Paris Burning
Antimulticulture
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20071
By Robert Spencer
November 4, 2005
Riots have now continued for eight days in and around Paris. Thursday night,
November 3, Muslim rioters burned 315 cars. In the previous week, they
torched 177 vehicles and burned numerous businesses, a post office, and two
schools. They have rampaged through twenty towns and shot at police and
firemen. In an episode that summed up the failure of France's efforts to
create a domestic, domesticated Islam, when moderate Muslim leader Dalil
Boubakeur, head of the Paris mosque, tried to restore calm, his car was
pelted with stones and he had to rush away.
The riots began on October 27 when two Muslim teenagers ran from police who
were checking identification papers - why they ran is as yet unclear. The
police did not chase them, but evidently the teenagers thought they were
being chased; they eventually hid in an electrical power sub-station, where
they accidentally electrocuted themselves. That night young Muslims took to
the streets for the first time, throwing rocks and bottles at police,
burning cars, and vandalizing property. The next day rioters, throwing
rocks, bottles, and Molotov cocktails, injured twenty-three police officers
in the Paris suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois. The violence continued over the
next few days: more destroyed vehicles and injured police officers. Then on
Sunday, October 30, a tear gas shell hit a mosque, further enraging local
Muslims; French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy stated somewhat
cryptically, "I am, of course, available to the imam of the Clichy mosque to
let him have all the details in order to understand how and why a tear gas
bomb was sent into this mosque." Since then the riots have continued
unabated, defying appeals for calm from French President Jacques Chirac and
others. The crisis now threatens to swamp the French government.
Why have the riots happened? From many accounts one would think that the
riots have been caused by France's failure to implement Marxism. "The
unrest," AP explained, has highlighted the division between France's big
cities and their poor suburbs, with frustration simmering in the housing
projects in areas marked by high unemployment, crime and poverty." Another
AP story declared flatly that the riots were over "poor conditions in
Paris-area housing projects."
Reuters agreed with AP's attribution of all the unrest to economic
injustice, and added in a suggestion of racism: "The unrest in the northern
and eastern suburbs, heavily populated by North African and black African
minorities, have been fuelled by frustration among youths in the area over
their failure to get jobs and recognition in French society." Deutsche
Presse Agentur called the high-rise public housing in the Paris suburbs "a
long-time flashpoint of unemployment, crime and other social problems."
One might get the impression from this that France is governed by
top-hatted, cigar-smoking capitalists, building their fortunes on the backs
of the poor, rather than by socialists and quasi-socialists who have
actually strained the economy by spending huge amounts of money on health
and welfare programs. Nor does the idea that the rioting has been caused by
economic inequalities explain why Catholics and others who are poor in
France have not joined the Muslims who are rioting. Of course, all the news
agencies have either omitted or mentioned only in passing that the rioters
are Muslims at all. The casual reader would not be able to escape the
impression that what is happening in France is all about economics - and
race.
The areas hardest hit by the riots, according to Reuters, are "home to North
African and black African minorities that feel excluded from French
society." AP shed some light on this feeling of exclusion: "the violence
also cast doubt on the success of France's model of seeking to integrate its
large immigrant community - its Muslim population, at an estimated 5
million, is Western Europe's largest - by playing down differences between
ethnic groups. Rather than feeling embraced as full and equal citizens,
immigrants and their French-born children complain of police harassment and
of being refused jobs, housing and opportunities."
So evidently France's failure to live up to its policy of playing down the
differences between ethnic groups has bred the simmering anger that has now
boiled over in the riots. However, in fact France has done just the opposite
of playing down the differences between ethnic groups. In her seminal
Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, historian Bat Ye'or details a series of
agreements between the European Union and the Arab League that guaranteed
that Muslim immigrants in Europe would not be compelled in any way to adapt
"to the customs of the host countries." On the contrary, the Euro-Arab
Dialogue's Hamburg Symposium of 1983, to take just one of many examples,
recommended that non-Muslim Europeans be made "more aware of the cultural
background of migrants, by promoting cultural activities of the immigrant
communities or 'supplying adequate information on the culture of the migrant
communities in the school curricula.'" Not only that: "Access to the mass
media had to be facilitated to the migrants in order to ensure 'regular
information in their own language about their own culture as well as about
the conditions of life in the host country."[1]
The European Union has implemented such recommendations for decades - so far
from playing down the differences between ethnic groups, they have instead
stood by approvingly while immigrants formed non-assimilated Islamic
enclaves within Europe. Indeed, as Bat Ye'or demonstrates, they have assured
the Arab League in multiple agreements that they would aid in the creation
and maintenance of such enclaves. Ignorance of the jihad ideology among
European officials has allowed that ideology to spread in those enclaves,
unchecked until relatively recently.
Consequently, among a generation of Muslims born in Europe, significant
numbers have nothing but contempt and disdain for their native lands, and
allegiance only to the Muslim umma and the lands of their parents' birth.
Those who continue to arrive in Europe from Muslim countries are encouraged
by the isolation, self-imposed and other-abetted, of the Islamic communities
in Europe to hold to the same attitudes. The Arab European League, a Muslim
advocacy group operating in Belgium and the Netherlands, states as part of
its "vision and philosophy" that "we believe in a multicultural society as a
social and political model where different cultures coexist with equal
rights under the law." It strongly rejects for Muslims any idea of
assimilation or integration into European societies: "We do not want to
assimilate and we do not want to be stuck somewhere in the middle. We want
to foster our own identity and culture while being law abiding and worthy
citizens of the countries where we live. In order to achieve that it is
imperative for us to teach our children the Arabic language and history and
the Islamic faith. We will resist any attempt to strip us of our right to
our own cultural and religious identity, as we believe it is one of the most
fundamental human rights." AEL founder Dyab Abou Jahjah, who was himself
arrested in November 2002 and charged with inciting Muslims in Antwerp to
riot (Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt said that the AEL was "trying
to terrorize the city"[2]), has declared: "Assimilation is cultural rape. It
means renouncing your identity, becoming like the others." He implied that
European Muslims had a right to bring the ideology of jihad and Sharia to
Europe, complaining that in Europe "I could still eat certain dishes from
the Middle East, but I cannot have certain thoughts that are based on
ideologies and ideas from the Middle East."
What kind of ideologies? Perhaps Hani Ramadan, grandson of Muslim
Brotherhood founder Hasan Al-Banna and brother of the famed self-proclaimed
moderate Muslim spokesman Tariq Ramadan, gave a hint when he defended the
traditional Islamic Sharia punishment of stoning for adultery in the Paris
journal Le Monde. In Denmark, politician Fatima Shah echoed the same
sentiments in November 2004. That same month, filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, who
had made a film, Submission, about the oppression of women by Islamic law,
was murdered in Holland by a Muslim, Mohammed Bouyeri. Bouyeri later
declared in court: "I did what I did purely out my beliefs. I want you to
know that I acted out of conviction and not that I took his life because he
was Dutch or because I was Moroccan and felt insulted." In other words, his
problem was religious, not racial: Van Gogh had blasphemed Islam, and so
according to Islamic law he had to die. Significantly, Bouyeri maintained
during his trial that he did not recognize the authority of the Dutch court,
but only of the law of Islam.
How many European Muslims share the sentiments of Mohammed Bouyeri? How many
of these are rioting this week in Paris? Alleviating Muslim unemployment and
poverty will not ultimately do anything to alter this rejection of European
values by growing numbers of people who are only geographically Europeans.
And the problem cannot be ignored. For France is not alone: Muslims in
Århus, Denmark have also been rioting this week. And in France, Sarkozy
recently revealed that this week's riots are just a particularly virulent
flare-up of an ongoing pattern of violence: he told Le Monde that twenty to
forty cars are set afire nightly in Paris' restive Muslim suburbs, and no
fewer than nine thousand police cars have been stoned since the beginning of
2005.
Blame for the riots in France has thus far focused on Sarkozy's tough talk
about ending this violence. On October 19 he declared of the suburbs that
"they have to be cleaned - we're going to make them as clean as a whistle."
Six days after this, Muslim protestors threw stones and bottles at him when
he visited the suburb of Argenteuil. He has been roundly criticized for
calling the rioters "scum"; one of them responded, "We're not scum. We're
human beings, but we're neglected." However, as a solution the same man
recommended only more neglect, saying of the Paris riot police: "If they
didn't come here, into our area, nothing would happen. If they come here it'
s to provoke us, so we provoke back." Others complained of rough treatment
they have received since 9/11 from police searching for terrorists: "It's
the way they stop and search people, kneeing them between the legs as they
put them up against the wall. They get students mixed up with the worst
offenders, yet these young people have done nothing wrong."
But of course, all these problems are exacerbated by the non-assimilation
policy that both the French government and the Muslim population have for so
long pursued: the rioters are part of a population that has never considered
itself French. Nor do French officials seem able or willing to face that
this is the core of their problem today. It is likely that the riots will
result only in intensification of the problems that caused them: if French
officials offer an accommodation to Muslims, it will probably result only in
further intensification of the Islamic identity, often in its most radical
manifestations, among French Muslims. The French response to the riots is
likely to unfold along the lines of a decision by officials in Holland last
May: they declined to ban a book called De weg van de Moslim (The Way of the
Muslim), even though it calls for homosexuals to be thrown head first off
tall buildings. The Amsterdam city council did not want to contravene "the
freedom to express opinions."
