Hooligans against Salafists : Germany

Dr Kynes said:

if germans want germany to be german instead of a pressurcooker of mohammedan sectarian agitators, then germans should have the right to protest their govt's policies without being inundated with cries of "That's Racist!!" from the left wing moonbats.

the noteable lack of actual racism in that "right wing racist" protest simply demonstrates that the left wing is a one trick pony, and vice is a reprehensible example of leftist "journalism".

Click to expand...

You are aware of how much the political structure of Germany is "left", right?

It should not be a surprise the journalist is of Soc-Dem leanings. I will agree--on the surface--the application of the word "racism" may be excessive (although we did not see everything that happened), but in a country that has a history with real racism to the extent of genocide, should it be odd for the citizens to be hyper-sensitive to the topic? While you may see it as just another march, they have visceral memories of similar marches made by equally dumb people who made better criminals than productive citizens. It is not the action, but the potential which he is probably concerned with...or does that seem illogical to you?

In any event, this is not a matter of "lefties" and "righties", and I fail to see how you can make that connection much like those hooligans who asked if inquirers were "from the Left-Party" or blaming their problems on "liberal media". The issue there is how fear can drive even a tolerant person into the fold of radicals, with the larger question being how to achieve integration and what to do in the event immigrants fail to do so, to the extent they disregard the base laws of the land in which they reside.

heckler73 said:

Perhaps that doesn't explain the particular issue surrounding Vilks.
This does...

Is this an example of moderate Islam? It's about as sensible as the Westboro hicks. Just more proof that religion causes serious mental problems.

Click to expand...

"Religion makes the most normally decent of people do the most indecent things" - Can't Remember who by

heckler73 said:

You are aware of how much the political structure of Germany is "left", right?

It should not be a surprise the journalist is of Soc-Dem leanings. I will agree--on the surface--the application of the word "racism" may be excessive (although we did not see everything that happened), but in a country that has a history with real racism to the extent of genocide, should it be odd for the citizens to be hyper-sensitive to the topic? While you may see it as just another march, they have visceral memories of similar marches made by equally dumb people who made better criminals than productive citizens. It is not the action, but the potential which he is probably concerned with...or does that seem illogical to you?

In any event, this is not a matter of "lefties" and "righties", and I fail to see how you can make that connection much like those hooligans who asked if inquirers were "from the Left-Party" or blaming their problems on "liberal media". The issue there is how fear can drive even a tolerant person into the fold of radicals, with the larger question being how to achieve integration and what to do in the event immigrants fail to do so, to the extent they disregard the base laws of the land in which they reside.

Click to expand...

the salient question is who should "integrate"?

should the german people be forced to convert to mohammedanism, learn arabic, and embrace sharia?

the newcomers and asylum seekers didnt come to germany because syria algeria and sudan were so groovy they felt the need to share their joy with the world, they left sandland because it SUCKS

if they refuse to integrate into german society, and germany is forced to change it's very nature to accomodate their outrageous demands, then germany will become just another failed state, a colder wetter version of sandland.

just like the US and our illegal immigration problems from latin america.

much of southern california is indistinguishable from the worst parts of tijuana, including the corruption, violence and lawlessness.

large portions of southern california are now simply mexico with marginally fewer donkey shows, but slightly better beer.

i for one LOVE mexico, but i sure as fuck wouldnt want to live in TJ, but thats the part of mexico we are getting.

if germany were receiving asylum seekers from syria algeria and sudan who brought with them the sort of cultural influences that were so beloved by the orientalists of the 19th century, i doubt the germans would mind, but they aint getting quaint customs, elaborate carpets, exotic foods, belly dancers and erotic poetry, they are getting salafism, wahhabism and sharia.

the third world exports the worst parts of their societies into the heart of nations which dont want their bullshit, and this causes conflict.

but when discussing this problem, the opposing side can only scream "That's Racist!!" because they have no rational argument for forcing people to accept alien social and cultural norms that civilized people find objectionable.

if Ye Olde Tyme Roman Catholicism made a come back, you can bet your bottom euro that the left would have some choice things to say about the inquisition, witch burnings, forced conversions and religious theocratic rule, but as long as it's the servants of mahound, the left obliges the mohammedan pretense of victim status.

