to share the same country, and to do so causes them both stress, so they must be physically separated.
-
The problem with your suggestions is that they are contrary to the most basic principles of Western Civilization. The biggest problem with Europe is multiculturalism, i.e. the idea that all cultures are equal. They obviously are not. If someone brings his custom of child marriage from the Third World to the UK, it should not be excused on the grounds of "cultural diversity"; he and his accessories (the girl's parents) should be prosecuted for statutory rape. If a girl's family think that "honour killings" are acceptable, perhaps a life sentence bunged up with their own chamber pots will teach them differently. And if some murderous bastards even think of planning terrorist actions, the laws designed to handle the IRA are still on the books; lock them up until they're too feeble to even lift a knife, to say nothing of stabbing someone with it!
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
> The biggest problem with Europe is multiculturalism Not so. Black caribean culture blended perfectly well with white culture in the 70s and gave rise to a whole new form of music and youth movement, two tone, ska, etc. Indian culture is highly compatible with EUropean culture and has been for centuries. THe problem is islam. Just that. It is them. They dont want to integrate. They want to dominate, to take over, to subjugate. That isnt going to happen, believe me.
-
You're right; I must have left out the 'sarcasm'/'irony' indicator on this. My apologies. Whether anyone likes it or not, a person born in the UK is a natural-born citizen of the country. While there may be a legal case for revoking the nationality and deportation of a naturalized terrorist, I don't see how you could do this for native-born ones.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
> Whether anyone likes it or not, a person born in the UK is a natural-born citizen of the country That is not the case in all countries you know, and can be changed easily. Here you go: Rotherham sex abusers could be deported and have UK citizenship taken away under new law | UK | News | Express.co.uk[^] See? It is simple.
-
>Are you also going to ban Kosher Yes. The rules are the rules, period. >Are you going to ban the wearing of long-sleeve dresses? Scarves? sigh. the difference is pretty obvious you know. > Are you going to strip them of their citizenship based on their religion? Yes. Didnt I make it obvious enough that that was my intent? > Are you going to ban them all? The rules are the rules. Period.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
>Are you also going to ban Kosher Yes. The rules are the rules, period.
[Halal and kosher slaughter - GOV.UK](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/halal-and-kosher-slaughter) According to this, neither Halal nor Kosher slaughtering are illegal in the UK, assuming they are performed under the listed restrictions. There are a few countries that prohibit Halal and/or Kosher slaughtering, but it is still permitted in most of the Western world. [Legal aspects of ritual slaughter - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal\_aspects\_of\_ritual\_slaughter#European\_Union) As for your other proposed bans, they would be struck down by the first court to hear the case. You cannot strip a native-born person of his citizenship without cause (and being a Moslem doesn't count for this purpose), nor could you justify a ban on the Bible, some of Shakespeare's plays, etc. etc.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
>Are you also going to ban Kosher Yes. The rules are the rules, period.
[Halal and kosher slaughter - GOV.UK](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/halal-and-kosher-slaughter) According to this, neither Halal nor Kosher slaughtering are illegal in the UK, assuming they are performed under the listed restrictions. There are a few countries that prohibit Halal and/or Kosher slaughtering, but it is still permitted in most of the Western world. [Legal aspects of ritual slaughter - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal\_aspects\_of\_ritual\_slaughter#European\_Union) As for your other proposed bans, they would be struck down by the first court to hear the case. You cannot strip a native-born person of his citizenship without cause (and being a Moslem doesn't count for this purpose), nor could you justify a ban on the Bible, some of Shakespeare's plays, etc. etc.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Yes, we know allowances are made, but if you tried to slaughter animals by this method under any other name you would be in court.
-
> are you banning the practice of religiously-acceptable animal slaughter because Because it is against UK law. If a religion practiced paedophilia would you permit it? Of course not. The law is the law. Period. > So, will ski masks be illegal, Dont be silly. The repression of women for religious reasons is what I am talking about, not head coverings persee, and it takes many forms, from head and body coverings to forbidding them to drive, and have freedom of choice.
-
Quote:
If a religion practiced paedophilia would you permit it
Sorry, but this is really a pure Argument. I don't know any Religion or civilized group which accept paedophilia. So this Argument is really _very_ hypothetical.
> I don't know any Religion or civilized group which accept paedophilia New Guinea: Google[^] Afghanistan: Bacha bazi - Wikipedia[^] Of course you can question whether these are civilised, or religious, but it exists. But of course I chose an extreme and emotive subject to highlight an issue: Does 'religion' give you free reign to break the laws of society?
-
> I don't know any Religion or civilized group which accept paedophilia New Guinea: Google[^] Afghanistan: Bacha bazi - Wikipedia[^] Of course you can question whether these are civilised, or religious, but it exists. But of course I chose an extreme and emotive subject to highlight an issue: Does 'religion' give you free reign to break the laws of society?
-
Pretty nasty stuff I am afraid.
-
> Whether anyone likes it or not, a person born in the UK is a natural-born citizen of the country That is not the case in all countries you know, and can be changed easily. Here you go: Rotherham sex abusers could be deported and have UK citizenship taken away under new law | UK | News | Express.co.uk[^] See? It is simple.
Read the article, not just the headline. The article mentions criminals with dual nationality, which typically means that they are immigrants, i.e. naturalised citizens. A naturalised citizen's rights differ from those of a natural-born citizen, in that a naturalised citizen may lose his/her citizenship under certain circumstances. Note that a naturalised citizen may (in some countries) lose their citizenship for perfectly innocent reasons, e.g. they lived abroad for more than a specified time.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
-
Pretty nasty stuff I am afraid.
-
Read the article, not just the headline. The article mentions criminals with dual nationality, which typically means that they are immigrants, i.e. naturalised citizens. A naturalised citizen's rights differ from those of a natural-born citizen, in that a naturalised citizen may lose his/her citizenship under certain circumstances. Note that a naturalised citizen may (in some countries) lose their citizenship for perfectly innocent reasons, e.g. they lived abroad for more than a specified time.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack. --Winston Churchill
Law is a funny thing, it is created to suit the situation....
-
> I don't know any Religion or civilized group which accept paedophilia New Guinea: Google[^] Afghanistan: Bacha bazi - Wikipedia[^] Of course you can question whether these are civilised, or religious, but it exists. But of course I chose an extreme and emotive subject to highlight an issue: Does 'religion' give you free reign to break the laws of society?
Maybe I'm naive, but no, non of the civilized groups or religions do tolerate things like paedophilia. It is more that "an non restricted www" does support this. Even I think technically it should an easy thing to stop it! And yes, I'm Aware the Problem is not new, but with WWW it becomes another Dimension, which nobody like to stop. Why?