That decision is a small example of what the Paris riots demonstrate on a
large scale: the abject failure of the multiculturalist philosophy that
disparate groups can coexist within a nation without any idea that they must
share at least some basic values. The French are paying the price today for
blithely assuming that France could absorb a population holding values
vastly different from that of the host population without negative
consequences for either.
That French officials show no sign, on the eighth day of the Paris riots, of
recognizing that this clash of values is the heart of the problem only
guarantees that before they will be able to say that their difficulties with
their Muslim population are behind them, many more cars will be torched,
many more buildings burned, and many more lives destroyed.
Notes:
[1] Bat Ye'or, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, Fairleigh Dickinson University
Press, 2005. P. 97.
[2] Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, "Ex-Hezbollah charged with inciting rioting,"
London Daily Telegraph, November 30, 2002.
--
Jim
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Western_Nationalist
Union Against Multiculty
"Abolish Multiculty and String Up The Traitors!"
Stan Pierce
"Antimulticulture" <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:01Haf.239$df2....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> Paris Burning
> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20071
> By Robert Spencer
> November 4, 2005
The French political class can be guaranteed to capitulate to these thugs...like
the Dutch...like the post-war British.
The workers will not be so devious when their jobs run out. All those billions
spend on 'education' in the social sciences will have been for naught when the
civil war really gets going.
Roger
news:01Haf.239$df2....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
Robert Spencer is a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law and the
director of Jihad Watch. He is the author of five books, seven monographs,
and hundreds of articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism, including Islam
Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World’s Fastest Growing Faith and
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). He is also an
Adjunct Fellow with the Free Congress Foundation.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Congress_Foundation
While arguably hostile to Islam, particularly to Muslim immigration to the
West, and tolerant of racial and religious profiling in anti-terrorist
efforts, FCF has been cooler to the worldwide War on Terror, and
particularly the Iraq War, than other conservatives. However, it has largely
refrained from endorsing direct criticism of President Bush's efforts in
that regard, or any criticism of the intentions and conduct of US and allied
forces.
Energumen
news:c%Haf.8199$BZ5...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> "Antimulticulture" <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:01Haf.239$df2....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
>> Paris Burning
>> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20071
>> By Robert Spencer
>
> Robert Spencer is a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law and the
> director of Jihad Watch. He is the author of five books, seven monographs,
> and hundreds of articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism, including
> Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World's Fastest Growing
> Faith and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). He
> is also an Adjunct Fellow with the Free Congress Foundation.
>
>
> From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Congress_Foundation
>
> While arguably hostile to Islam, particularly to Muslim immigration to the
> West, and tolerant of racial and religious profiling in anti-terrorist
> efforts, FCF has been cooler to the worldwide War on Terror, and
> particularly the Iraq War, than other conservatives. However, it has
> largely refrained from endorsing direct criticism of President Bush's
> efforts in that regard, or any criticism of the intentions and conduct of
> US and allied forces.
>
In relation to the Iraq war, there is a problem for the "neocons" in getting
to grips with the real problems of Islam and in particular Islamic
immigration to Europe. Because they support the "liberation" and attempted
democratisation in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East they have put
themselves in a situation whereby they cannot acknowledge that Islam
incorporates values that make it incompatable with freedom and democracy,
even if they may agree with Spencer that those values. when viewed in
isolation one by one, are fundamentally wrong. To a neocon, the Middle East
is just waiting to democratise and can do so without abandoning Islam, hence
immigration of Muslims to Europe does not threaten democracy there. To admit
that it does would be to admit that their project in the Middle East is
probably doomed to failure. Hence in many ways and on many occasions
"neocons" actually fall on the same side as the multiculti lefties.
The truth is that nowhere can freedom and Islam coexist for very long,
either one must defeat and suppress the other or some dictatorial form must
come along and defeat and suppress both. Islam is a vigorous and religious
meme set and so is difficult to suppress to the point of elimination (though
the USSR did so within it's borders before it collapsed). Short of genetic
engineering the will to freedom and democracy is impossible to completely
eliminate, since it is coded into us from our hunter gatherer past.
Roger
news:436b522b$0$63068$ed2e...@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
All those words.
All nonsense.
Energumen
What is nonsense about them then? Unless you can post some critique I'll
have to assume that you have no argument at all.
Roger
You don't know anything about human nature or genetics.
I'm not going to argue with a person who is that ignorant of subjects he
writes at great lengths about.
Here's a tip: write what you know. This you don't know.
Energumen
Fine, that's a criticism of one sentence (albeit entirely an ad hominem
logical fallacy). What about the other seven sentences?
Freespeecher
cultures, the following essay may help. Click here:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/15_4_suicide_bombers.html
Jason P
"I am convinced that a number of acts of urban violence would never
have occurred in our country if so many hoodlums had not thought that
one could burn one's neighbour's car with impunity," he said.
The riots have focused attention on the country's sink estates - the
rundown suburbs which ring many of its big cities and which France's
immigration policy has helped turn into ghettos inhabited by poor
immigrants.
France has a Muslim population of about five million - Western Europe's
largest - and mainly of North African origin. They suffer from
discrimination in housing, education and jobs. Drug dealing and petty
crime are often rife on such estates where even police hesitate to
enter.
Commentators noted yesterday that French politicians are finally being
forced to wake up to the fact that people in these areas have been
living in a state of chronic tension for years. The deaths of the two
teenagers last week appears to have been the final straw.
But the sight of bearded men urging rioters to calm down in the name of
Islam on Monday has also triggered a debate about whether Muslim
radicals were exploiting the frustration of the youths.
Bruno Gollnisch, a leader of the anti- immigrant National Front, said:
"The supposed mediation of big brothers [community leaders] crying out
Allah Akbar [God is Greatest] is one sign among many of the
capitulation of the legitimate authorities."
Jason P
Roger Dewhurst
> "Energumen" <ener_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:436b588b$0$63063$ed2e...@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
> > "Roger" <rog...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:gzIaf.8219$BZ5....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> >> "Energumen" <ener_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:436b522b$0$63068$ed2e...@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
> >>> "Roger" <rog...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:c%Haf.8199$BZ5...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
> >>>> "Antimulticulture" <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:01Haf.239$df2....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> >>>>> Paris Burning
> >>>>> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20071
>
>
> I'm not going to argue with a person who is that ignorant of subjects he
> writes at great lengths about.
>
> Here's a tip: write what you know. This you don't know.
I have read many of Energumen's posts. To me it is clear that he knows
enough about genetics to support his arguments.
R
>
>
joe
>
> I have read many of Energumen's posts. To me it is clear that he knows
> enough about genetics to support his arguments.
>
Well, even if he is a professor of genetics he can't support this
ridiculous statement with any scientific facts:
"Short of genetic engineering the will to freedom and democracy is
impossible to completely eliminate, since it is coded into us from our
hunter gatherer past."
Joe
Energumen
Neither can anyone else derive such a thing from genes directly, or disprove
it in the same way, but I can certainly provide you with plenty of evidence
that the urges and desires behind freedom and democracy fit with the
structures of hunter gatherer societies.
joe
> but I can certainly provide you with plenty of evidence
> that the urges and desires behind freedom and democracy fit with the
> structures of hunter gatherer societies.
>
Even if you could support this argument - which I doubt you could - it
would do nothing whatsoever to support your original claim that "the
will to freedom and democracy is...coded into us from our hunter
gatherer past."
Joe
Stan Pierce
"Roger Dewhurst" <dewh...@wave.co.nz> wrote in message
news:dkggp3$kcj$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
(snipped)
> I have read many of Energumen's posts. To me it is clear that he knows
> enough about genetics to support his arguments.
>
> R
It doesn't matter what anyone knows about anything in theory. What is certain
about religious differences is that it will all end in misery and chaos and war.
This is what humans do. We are not abstractions...just bundles of emotions with
a veneer of respectability...some more self controlled than others...that's all.
All history tells you we are in for a long miserable life over allowing Muslims
into Western countries. There is NO controlling it now. One side has to be
slaughtered to be in control or forever live in misery of conflict.
The weed smoking 'academics' in the social engineering industry are now keeping
their heads low over the enormity of what they inflicted on us. Paris is just
the beginning.
The more the media industry keep us arguing over details and the blame game
politics of the mistake, the better the culprits can get on with enjoying their
super somewhere safe. You will notice no doubt that no journalist ever
interviews the perpetrators who advised the governments about the Multicrap
policies in the 1970s.
Check out " The Origins of Multiculturism in Australian Politics 1945-1975"
MARK LOPEZ.
Energumen
Do you believe that we have a different set of genes? Or are you a proponent
of the idea that we are born blank slates?
Roger
Exactly. This is the reason for my comment.
Roger
He said GENETICALLY.
Provide your evidence.
Put it here:
-----------------------------------
Roger Dewhurst
> "joe" <a@b.c> wrote in message news:dkgiq3$80n$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
>
proponent
> of the idea that we are born blank slates?
The PC view is that we are born blank slates and that all the slates are
identical under the skin.
R
>
>
joe
>
> Do you believe that we have a different set of genes? Or are you a proponent
> of the idea that we are born blank slates?
>
I believe that you haven't presented a whit of scientific evidence that
"will to freedom and democracy is [...] coded into us from our hunter
gatherer past", and I believe that you will continue to not do so.
Joe
Roger
That's not true, but then neither is it true that "races" have
characteristics.
Energumen
The evidence is simply that,
A) Hunter gatherer societies are egalitarian and relatively non-hierarchical
(comparred to post-agricultural societies) with high levels of individual
freedom and collective decision making.
B) Our genes have scarcely changed since we were hunter gatherers and hence
adaptations to those social conditions will be part of our genetic make-up.