My disgust attitude toward fanatics, this is also racism?

Harrekin said:

"Religion makes the most normally decent of people do the most indecent things" - Can't Remember who by

Click to expand...

Perhaps Steven Weinberg, physicist?
With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion.

Another interesting quote from him:

I have a friend — or had a friend, now dead — Abdus Salam, a very devout Muslim, who was trying to bring science into the universities in the Gulf states and he told me that he had a terrible time because, although they were very receptive to technology, they felt that science would be a corrosive to religious belief, and they were worried about it... and damn it, I think they were right. It is corrosive of religious belief, and it's a good thing too.

Harrekin said:

"Religion makes the most normally decent of people do the most indecent things" - Can't Remember who by

Click to expand...

>>implying mohammedan fundamentalists are normally decent...

normally decent people dont go to art shows just to demand that the artist be killed, even if the artist is a pointless hack like vilks.

i dont go to the local mosque and attack the imam during his sermon.

i dont move to a moslem country and demand they accommodate my religion, my foreign language, my heavily pork based diet and my lust for degenerate pornography.

but moslem fundamentalists expect that they have the right to do all this and more because their degenerate death cult tells them they deserve to rule the world.

MiG pilot said:

My disgust attitude toward fanatics, this is also racism?

Click to expand...

as long as you express disgust against christians and jews, then it's perfectly acceptable. (or serbs..)

the behaviour you deplore, when coming from a mohammedan, is protected, thus you become a racist.

I would not mind if a fanatic would call me a racist.

Dr Kynes said:

but moslem fundamentalists expect that they have the right to do all this and more because their degenerate death cult tells them they deserve to rule the world.

Click to expand...

And yet, a Muslim can be a physicist (or scientist) without issue. So can Christians and Hindus and Sikhs, and they don't create problems in their locales. They don't burden their gov'ts with rights, real or otherwise. So how does one distinguish between these relatively benign "spiritual" types and the "fundamentalists"?

It is the perception of a deviant minority which colours the whole in the minds of the fearful because they don't allow for a wider perspective in analysis. There is no room in their minds for contrary examples. This breeds further isolation and/or segregation (self-imposed or external), which only feeds back on the fear.
That cycle is what builds the potential. And in that statement I mean all sides.

Winding back to your SoCal comment; are those lawless 'latin americans' not subject to the same laws as everyone else? Are they making demands of the gov't to accomodate them to the extent it infringes upon your ability to exist or pursue a livelihood? Maybe you're mistaking the natural, temporal, demographic changes of neighbourhoods with some nefarious influx of immigrants creating displacement. Furthermore, do you lump all 'latin american' immigrants into the same pot because of a minority element within their communities?

By that logic, all Americans are merciless warrior robots looking to steal all the wealth that can be had. I can't believe you actually mean that, though, so could you clarify? I do understand the reason for concern with unchecked entrants, but I fail to see the benefit for you to eschew them entirely because of their bad elements. Such attitudes only help to stoke the fire of calamity. I also fail to see the comparison between immigrants who literally have no place to go and are piling up in 'holding facilities', with an established, integrated community which allows them a cultural mechanism by which to join an adoptive society in a productive manner.

Integration begins with communication. That is perhaps where we all fail in some aspect. Just like chaos (i.e. infinitely random) is impossible, so is perfection.