Which of these do you contest?
Energumen
For those reasons a dictatorial system such as communism will see rebellion
against it when the realistic opportunity to do so presents itself since it
is cutting against the grain of human nature.
Roger Dewhurst
A race is a sub-set of a species or sub-species distinguishable by some
characteristic(s). The characteristic is usually colour in birds, fish,
mammals, and this includes humans. Races almost always develop through
geographic separation. If the separation is long enough is usually results
in speciation which generally results in an inability to interbreed. Races
and generally sub-species are capable of interbreeding. Thus the human
races, or sub-species, are all capable of interbreeding. That they are
capable of interbreeding, and do so, merely shows that all are members of
one species.
I am not sure what part of my comment you allege is untrue. Are you
suggesting that the PC believe that "all the slates are identical under the
skin" is untrue? Is it then implicit that the PC believe that everyone is
different under the skin? If that is the case why are you arguing with
Energumen?
R
>
>
Roger Dewhurst
I do not think that those you are arguing with even accept the concept of
human nature.
R
>
>
Wayne
Out of interest then, can you at least attempt a counter argument?
joe
>
> Out of interest then, can you at least attempt a counter argument?
Absolutely: No "freedom and democracy" gene has been found in humans.
Joe
Wayne
Yet different breeds of dogs, for example, have different
characteristics well beyond physical appearance. One of the greatest
lies pushed upon us in the last half century is that the only
difference between different races of humans is merely cosmetic.
Roger Dewhurst
"joe" <a@b.c> wrote in message news:dkgutp$9dc$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
> Wayne wrote:
> >
> > Out of interest then, can you at least attempt a counter argument?
>
> Absolutely: No "freedom and democracy" gene has been found in humans.
It is not necessary to have a 'freedom and democracy' gene. it is
sufficient only to have a group of genes that control our behaviour in a
manner that tends to lead to democracy and independence of the individual.
Clearly we lack the genes that cause bees and ants to function in totally
dependent colonies. If one is able to accept that the nature of bees and
ants are controlled by their genes why should you have difficulty with the
same sorts of mechanisms operating in humans?
R
fasgnadh
> "Roger" <rog...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uHRaf.9634$7h7....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>"Roger Dewhurst" <dewh...@wave.co.nz> wrote in message
>>news:dkgo9a$3ed$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>>
>>>"Energumen" <ener_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>news:436bd3d3$0$63059$ed2e...@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
>>>
>>>>"joe" <a@b.c> wrote in message
>>>>news:dkgiq3$80n$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
>>>>
>>>>Do you believe that we have a different set of genes?
>>>>Or are you a proponent of the idea that we are born blank slates?
>>>
>>>The PC view is that we are born blank slates and that all the slates are
>>>identical under the skin.
>>
>>That's not true, but then neither is it true that "races" have
>>characteristics.
>
>
> A race is a sub-set of a species or sub-species distinguishable by some
> characteristic(s).
There are no sub-species of homo sapiens sapiens.
You are talking un-scientific nonsense.
The American Association of Anthropologists have
clearly stated that there is no scientific basis
for the concept of 'race'. It is a primitive
superstition similar to belief in a Flat Earth! B^)
"In the United States both scholars and the general public have
been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate
divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences.
With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century,
however, it has become clear that human populations are not
unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups.
Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that
most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
...
This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups
than between them. In neighboring populations there is much
overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions.
Throughout history whenever different groups have come into
contact, they have interbred. "
- American Anthropological Association
> The characteristic is usually colour in birds, fish, mammals,
> and this includes humans.
Complete rubbish, colour in birds is more likely to distinguish
GENDER rather than species. Cows, Deer and Moose can be brown,
Cows can also be white, black and piebald.
Even in the animal kingdom your 'racist' nonsense, and trying to
compare it so species and subspecies.. is laughable.. B^D
http://www.picpop.com/gallery/albums/userpics/1-14-05/laughingatyou.jpg
> Races almost always develop through
> geographic separation. If the separation is long enough is usually results
> in speciation which generally results in an inability to interbreed.
All humans, with the possible exception of little-dick White
Supremacists, are able to 'interbreed'.
We are eternally grateful to the females of the human species
that they refuse to allow you banjo-plucking pig-fucking inbreeds
to pollute the gene pool by swimming in it.
http://www.starterupsteve.com/funny12/japanese.jpg
> That they are capable of interbreeding, and do so,
> merely shows that all are members of one species.
With the possible exception of you.
> I am not sure what part of my comment you allege is untrue.
He could have picked any part.. it is all tripe.
--
"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin
"History shows us that there have been many
struggles between the honest men of England and
those that tyrannized them.
All good laws come as innovation and as constraints upon
the power of the King and Lords."
-Colonal Thomas Rainsborough
Council of the Army, Putney Church, 1647
"We swear by the Southern Cross to stand truly by each other
and fight to defend our rights and liberties."
------------
The Official [Est. June 2000] aus.culture.true-blue FAQ ;
http://geocities.com/fairdinkum_trueblue/faq.html
The true-blue Homestead;
http://geocities.com/fairdinkum_trueblue/
The true-blue Hall Of Fame;
http://www.geocities.com/trueblue_hall_of_fame/index.html
The Tuckerbox;
http://www.geocities.com/true_blue_tucker_box/index.html
-----------
Roger
>
> "Roger" <rog...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uHRaf.9634$7h7....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>> "Roger Dewhurst" <dewh...@wave.co.nz> wrote in message
>> news:dkgo9a$3ed$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>> >
>> > "Energumen" <ener_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> > news:436bd3d3$0$63059$ed2e...@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
>> >> "joe" <a@b.c> wrote in message
>> >> news:dkgiq3$80n$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
>> >>
>> >> Do you believe that we have a different set of genes? Or are you a
>> > proponent
>> >> of the idea that we are born blank slates?
>> >
>> > The PC view is that we are born blank slates and that all the slates
>> > are
>> > identical under the skin.
>>
>> That's not true, but then neither is it true that "races" have
>> characteristics.
>
> A race is a sub-set of a species or sub-species distinguishable by some
> characteristic(s).
In humans, it's skin color, hair texture, and other minor external features.
That's it.
> The characteristic is usually colour in birds, fish,
> mammals, and this includes humans. Races almost always develop through
> geographic separation. If the separation is long enough is usually
> results
> in speciation which generally results in an inability to interbreed.
> Races
> and generally sub-species are capable of interbreeding. Thus the human
> races, or sub-species, are all capable of interbreeding. That they are
> capable of interbreeding, and do so, merely shows that all are members of
> one species.
>
> I am not sure what part of my comment you allege is untrue. Are you
> suggesting that the PC believe that "all the slates are identical under
> the
> skin" is untrue? Is it then implicit that the PC believe that everyone is
> different under the skin? If that is the case why are you arguing with
> Energumen?
Every INDIVIDUAL is different. Not because of the "race" they belong to, but
because they are INDIVIDUALS. There is more variation within "races" than
there is between "races".
Energumen
news:436C0389...@yahoo.com.au...
> Roger Dewhurst wrote:
>> "Roger" <rog...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:uHRaf.9634$7h7....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>"Roger Dewhurst" <dewh...@wave.co.nz> wrote in message
>>>news:dkgo9a$3ed$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>>>
>>>>"Energumen" <ener_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>news:436bd3d3$0$63059$ed2e...@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
>>>>
>>>>>"joe" <a@b.c> wrote in message
>>>>>news:dkgiq3$80n$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you believe that we have a different set of genes? Or are you a
>>>>>proponent of the idea that we are born blank slates?
>>>>
>>>>The PC view is that we are born blank slates and that all the slates are
>>>>identical under the skin.
>>>
>>>That's not true, but then neither is it true that "races" have
>>>characteristics.
>>
>>
>> A race is a sub-set of a species or sub-species distinguishable by some
>> characteristic(s).
>
> There are no sub-species of homo sapiens sapiens.
Rubbish, Homo sapiens idaltu is recognised by the scientific community. The
non recognition of extant subspecies is politics, not science.
>
> You are talking un-scientific nonsense.
>
> The American Association of Anthropologists have
> clearly stated that there is no scientific basis
> for the concept of 'race'. It is a primitive
> superstition similar to belief in a Flat Earth! B^)
They are talking bollocks.
Read,
http://www.goodrumj.com/RFaqHTML.html
Science is not a matter of proof by authority.
>
> "In the United States both scholars and the general public have
> been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate
> divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences.
> With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century,
> however, it has become clear that human populations are not
> unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups.
> Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that
> most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nowhere near 94%, but in any case that is not the point. Races ie
subspecies, are not defined in that way for other animals.
> ...
> This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups
> than between them. In neighboring populations there is much
> overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions.
> Throughout history whenever different groups have come into
> contact, they have interbred. "
>
> - American Anthropological Association
>
>
>> The characteristic is usually colour in birds, fish, mammals,
>> and this includes humans.
>
> Complete rubbish, colour in birds is more likely to distinguish
> GENDER rather than species. Cows, Deer and Moose can be brown,
> Cows can also be white, black and piebald.
>
> Even in the animal kingdom your 'racist' nonsense, and trying to
> compare it so species and subspecies.. is laughable.. B^D
>
> http://www.picpop.com/gallery/albums/userpics/1-14-05/laughingatyou.jpg
Get a clue. The real scientists are suppressed, but they're even now inching
out of the woodwork. You will lose the battle, because you propound
falsehood.
>
>
>
>> Races almost always develop through
>> geographic separation. If the separation is long enough is usually
>> results
>> in speciation which generally results in an inability to interbreed.
>
> All humans, with the possible exception of little-dick White Supremacists,
> are able to 'interbreed'.
Who has argued otherwise?
Wayne
}"Roger Dewhurst" <dewh...@wave.co.nz> wrote in message
}news:dkgslm$c56$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
}>
}> "Roger" <rog...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
}> news:uHRaf.9634$7h7....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
}>> "Roger Dewhurst" <dewh...@wave.co.nz> wrote in message
}>> news:dkgo9a$3ed$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
}>> >
}>> > "Energumen" <ener_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
}>> > news:436bd3d3$0$63059$ed2e...@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net...
}>> >> "joe" <a@b.c> wrote in message
}>> >> news:dkgiq3$80n$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
}>> >>
}>> >> Do you believe that we have a different set of genes? Or are you a
}>> > proponent
}>> >> of the idea that we are born blank slates?
}>> >
}>> > The PC view is that we are born blank slates and that all the slates
}>> > are
}>> > identical under the skin.
}>>
}>> That's not true, but then neither is it true that "races" have
}>> characteristics.
}>
}> A race is a sub-set of a species or sub-species distinguishable by some
}> characteristic(s).
}
}In humans, it's skin color, hair texture, and other minor external features.
}
}That's it.
}
Sure in other species it goes beyond mere appearance but in humans it
stops at melanin. I also have a bridge that you might be interested in
buying - going cheap.
One simple example is the Asian intolerance to alcohol (about 50%
suffer from this) while in Europeans this is almost non-existent due
to the fact that we have used alcohol for millennia. naturally you
believe that this sort of genetic difference only shows up in obvious
and simple physical traits.
}
}> The characteristic is usually colour in birds, fish,
}> mammals, and this includes humans. Races almost always develop through
}> geographic separation. If the separation is long enough is usually
}> results
}> in speciation which generally results in an inability to interbreed.
}> Races
}> and generally sub-species are capable of interbreeding. Thus the human
}> races, or sub-species, are all capable of interbreeding. That they are
}> capable of interbreeding, and do so, merely shows that all are members of
}> one species.
}>
}> I am not sure what part of my comment you allege is untrue. Are you
}> suggesting that the PC believe that "all the slates are identical under
}> the
}> skin" is untrue? Is it then implicit that the PC believe that everyone is
}> different under the skin? If that is the case why are you arguing with
}> Energumen?
}
}Every INDIVIDUAL is different. Not because of the "race" they belong to, but
}because they are INDIVIDUALS. There is more variation within "races" than
}there is between "races".
}
Ah, the current mantra of political correctness as seen in the
sciences - if we say it is so often enough it will be so. History will
show this to be the absurdity it is (even your average peasant in
Africa or Asia knows this isn't so) - a classic case of social
expectations and political correctness leading science by the nose.
Western folly sowing the seeds of our own destruction.
Stan Pierce
>
> "joe" <a@b.c> wrote in message news:dkgutp$9dc$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
>
> It is not necessary to have a 'freedom and democracy' gene. it is
> sufficient only to have a group of genes that control our behaviour in a
> manner that tends to lead to democracy and independence of the individual.
> Clearly we lack the genes that cause bees and ants to function in totally
> dependent colonies. If one is able to accept that the nature of bees and
> ants are controlled by their genes why should you have difficulty with the
> same sorts of mechanisms operating in humans?
>
Because he doesn't understand there is no empirical relation between 'words'
and 'things'. Words are labels we think up to describe something. He
thinks *freedom and democracy* have substance in time and space...in the same
manner as an empirical fact of Genetics. Genetics is a label attached to
proven testing to show existence...the same cannot be said to freedom and
democracy because the meaning changes to suit an individual's attitude. They
remain in the realm of metaphysics...belief systems.
Unless people understand this problem in language in relation to empirical
facts, arguments just go round and round as noise. Can make good literature
sometimes, but solves nothing.
Grantland
Careful there Kamrad, you're spilling sperm on the keyboard. Sick fucking
freak.
Grantland
>
http://www.heretical.com/ofarrell/hell.html
THE O'FARRELL COLUMN
28 SEPTEMBER 2005
The Road to Hell
...Is Paved with Liberal Intentions
Liberals are clear-eyed, cool-headed rationalists, implacably opposed to dogma
and superstition. That's why they reject the fairy-tales of the creationists.
Like this one: The Universe was created in six days and is now only 6,000 years
old. Laughable. Or this one: Noah's ark rode out a world-wide flood for forty
days and nights with a huge collection of animals on board. Ludicrous. Or this
one: Mass immigration by non-whites into White societies will produce peace,
prosperity, and happiness for all. Ridic– Whoops, sorry, my mistake. I'm mixing
my fairy-tales up. That last one belongs to the liberals, not the creationists.
Yes, the truth is that liberals don't really object to dogma, superstition, and
fairy-tales at all, they just object to the wrong kind: the old Christian kind.
With the new kind – their kind – they're perfectly happy, and they hate science
just as much as creationists when it threatens to contradict their irrational
ideas. Race does not exist. IQ tests measure nothing but the prejudices of IQ
testers. Differences in the psychology and behavior of men and women are solely
the product of social conditioning. Those are three of the biggest liberal
dogmas, and for the past forty years, led by pseudo-scientists like Stephen Jay
Gould (Jew), Richard Lewontin (Jew), Leon Kamin (Jew), Steven Rose (Jew), and
Jared Diamond (guess), they've fought tooth-and-nail against the ever-growing
scientific evidence that all three are completely wrong. Race does exist, IQ
tests do measure something real, and men and women are innately different in
psychology and behavior.
More evidence of how liberals can't tolerate true science comes from their
ignorance about one of the most important of all scientific tools: the
controlled experiment. When you have an idea or invention to test, use a small
space to start with and compare what happens with a control where you don't do
anything. One of the advantages of this method is that if something goes wrong,
you can easily contain the problem. Suppose you have a new chemical that might
help crops grow faster and feed more people, but might have unwelcome
side-effects too. You need to test it to make sure it's safe, so the obvious
thing to do is manufacture thousands of gallons of the stuff and use it on every
farm in the country. That way, if every plant turns yellow and dies after two
weeks, shortly before farmers and their families start developing strange and
deadly new cancers, you're up shit creek without a paddle. But you can at least
say that your heart was in the right place.
If you think that sounds wrong, you're obviously not a liberal, because that is
actually a good description of how liberals have been testing the effects of
race mixing. Mass immigration by non-whites is an experiment on a huge scale
with no controls whatsoever, and if it all goes horribly wrong the ordinary
Whites of Europe and America, who never asked for or wanted the experiment to
take place, will be left up shit creek without a paddle. It will be no
consolation that many liberals will be sharing the canoe with them. Other
liberals, with the money to buy their way out of a self-created disaster, may be
able to flee somewhere still safe like Iceland or the far north of Canada. If
so, then maybe after a few years, when the memories of massacre and rape by
non-whites have begun to fade, their crazy liberal religion will re-assert
itself and they'll begin agitating for more "diversity" in the hideously White
societies that surround them.
That's why the native Whites of Iceland and northern Canada, if they have any
sense, will arrest those fleeing liberals as soon as they step off the plane and
deport them straight back where they came from: the racially mixed hell-holes
their criminal ideas and actions helped create. After all, there's no way the
refugees could plead innocence or ignorance. The disastrous effects of mass
immigration are already obvious now in the experiment that took place in the
Pacific on the tiny island of Fiji. Europe and America are big places with many
millions of White inhabitants. It will take a long time to destroy them
completely with mass immigration, and the process has only just started. Fiji
isn't a big place and that's why it's already been destroyed. The old Fiji is
now gone for ever, because the native Fijians are outnumbered by the offspring
of Indian laborers imported under the British Empire. There's huge racial
trouble there and for once the old liberal whine is right: The disaster in Fiji
is Whitey's fault.
Or rather, it's the fault of the ignorant, short-sighted White colonial
politicians who ran Fiji and imported Hindu Indians without the consent of the
island's rightful owners. The same kind of politician imported Hindus from
mainland India into Buddhist Sri Lanka and created another intractable racial
conflict. Sri Lanka is where suicide bombing was invented before it was picked
up by the Palestinians in their racial conflict with the Jews and then sent on
to the London subway and the racial conflict between Whites and non-whites in
Britain. In each case – Fiji, Sri Lanka, Palestine, Britain – a small group of
politicians have ignored common sense and the lessons of history by allowing
different races and religions to mix. In the case of Britain, their task was
made easier by the lies of Jew-corrupted science and psychology about the
realities of race and racial differences.
But there is some good news: Those lies are starting to crumble fast. Many
readers will have heard about the new research into gene-variants underlying
brain development. There are highly significant genetic differences between
Whites and sub-Saharan blacks, for example, and those differences support race
realism about differences between White and black intelligence. I've been
reading liberal papers and watching liberal websites and very little has been
said about this research, which is a sure sign of its significance. Liberals
can't attack the researcher as a racist because he's Chinese, and though they
may be able to delay the even more significant findings he's said to have made,
it really is only a matter of time before the religion of modern liberalism
becomes extinct.
That's because its cherished dogmas about race are being destroyed one by one.