In the case of Muslims who refuse to integrate, there may need to be some extra effort, along with ridicule. That latter part may seem odd to some, but sarcastic humour can have amazing effects in breaking one's 'program' if applied strategically. I believe in the case of Salafists, etc. that may be a good approach. If they are made aware the developed western world will never take them seriously to the extent in which they view themselves, then it may help to tear down some of the walls which divide. To some degree, I believe that is the greater purpose of things like "Draw Mohammed Day". You do know some devout Muslims have no problem with depictions of Mohammed, right?
I mean, so long as they aren't pics of him sucking cock... not that I have any problems with that if that's what Mohammed wants to do, and so long as the owner of that cock is of consenting age. No sucking of kiddie cock allowed!

heckler73 said:

And yet, a Muslim can be a physicist (or scientist) without issue. So can Christians and Hindus and Sikhs, and they don't create problems in their locales. They don't burden their gov'ts with rights, real or otherwise. So how does one distinguish between these relatively benign "spiritual" types and the "fundamentalists"?

It is the perception of a deviant minority which colours the whole in the minds of the fearful because they don't allow for a wider perspective in analysis. There is no room in their minds for contrary examples. This breeds further isolation and/or segregation (self-imposed or external), which only feeds back on the fear.
That cycle is what builds the potential. And in that statement I mean all sides.

Winding back to your SoCal comment; are those lawless 'latin americans' not subject to the same laws as everyone else? Are they making demands of the gov't to accomodate them to the extent it infringes upon your ability to exist or pursue a livelihood? Maybe you're mistaking the natural, temporal, demographic changes of neighbourhoods with some nefarious influx of immigrants creating displacement. Furthermore, do you lump all 'latin american' immigrants into the same pot because of a minority element within their communities?

By that logic, all Americans are merciless warrior robots looking to steal all the wealth that can be had. I can't believe you actually mean that, though, so could you clarify? I do understand the reason for concern with unchecked entrants, but I fail to see the benefit for you to eschew them entirely because of their bad elements. Such attitudes only help to stoke the fire of calamity. I also fail to see the comparison between immigrants who literally have no place to go and are piling up in 'holding facilities', with an established, integrated community which allows them a cultural mechanism by which to join an adoptive society in a productive manner.

Integration begins with communication. That is perhaps where we all fail in some aspect. Just like chaos (i.e. infinitely random) is impossible, so is perfection.

In the case of Muslims who refuse to integrate, there may need to be some extra effort, along with ridicule. That latter part may seem odd to some, but sarcastic humour can have amazing effects in breaking one's 'program' if applied strategically. I believe in the case of Salafists, etc. that may be a good approach. If they are made aware the developed western world will never take them seriously to the extent in which they view themselves, then it may help to tear down some of the walls which divide. To some degree, I believe that is the greater purpose of things like "Draw Mohammed Day". You do know some devout Muslims have no problem with depictions of Mohammed, right?
I mean, so long as they aren't pics of him sucking cock... not that I have any problems with that if that's what Mohammed wants to do, and so long as the owner of that cock is of consenting age. No sucking of kiddie cock allowed!

Click to expand...

no. all immigrants are not the same.

some come to a new land looking for a better life.

only a fool would think that fleeing somalia and coming to germany france or the US, yet dragging with them all the baggage, gris-gris and corruption of somalia would do anything but transplant the very cancer they are fleeing in a new nation.

the leftist and the post-modernist would have us believe that creating enclaves of third world "culture" in civilized nations will improve the civilized nation, creating some sort of "multicultural" utopia, yet time and time again the result has been the same, generations of immigrants ensconced in a putrescent cyst of backwardness illiteracy and crime.

only by freeing themselves from the retrograde cultural influences that trap the victims in a cycle of failure can the descendants of those immigrants enjoy the benefits of the society their parents and grandparents sought to escape to.

but to the leftist and the post-modernist, the plight of those trapped in these enclaves of backwardness and self-destructive identity politics are irrelevant.

the leftists and post-modernists have openly declared their desire for all the world to become a homogenous world "culture" which, not coincidentally, is devoid of european influences, because, as we have all been told so many times, "white people are evil"

the only way to defeat the evil cultural dominance of "YT" is to erode and dilute european societies with outside influences until eventually, germanness, frenchness, englishness, irishness, swedishness, americanness etc etc become mere footnotes of history.