Science is on our side, not theirs, and even the most deluded of white liberals
are starting to realize it. Those Jewish pseudo-scientists like Gould and
Diamond, who knew the truth all along, are now being exposed as the liars and
charlatans they always were. They should thank their lucky stars that this
scientific war won't end in a trial for war crimes, because they're guilty as
hell and share a heavy responsibility for all the Whites raped, murdered, and
beaten by non-whites in Europe and America since the crazy and criminal
experiment of race mixing and mass immigration started back in the last century.
LUKE O'FARRELL
"Whatever advantage these genes give, some groups have it and some don't. This
has to be the worst nightmare for people who believe strongly there are no
differences in brain function between groups," says anthropologist John Hawks of
the University of Wisconsin in Madison, US.
A summary of research into brain evolution by the Chinese scientist Bruce Lahn.
Henny
>Get a clue. The real scientists are suppressed, but they're even now
>inching out of the woodwork. You will lose the battle, because you
>propound falsehood.
You're right! I've seen lesser nations play ice hockey, and if you can't be
up to Canada's standards, there is a genuine genetic defect and they don't
deserve to live. It's nice to see Russians, Finns and Swedes try to mesure
up to our intimidating capabilities.
Heck! I hear that Aussies, Brits and those from India can't even lace on
their skates!
Time to nuke them~!
Roger
news:hbvnm1t36k7d025o7...@4ax.com...
Simple fact that seems beyond you: Humans aren't dogs.
Roger
I didn't say that.
Learn to read.
>
> One simple example is the Asian intolerance to alcohol (about 50%
> suffer from this) while in Europeans this is almost non-existent due
> to the fact that we have used alcohol for millennia. naturally you
> believe that this sort of genetic difference only shows up in obvious
> and simple physical traits.
Prove it.
Roger
Evidence. You have none.
You can't just make up an ARGUMENT and call it evidence. They're not the
same thing.
Roger
If you are referring to me, you are wrong.
Roger
news:dkgrod$t52$1...@theodyn.ncf.ca...
>
>>> The PC view is that we are born blank slates and that all the slates are
>>> identical under the skin.
>
>> That's not true, but then neither is it true that "races" have
>> characteristics.
>
> cultural, they also have dispositions to various diseases that other races
> do not.
You are probably referring to things like sickle cell anemia.
These diseases affect POPULATIONS, not "RACES." There is often overlap, but
they're not the same thing. Note: "It is interesting that in the USA, where
there is no endemic malaria, the incident of sickle cell anaemia amongst
people of African descent is much lower than in West Africa and falling."
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle_Cell_Anemia#Genetics
The sufferers of the illness have a reduced life span. It is believed that
carriers (sickle cell trait) are relatively resistant to malaria. Since the
gene is incompletely recessive, carriers have a few sickle red blood cells
at all times, not enough to cause symptoms, but enough to give resistance to
malaria. Because of this, heterozygotes have a higher fitness than either of
the homozyogotes. This is known as heterozygote advantage.
The malaria parasite has a complex life cycle and spends part of it in red
blood cells. In a carrier, the presence of the malaria parasite causes the
red blood cell to rupture, making the plasmodium unable to reproduce.
Further, the polymerization of Hb affects the ability of the parasite to
digest Hb in the first place. Therefore, in areas where malaria is a
problem, people's chances of survival actually increase if they carry sickle
cell anemia.
Due to the above phenomenon, the illness is still prevalent, especially
among people with recent ancestry in malaria-striken areas, such as Africa,
the Mediterranean, India and the Middle East. In fact, sickle-cell anemia is
the most common genetic disorder among African Americans; about 1 in every
12 is a carrier.
The evolution of sickle-cell anaemia is probably an example of Baldwinian
evolution, whereby humans modify their environment and thus change the
selective pressures. As humans in tropical areas in Africa and elsewhere
developed agriculture and animal husbandry, they expanded the niche for
Anopheles mosquitoes that could transmit the malaria parasite.
It is interesting that in the USA, where there is no endemic malaria, the
incident of sickle cell anaemia amongst people of African descent is much
lower than in West Africa and falling. Without endemic malaria from Africa,
the condition is purely disadvantageous, and will tend to be bred out of the
affected population. See the Price equation article for a simplified
mathematical model of the genetic evolution of sickle cell anemia.
hw...@freeispshares.co.uk
Roger wrote:
> "Karen Gordon" <ar...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
> news:dkgrod$t52$1...@theodyn.ncf.ca...
> >
> >>> The PC view is that we are born blank slates and that all the slates are
> >>> identical under the skin.
> >
> > "Roger" (rog...@hotmail.com) writes:
> >> That's not true, but then neither is it true that "races" have
> >> characteristics.
> >
> > (K): "Races" not only have characteristics - physical, genetic and
> > cultural, they also have dispositions to various diseases that other races
> > do not.
>
> You are probably referring to things like sickle cell anemia.
>
> These diseases affect POPULATIONS, not "RACES." There is often overlap, but
> they're not the same thing.
What about different gestation periods then?
Roger Dewhurst
Energumen appears to be an anthropologist or works in a closely related
field. His proposition (A) could amount to a brief summary of professional
anthropological opinion. Either you accept this opinion or not. Do you?
It is generally accepted that our ancestors were hunter gatherers. You may
wish to argue about the date when our species separated from its ancestral
species but that must have been several million years ago. Since hunter
gatherer society began to be replaced by settled urban societies a mere few
thousand years ago it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that there has
been minimal genetic change since then. The conclusions that Energumen
draws are reasonable.
If you are able to produce any logical and rational argument to dispute his
proposition why not do so?
R
>
>
Roger
I asked for evidence. The "word" of someone whose credentials cannot be
validated is not evidence.
I have been told several times that "I have such-and-such a degree" and they
later say they don't.
Evidence.
>
> It is generally accepted that our ancestors were hunter gatherers. You
> may
> wish to argue about the date when our species separated from its ancestral
> species but that must have been several million years ago. Since hunter
> gatherer society began to be replaced by settled urban societies a mere
> few
> thousand years ago it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that there has
> been minimal genetic change since then. The conclusions that Energumen
> draws are reasonable.
>
> If you are able to produce any logical and rational argument to dispute
> his
> proposition why not do so?
He who proposes it proves it. If he can't prove it, don't propose it.
Simple.
Roger
news:1131197484.1...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Silly or stupid, which is it?
Roger Dewhurst
If you care to read any decent books on birds you will find numerous
references to distict races or sub-species of birds in which the only
distinction is colour and geographic separation.
>Cows, Deer and Moose can be brown,
> Cows can also be white, black and piebald.
Would you accept that Friesian (black and white) and Jersey (brown) cows are
differents breeds? If you do not agree with this perhaps you should try
discussing the matter with a few dairy farmers!
Breed is merely an alternatve word for race. Similar examples are provided
in all, or at least most, domesticated animals. Friesian cows do not look
like Jersey cows because of distinct genetic differences have been developed
in several hundred years of selective breeding.
>
> Even in the animal kingdom your 'racist' nonsense, and trying to
> compare it so species and subspecies.. is laughable.. B^D
We are part of the animal kingdom and humans can be classified like any
other animal or plant. The concepts of genus, species and sub-species apply
to us as much as to any other living organism.
R
Welsh Witch
>
> "Antimulticulture" <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:01Haf.239$df2....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
>> Paris Burning
>> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20071
>> By Robert Spencer
>> November 4, 2005
> (snipped)
>
> The French political class can be guaranteed to capitulate to these thugs...like
> the Dutch...like the post-war British.
> The workers will not be so devious when their jobs run out. All those billions
> spend on 'education' in the social sciences will have been for naught when the
> civil war really gets going.
***************************************
Have they cancelled the French National Anthem yet??? you can imagine what
would happen we we sang a national anthem as bloody as this!! BUT they say
it is this anthem that won the revolution because it is such a wonderful
nationaly cohesive.
I realise what the revolution was all about but the words make a shiver
run down my spine, they could be so apt in the present circumstances?
La Marseillaise - English lyrics
Arise children of the fatherland
The day of glory has arrived
Against us tyranny's
Bloody standard is raised
Listen to the sound in the fields
The howling of these fearsome soldiers
They are coming into our midst***
To cut the throats of your sons and consorts***
To arms citizens Form your battalions
March, march
Let impure blood
Water our furrows
What do they want this horde of slaves
Of traitors and conspiratorial kings?
For whom these vile chains
These long-prepared irons?
Frenchmen, for us, ah! What outrage
What methods must be taken?
It is us they dare plan
To return to the old slavery!
****What! These foreign cohorts!
They would make laws in our courts!
What! These mercenary phalanxes
Would cut down our warrior sons
Good Lord! By chained hands
Our brow would yield under the yoke
The vile despots would have themselves be
The masters of destiny***
Tremble, tyrants and traitors
The shame of all good men
Tremble! Your parricidal schemes
Will receive their just reward
Against you we are all soldiers
If they fall, our young heros
France will bear new ones
Ready to join the fight against you
Frenchmen, as magnanimous warriors
Bear or hold back your blows
Spare these sad victims
That they regret taking up arms against us
But not these bloody despots
These accomplices of Bouillé
All these tigers who pitilessly
Ripped out their mothers' wombs
We too shall enlist
When our elders' time has come
To add to the list of deeds
Inscribed upon their tombs
We are much less jealous of surviving them
Than of sharing their coffins
We shall have the sublime pride
Of avenging or joining them
Drive on sacred patriotism
Support our avenging arms
Liberty, cherished liberty
Join the struggle with your defenders
Under our flags, let victory
Hurry to your manly tone
So that in death your enemies
See your triumph and our glory!
Roger Dewhurst
These are not matters amenable to mathematical proof. There is much in
science that is not. However reasoned argument based on whatever evidence
is available is often the best that we have. At the end of the day in the
real world we have to make decisions based based on whatever evidence we
have or can afford to obtain. For example, mining operation generally
commence not on absolute proof that an orebody of a certain size and grade
exists but on informed opinion that the cost of getting additional proof
will exceed the cost of the probabal error in getting the estimate wrong.
Much of life in the real world is based on decisions like that.
I do not know whether you object to the concept of species in all fields of
the natural world or whether it is only to humanity that you object to
standard zoological classification.
If the whole concept of species in nature is totally alien and unacceptable
to you there is little point in continuing any debate. You are, in a sense,
a flat earther.
If, on the other hand, you accept the concept of species and speciation in
time and space you migh just like to consider what would have happened to
the human species if the human population had stayed at the number living
2000 years ago and that technology had not advanced beyond that of 2000
years ago.
I would suggest that there would have been effective geographic isolation of
Africa from Australia and east Asia and that the peoples living in these
areas would, in the course of a million years or so, have become separate
species unable to interbreed. The people living between African and east
Asia may well have separated into interbreeding sub-species and races much
as the Herring Gull and the Lesser Black Backed Gull are the non
interbreeding end members of a continuum of interbreeding hybrids around the
Arctic Circle.
R
>
>
Henny
>On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 11:33:14 +0000, Stan Pierce wrote:
>
>>
>> "Antimulticulture" <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:01Haf.239$df2....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
>>> Paris Burning
>>> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20071
>>> By Robert Spencer
>>> November 4, 2005
>> (snipped)
>>
>> The French political class can be guaranteed to capitulate to these
>> thugs...like the Dutch...like the post-war British.
>> The workers will not be so devious when their jobs run out. All those
>> billions spend on 'education' in the social sciences will have been for
>> naught when the civil war really gets going.
>***************************************
>Have they cancelled the French National Anthem yet??? you can imagine what
>would happen we we sang a national anthem as bloody as this!! BUT they say
>it is this anthem that won the revolution because it is such a wonderful
> nationaly cohesive.
>I realise what the revolution was all about but the words make a shiver
>run down my spine, they could be so apt in the present circumstances?
>
I find it strange that the French tolerate this crap! Despite what popular
American lore says, they don't roll over easily, are bloody intolerant and I
think that one of the reasons that the Americans don't get along with them
has to do with both of them being similar in many ways.
Opposites attract, Americans and French aren't opposites when it comes down
to being nationalistic.
Despite how many in the USA thought that the French hated the Americans
around the time of the Iraq invasion, a full 15% of them supported Bush.
15% is 9 million. That's far more than the number in Canada who backed Bush
and certainly more than a number of other countries.
Stan Pierce
started Internet web urging other parts of France to join the unrest."
The beginnings of new European War is festering. Copenhagen is being
politically correct in suppressing it's Muslim lawlessness. War by mobile
phone.
You will know something is up when Princess Mary starts ringing her mum about
wanting to come home. Arriving in Sydney to Muslim baggage handlers.
hw...@freeispshares.co.uk
What do you mean?
fasgnadh
> Roger wrote:
>
>><hw...@freeispshares.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:1131197484.1...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>Roger wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Karen Gordon" <ar...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
>>>>news:dkgrod$t52$1...@theodyn.ncf.ca...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>cultural, they also have dispositions to various diseases that other
>>>>>races do not.
Name one genetic characteristic defining 'race'?
There is no scientific basis for 'race', there is no scientific
taxonomy defining 'race'
>>>>
>>>>You are probably referring to things like sickle cell anemia.
>>>>
>>>>These diseases affect POPULATIONS, not "RACES." There is often overlap,
>>>>but
>>>>they're not the same thing.
>>>
Correct, no watch how, typically, racists abandon
each bullshit myth they have picked up and uncritically
believed as soon as it is challenged with science;
>>>What about different gestation periods then?
>>
>>Silly or stupid, which is it?
>
Both, and too thick to realise what a fool it is making
of itself, in public;
>
> What do you mean?
Wayne
Yes, yes, you also mentioned hair colour/texture and general
appearance.
}
}>
}> One simple example is the Asian intolerance to alcohol (about 50%
}> suffer from this) while in Europeans this is almost non-existent due
}> to the fact that we have used alcohol for millennia. naturally you
}> believe that this sort of genetic difference only shows up in obvious
}> and simple physical traits.
}
}Prove it.
}
You either accept evolution in full or you don't. Human beings are not
exempt from it unless you are going to tell me they are the product of
divine creation.
Varying studies have shown differing IQ averages between racial
groups, a recent extensive study has shown personality/temperament are
at least 50% biological - ie genetically based and therefore
inherited. Intelligence (in varying forms) is also partially
genetically based and selectable. Again you have to accept the theory
of evolution and then as not only being applicable to lower animals
but to humans as well. While you may want to believe desperately that
we are now so advanced and intelligent, or perhaps by some other
magical means, as to be exempt from evolution's processes it doesn't
make it so.
Wayne
No and dogs aren't cats, nor are they cows, nor are they chimps, and
so on, yet in each of these the sub species of each has varying
appearance, temperament, intelligence. What is the special force or
clause which makes humans exempt from evolutionary reality. Or is it
merely the fact that dare not speak its name?
Freespeecher
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/11/chirac_appeals_for_calm_as_par.php
Stan Pierce
"Henny" <he...@henny.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9705BBA219...@216.196.97.142...
(snipped)
> Despite how many in the USA thought that the French hated the Americans
> around the time of the Iraq invasion, a full 15% of them supported Bush.
>
> 15% is 9 million. That's far more than the number in Canada who backed Bush
> and certainly more than a number of other countries.
>
Interesting. I bet they were all old world war two Resistance fighters and
their families.
Petzl
It's starting in Australia also
Expect an exploding raghead at a children's event near you!
<http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17153511-2,00.html>
or <http://tinyurl.com/a5dhs>
Petzl
--
LET'S LOOK OUT FOR AUSTRALIA
http://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/
Protecting our way of life from terrorist threat
fasgnadh
> More commentaries on the 'Paris Burning' issue here:
> http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/11/chirac_appeals_for_calm_as_par.php
>
"American renaissance"!? BWAAAAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!
"Raising White Children" and other racist notions. B^p
Roger
news:1131237897.8...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Thanks, but I got my answer.
Roger
All I said was that if you say it, back it up. Have proof.
If you can't back it up, don't say it, or say you can't back it up.
>
> I do not know whether you object to the concept of species in all fields
> of
> the natural world or whether it is only to humanity that you object to
> standard zoological classification.
Humans are a species. There is currently only one species of human: homo
sapien sapien.
There COULD BE more species. There aren't.
>
> If the whole concept of species in nature is totally alien and
> unacceptable
> to you there is little point in continuing any debate. You are, in a
> sense,
> a flat earther.
Bullshit. I am quite aware of biological classification. I have it right.
You don't.
>
> If, on the other hand, you accept the concept of species and speciation in
> time and space you migh just like to consider what would have happened to
> the human species if the human population had stayed at the number living
> 2000 years ago and that technology had not advanced beyond that of 2000
> years ago.
Technology and population size have nothing to do with speciation.
>
> I would suggest that there would have been effective geographic isolation
> of
> Africa from Australia and east Asia and that the peoples living in these
> areas would, in the course of a million years or so, have become separate
> species unable to interbreed.
Perhaps there would. There hasn't.
> The people living between African and east
> Asia may well have separated into interbreeding sub-species and races much
> as the Herring Gull and the Lesser Black Backed Gull are the non
> interbreeding end members of a continuum of interbreeding hybrids around
> the
> Arctic Circle.
Perhaps their could have been. There haven't.
Energumen
For contention A), some papers,
Woodburn, 1982
Lee & DeVore, 1968
Brown, 1991
Flanagan, 1989
Boehm, 1992
Charlton, 1996
Burch and Ellana, 1995
Knauft, 1991
Cashdan, 1980
Barkow et al, 1992
Bird-David, 1992
Diamond, 1992
Bowles and Gintis, 1998
Erdal and Whiten, 1994
Kelly, 1995
Foley, 1995
Dunbar, 1996
Boehm, 1993
If you are serious about wanting evidence, rather than just using it as a
rhetorical device, then get down to a university library and start reading.
Energumen
In other words you're not prepared even to enter the argument but simply to
use a rhetorical device.
>
>
>>
>> I do not know whether you object to the concept of species in all fields
>> of
>> the natural world or whether it is only to humanity that you object to
>> standard zoological classification.
>
> Humans are a species. There is currently only one species of human: homo
> sapien sapien.
Homo sapiens sapiens is a subspecies, Homo sapiens is a species.
>
> There COULD BE more species. There aren't.
Who is arguing that there are?
Energumen
Particularly of interest, from an explanation rather than an evidence
perspective is Christopher Boehm's theory of "reverse dominance hierarchy"
to explain how the egalitarian nature of hunter gatherer societies may have
evolved,
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674006917/104-0451809-2429554?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance
However you asked for evidence that this is the way hunter gatherers are and
you will find plenty of it in the above papers.
The loop of power that is a democratic system (where leaders can be deposed
by popular will) is an excellent example of a reverse dominance hierarchy.
In fact you could argue that hunter gatherer societies simply are democratic
full stop, though in the Athenian direct democracy sense rather than the
elected representatives sense. Though unlike Athens hunter gatherers did not
have slavery or different classes of people. "Citizenship" would simply
correspond to tribal belonging, (or band belonging or foraging party
belonging at the devolved levels of decision making).
Roger
There's no argument to have if one party doesn't back up their claims.
Why argue over bullshit? Only facts and truth are worth the time.
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I do not know whether you object to the concept of species in all fields
>>> of
>>> the natural world or whether it is only to humanity that you object to
>>> standard zoological classification.
>>
>> Humans are a species. There is currently only one species of human: homo
>> sapien sapien.
>
> Homo sapiens sapiens is a subspecies, Homo sapiens is a species.
Correct: only one subspecies: Homo sapiens sapiens
>
>>
>> There COULD BE more species. There aren't.
>
> Who is arguing that there are?
You implied it with "I do not know whether you object to the concept of
Roger
Those wasn't what I was questioning. I was questioning:
"Short of genetic engineering the will to freedom and democracy is
impossible to completely eliminate, since it is coded into us from our
hunter gatherer past."
That's why I said:
> He said GENETICALLY.
>
> Provide your evidence.
>
> Put it here:
Wayne
backed yourself into a corner, Woger.
Roger
And how did I do that? By quoting what I asked for days ago?
How does not getting an answer to my request affected me?
Roedy Green
<Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
>The riots began on October 27 when two Muslim teenagers ran from police who
>were checking identification papers - why they ran is as yet unclear. The
>police did not chase them, but evidently the teenagers thought they were
>being chased; they eventually hid in an electrical power sub-station, where
>they accidentally electrocuted themselves.
Under what sorts of conditions would that lead to riots of this
intensity? I suggest it might be that police were not treating Muslim
citizens equally and fairly and the anger at that boiled over.
You have to look at the bigger picture. The French partly brought
this on themselves with their racism. The odd thing is, Americans are
egging them on to attempt to solve the problem with even more racism.
The riots are similar to the riots in Watts.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
hw...@freeispshares.co.uk
Roedy Green wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 21:48:49 +1100, "Antimulticulture"
> <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
> someone who said :
>
> >The riots began on October 27 when two Muslim teenagers ran from police who
> >were checking identification papers - why they ran is as yet unclear. The
> >police did not chase them, but evidently the teenagers thought they were
> >being chased; they eventually hid in an electrical power sub-station, where
> >they accidentally electrocuted themselves.
>
> Under what sorts of conditions would that lead to riots of this
> intensity? I suggest it might be that police were not treating Muslim
> citizens equally and fairly and the anger at that boiled over.
>
> You have to look at the bigger picture. The French partly brought
> this on themselves with their racism.
How is granting equal French citizenship to millions of non-French not
living in France racist?
And even if the French were racist, isn't the obvious solution for the
non-French to move back to their homelands, just as white victims of
black racism in South Africa are doing, instead of rioting?
Jason P
Roedy Green wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 21:48:49 +1100, "Antimulticulture"
> <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
> someone who said :
>
> >The riots began on October 27 when two Muslim teenagers ran from police who
> >were checking identification papers - why they ran is as yet unclear. The
> >police did not chase them, but evidently the teenagers thought they were
> >being chased; they eventually hid in an electrical power sub-station, where
> >they accidentally electrocuted themselves.
>
> Under what sorts of conditions would that lead to riots of this
> intensity? I suggest it might be that police were not treating Muslim
> citizens equally and fairly and the anger at that boiled over.
>
> You have to look at the bigger picture. The French partly brought
> this on themselves with their racism. The odd thing is, Americans are
> egging them on to attempt to solve the problem with even more racism.
>
> The riots are similar to the riots in Watts.
In Watts, and ten years later in South Central L.A., the authorities
sent in enough para-military and outright military to end the rioting
first!
Questions were asked later, and solutions found afterward, not during
the riots!
Jeeeeezzzzz...man!
The French have waited alreay a full week too long. It may even be too
late for France by this time. In the U.S. this would have been
long-over by now -- the Katrina fiasco notwithstanding. In the U.S.
protesters are tolerated, while rioters clearly are not! There is a big
difference that the French seemed to have missed altogether.
What is it now... one 60 year old man killed for trying to put out a
trash can fire in front of his home, a 57 year old woman burned
severely trying to evacuate a bus under attack, several police stations
burned, a thousand cars burned out, gunfire at police and
firefighters...
It's intolerable and the stupid French have been doing nothing to stop
the madness. Deport the lot of them, whether they were born in France
or not -- stiff jail sentences if it means putting them in prison
camps.
They're finally using rubber bullets, this should have been done a week
ago. Where the hell are the machine guns and the tear gas? How about
some tangle nets, and police taser guns..? Where the hell is the French
Army?
The French are a complete waste of a nation if they can't control this
themselves. Look toward a new armed camp Israeli-style in France after
this. Pray it doesn't spread to Germany, Spain, and England.
Roedy Green
<Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :
> The
>police did not chase them, but evidently the teenagers thought they were
>being chased; they eventually hid in an electrical power sub-station, where
>they accidentally electrocuted themselves.
Seriously, do YOU believe that? Why would you expect the Muslim
community to?
There is some protection even in inside a substation to prevent
accidental electrocution. They would have had to climb up.
Then if teen A fries, does it really make sense that teen B would then
repeat the exact same stupid mistake? Come on.
Whether the teens were murdered or not, it looks suspiciously like
they were or at least one was.
You can see from the extreme racism of Americans posting here, likely
the Paris police had similar attitudes. The riots are analogous to
what happens when police start throwing their weight around unfairly
in black ghettos in the USA.
Riots don't happen in a vacuum. It is absurd to claim the French
police were 100% innocent or that Muslims are inherently violent.
Rule of law must prevail. If you vandalise or commit arson, you are
tried and sentenced. You don't go murdering people just because of
their religion or skin colour.
What I find truly bizarre is more racism being touted as the solution
to a problem CAUSED by racism.
In a riot, people don't behave rationally. They get caught up in the
excitement. You need to cool things down. Inflammatory rhetoric about
killing all the Muslims is not going to help.
Michael Voytinsky
> There is some protection even in inside a substation to prevent
> accidental electrocution. They would have had to climb up.
>
> Then if teen A fries, does it really make sense that teen B would then
> repeat the exact same stupid mistake? Come on.
One of the common causes of electrocution is trying to rescue another
person who is in the process of being electrocuted.
So if stupid A was in contact with a live wire and being electrocuted,
and stupid B tried to pull him away without first making sure that
power is off, he would be joining stupid A in paradise.
> Whether the teens were murdered or not, it looks suspiciously like
> they were or at least one was.
Of course. The police climbed in to the power substation with them,
and held them down against a live wire. Yes. That makes a lot of
sense.
> Riots don't happen in a vacuum.
Nor does much of anything. Another non-point.
> It is absurd to claim the French police were 100% innocent
Depends on what you mean by "innocent". If you mean, after the fact,
it is possible to think of some way they might have handled things
better, then you are right - but in this sense, no one is innocent.
If you mean that they did not perform their duties in an acceptable
(even if imperfect) manner, it is of course possible, but I would still
ask for evidence.
> or that Muslims are inherently violent.
True, it does not.
> What I find truly bizarre is more racism being touted as the solution
> to a problem CAUSED by racism.
Bigotry against Muslims is not racism, but I will take you to mean
"bigotry" where you say "racism".
In the past in North America, the Jews and the Chinese (for example)
were subjected to enormous amounts of bigotry. And yet I cannot think
of any examples of Jews or Chinese rioting and setting ambulances and
nursery schools on fire.
So if bigotry is a factor, it is not the sole factor.
> In a riot, people don't behave rationally. They get caught up in the
> excitement. You need to cool things down. Inflammatory rhetoric about
> killing all the Muslims is not going to help.
No, it is not going to help. Dealing with riots requires a combination
of cooling things down and busting heads, in right proportions. Idiots
going on inflammatry rants are not going to help.
God's Voice
14th century arab.
"Antimulticulture" <Antimult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:01Haf.239$df2....@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> Paris Burning
> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20071
> By Robert Spencer
> November 4, 2005
>
> Riots have now continued for eight days in and around Paris. Thursday
> night,
> November 3, Muslim rioters burned 315 cars. In the previous week, they
> torched 177 vehicles and burned numerous businesses, a post office, and
> two
> schools. They have rampaged through twenty towns and shot at police and
> firemen. In an episode that summed up the failure of France's efforts to
> create a domestic, domesticated Islam, when moderate Muslim leader Dalil
> Boubakeur, head of the Paris mosque, tried to restore calm, his car was
> pelted with stones and he had to rush away.
>
> The riots began on October 27 when two Muslim teenagers ran from police
> who
> were checking identification papers - why they ran is as yet unclear. The
> police did not chase them, but evidently the teenagers thought they were
> being chased; they eventually hid in an electrical power sub-station,
> where
> they accidentally electrocuted themselves. That night young Muslims took
> to
> the streets for the first time, throwing rocks and bottles at police,
> burning cars, and vandalizing property. The next day rioters, throwing
> rocks, bottles, and Molotov cocktails, injured twenty-three police
> officers
> in the Paris suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois. The violence continued over the
> next few days: more destroyed vehicles and injured police officers. Then
> on
> Sunday, October 30, a tear gas shell hit a mosque, further enraging local
> Muslims; French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy stated somewhat
> cryptically, "I am, of course, available to the imam of the Clichy mosque
> to
> let him have all the details in order to understand how and why a tear gas
> bomb was sent into this mosque." Since then the riots have continued
> unabated, defying appeals for calm from French President Jacques Chirac
> and
> others. The crisis now threatens to swamp the French government.
>
> Why have the riots happened? From many accounts one would think that the
> riots have been caused by France's failure to implement Marxism. "The
> unrest," AP explained, has highlighted the division between France's big
> cities and their poor suburbs, with frustration simmering in the housing
> projects in areas marked by high unemployment, crime and poverty." Another
> AP story declared flatly that the riots were over "poor conditions in
> Paris-area housing projects."
>
> Reuters agreed with AP's attribution of all the unrest to economic
> injustice, and added in a suggestion of racism: "The unrest in the
> northern
> and eastern suburbs, heavily populated by North African and black African
> minorities, have been fuelled by frustration among youths in the area over
> their failure to get jobs and recognition in French society." Deutsche
> Presse Agentur called the high-rise public housing in the Paris suburbs "a
> long-time flashpoint of unemployment, crime and other social problems."
>
> One might get the impression from this that France is governed by
> top-hatted, cigar-smoking capitalists, building their fortunes on the
> backs
> of the poor, rather than by socialists and quasi-socialists who have
> actually strained the economy by spending huge amounts of money on health
> and welfare programs. Nor does the idea that the rioting has been caused
> by
> economic inequalities explain why Catholics and others who are poor in
> France have not joined the Muslims who are rioting. Of course, all the
> news
> agencies have either omitted or mentioned only in passing that the rioters
> are Muslims at all. The casual reader would not be able to escape the
> impression that what is happening in France is all about economics - and
> race.
>
> The areas hardest hit by the riots, according to Reuters, are "home to
> North
> African and black African minorities that feel excluded from French
> society." AP shed some light on this feeling of exclusion: "the violence
> also cast doubt on the success of France's model of seeking to integrate
> its
> large immigrant community - its Muslim population, at an estimated 5
> million, is Western Europe's largest - by playing down differences between
> ethnic groups. Rather than feeling embraced as full and equal citizens,
> immigrants and their French-born children complain of police harassment
> and
> of being refused jobs, housing and opportunities."
>
> So evidently France's failure to live up to its policy of playing down the
> differences between ethnic groups has bred the simmering anger that has
> now
> boiled over in the riots. However, in fact France has done just the
> opposite
> of playing down the differences between ethnic groups. In her seminal
> Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, historian Bat Ye'or details a series of
> agreements between the European Union and the Arab League that guaranteed
> that Muslim immigrants in Europe would not be compelled in any way to
> adapt
> "to the customs of the host countries." On the contrary, the Euro-Arab
> Dialogue's Hamburg Symposium of 1983, to take just one of many examples,
> recommended that non-Muslim Europeans be made "more aware of the cultural
> background of migrants, by promoting cultural activities of the immigrant
> communities or 'supplying adequate information on the culture of the
> migrant
> communities in the school curricula.'" Not only that: "Access to the mass
> media had to be facilitated to the migrants in order to ensure 'regular
> information in their own language about their own culture as well as about
> the conditions of life in the host country."[1]
>
> The European Union has implemented such recommendations for decades - so
> far
> from playing down the differences between ethnic groups, they have instead
> stood by approvingly while immigrants formed non-assimilated Islamic
> enclaves within Europe. Indeed, as Bat Ye'or demonstrates, they have
> assured
> the Arab League in multiple agreements that they would aid in the creation
> and maintenance of such enclaves. Ignorance of the jihad ideology among
> European officials has allowed that ideology to spread in those enclaves,
> unchecked until relatively recently.
>
> Consequently, among a generation of Muslims born in Europe, significant
> numbers have nothing but contempt and disdain for their native lands, and
> allegiance only to the Muslim umma and the lands of their parents' birth.
> Those who continue to arrive in Europe from Muslim countries are
> encouraged
> by the isolation, self-imposed and other-abetted, of the Islamic
> communities
> in Europe to hold to the same attitudes. The Arab European League, a
> Muslim
> advocacy group operating in Belgium and the Netherlands, states as part of
> its "vision and philosophy" that "we believe in a multicultural society as
> a
> social and political model where different cultures coexist with equal
> rights under the law." It strongly rejects for Muslims any idea of
> assimilation or integration into European societies: "We do not want to
> assimilate and we do not want to be stuck somewhere in the middle. We want
> to foster our own identity and culture while being law abiding and worthy
> citizens of the countries where we live. In order to achieve that it is
> imperative for us to teach our children the Arabic language and history
> and
> the Islamic faith. We will resist any attempt to strip us of our right to
> our own cultural and religious identity, as we believe it is one of the
> most
> fundamental human rights." AEL founder Dyab Abou Jahjah, who was himself
> arrested in November 2002 and charged with inciting Muslims in Antwerp to
> riot (Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt said that the AEL was "trying
> to terrorize the city"[2]), has declared: "Assimilation is cultural rape.
> It
> means renouncing your identity, becoming like the others." He implied that
> European Muslims had a right to bring the ideology of jihad and Sharia to
> Europe, complaining that in Europe "I could still eat certain dishes from
> the Middle East, but I cannot have certain thoughts that are based on
> ideologies and ideas from the Middle East."
>
> What kind of ideologies? Perhaps Hani Ramadan, grandson of Muslim
> Brotherhood founder Hasan Al-Banna and brother of the famed
> self-proclaimed
> moderate Muslim spokesman Tariq Ramadan, gave a hint when he defended the
> traditional Islamic Sharia punishment of stoning for adultery in the Paris
> journal Le Monde. In Denmark, politician Fatima Shah echoed the same
> sentiments in November 2004. That same month, filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, who
> had made a film, Submission, about the oppression of women by Islamic law,
> was murdered in Holland by a Muslim, Mohammed Bouyeri. Bouyeri later
> declared in court: "I did what I did purely out my beliefs. I want you to
> know that I acted out of conviction and not that I took his life because
> he
> was Dutch or because I was Moroccan and felt insulted." In other words,
> his
> problem was religious, not racial: Van Gogh had blasphemed Islam, and so
> according to Islamic law he had to die. Significantly, Bouyeri maintained
> during his trial that he did not recognize the authority of the Dutch
> court,
> but only of the law of Islam.
>
> How many European Muslims share the sentiments of Mohammed Bouyeri? How
> many
> of these are rioting this week in Paris? Alleviating Muslim unemployment
> and
> poverty will not ultimately do anything to alter this rejection of
> European
> values by growing numbers of people who are only geographically Europeans.
> And the problem cannot be ignored. For France is not alone: Muslims in
> Århus, Denmark have also been rioting this week. And in France, Sarkozy
> recently revealed that this week's riots are just a particularly virulent
> flare-up of an ongoing pattern of violence: he told Le Monde that twenty
> to
> forty cars are set afire nightly in Paris' restive Muslim suburbs, and no
> fewer than nine thousand police cars have been stoned since the beginning
> of
> 2005.
>
> Blame for the riots in France has thus far focused on Sarkozy's tough talk
> about ending this violence. On October 19 he declared of the suburbs that
> "they have to be cleaned - we're going to make them as clean as a
> whistle."
> Six days after this, Muslim protestors threw stones and bottles at him
> when
> he visited the suburb of Argenteuil. He has been roundly criticized for
> calling the rioters "scum"; one of them responded, "We're not scum. We're
> human beings, but we're neglected." However, as a solution the same man
> recommended only more neglect, saying of the Paris riot police: "If they
> didn't come here, into our area, nothing would happen. If they come here
> it'
> s to provoke us, so we provoke back." Others complained of rough treatment
> they have received since 9/11 from police searching for terrorists: "It's
> the way they stop and search people, kneeing them between the legs as they
> put them up against the wall. They get students mixed up with the worst
> offenders, yet these young people have done nothing wrong."
>
> But of course, all these problems are exacerbated by the non-assimilation
> policy that both the French government and the Muslim population have for
> so
> long pursued: the rioters are part of a population that has never
> considered
> itself French. Nor do French officials seem able or willing to face that
> this is the core of their problem today. It is likely that the riots will
> result only in intensification of the problems that caused them: if French
> officials offer an accommodation to Muslims, it will probably result only
> in
> further intensification of the Islamic identity, often in its most radical
> manifestations, among French Muslims. The French response to the riots is
> likely to unfold along the lines of a decision by officials in Holland
> last
> May: they declined to ban a book called De weg van de Moslim (The Way of
> the
> Muslim), even though it calls for homosexuals to be thrown head first off
> tall buildings. The Amsterdam city council did not want to contravene "the
> freedom to express opinions."
>
> That decision is a small example of what the Paris riots demonstrate on a
> large scale: the abject failure of the multiculturalist philosophy that
> disparate groups can coexist within a nation without any idea that they
> must
> share at least some basic values. The French are paying the price today
> for
> blithely assuming that France could absorb a population holding values
> vastly different from that of the host population without negative
> consequences for either.
>
> That French officials show no sign, on the eighth day of the Paris riots,
> of
> recognizing that this clash of values is the heart of the problem only
> guarantees that before they will be able to say that their difficulties
> with
> their Muslim population are behind them, many more cars will be torched,
> many more buildings burned, and many more lives destroyed.
>
> Notes:
>
> [1] Bat Ye'or, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, Fairleigh Dickinson University
> Press, 2005. P. 97.
>
> [2] Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, "Ex-Hezbollah charged with inciting rioting,"
> London Daily Telegraph, November 30, 2002.
>
> --
> Jim
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Western_Nationalist
> Union Against Multiculty
>
> "Abolish Multiculty and String Up The Traitors!"
>
>
>
>