multiculturalism has become a newspeak buzzword that doesnt bear any resemblance to what it pretends to mean, open and accepting societies where you can be a christian, and irishman, a jew, a hindu, a german, a moslem, a frenchman, and italian, a jamaican, an atheist or whatever you like, but rather you must accept the faceless formless SAMENESS of the lowest common denominator, or youre a racist.

leftism created post-moderism, and it's attendant rejection of all value judgements as a tool to erode and devalue everything until all human society becomes a meaningless self-referential series of ironic affectations, a global hipsterism that creates nothing, and is interested only in destroying the very culture it parasitizes.

no thought, no philosophy, no art, so science, just endless waves of self-absorbed numbskulls doing their damndest to drive back 10,000 years of human progress in a self-indulgent orgy of ignorance, twatter posts and spray on tans.

Dr Kynes said:

no. all immigrants are not the same.

some come to a new land looking for a better life.

only a fool would think that fleeing somalia and coming to germany france or the US, yet dragging with them all the baggage, gris-gris and corruption of somalia would do anything but transplant the very cancer they are fleeing in a new nation.

the leftist and the post-modernist would have us believe that creating enclaves of third world "culture" in civilized nations will improve the civilized nation, creating some sort of "multicultural" utopia, yet time and time again the result has been the same, generations of immigrants ensconced in a putrescent cyst of backwardness illiteracy and crime.

only by freeing themselves from the retrograde cultural influences that trap the victims in a cycle of failure can the descendants of those immigrants enjoy the benefits of the society their parents and grandparents sought to escape to.

but to the leftist and the post-modernist, the plight of those trapped in these enclaves of backwardness and self-destructive identity politics are irrelevant.

the leftists and post-modernists have openly declared their desire for all the world to become a homogenous world "culture" which, not coincidentally, is devoid of european influences, because, as we have all been told so many times, "white people are evil"

the only way to defeat the evil cultural dominance of "YT" is to erode and dilute european societies with outside influences until eventually, germanness, frenchness, englishness, irishness, swedishness, americanness etc etc become mere footnotes of history.

multiculturalism has become a newspeak buzzword that doesnt bear any resemblance to what it pretends to mean, open and accepting societies where you can be a christian, and irishman, a jew, a hindu, a german, a moslem, a frenchman, and italian, a jamaican, an atheist or whatever you like, but rather you must accept the faceless formless SAMENESS of the lowest common denominator, or youre a racist.

leftism created post-moderism, and it's attendant rejection of all value judgements as a tool to erode and devalue everything until all human society becomes a meaningless self-referential series of ironic affectations, a global hipsterism that creates nothing, and is interested only in destroying the very culture it parasitizes.

no thought, no philosophy, no art, so science, just endless waves of self-absorbed numbskulls doing their damndest to drive back 10,000 years of human progress in a self-indulgent orgy of ignorance, twatter posts and spray on tans.

Click to expand...

Emigration=bad

Did I summarize correctly?

Surely you must believe that for a nation state to be successful it must have some forms of emigration and different forms of individuals within it. Or do you really prefer that like keeps with like?

Not a troll, trying to understand what you think is acceptable. Make immigrants assimilate? What is your ideal America?

You also sound scared of the homogenization of the planet, I can understand if I had any nationalism or racial pride that this would be intimidating. Perhaps you should stop being proud of something you didn't accomplish if those are your feelings.

Dr Kynes said:

the salient question is who should "integrate"?

should the german people be forced to convert to mohammedanism, learn arabic, and embrace sharia?

Click to expand...

let's see here...

current muslim population in germany: 5%

projected muslim population in 20 years: 7.1%

i don't think your rhetoric has any basis in reality whatsoever, kkkynes. unless, of course, germany is going to submit to 7% of the population.

Dr Kynes said:

the leftists and post-modernists have openly declared their desire for all the world to become a homogenous world "culture" which, not coincidentally, is devoid of european influences, because, as we have all been told so many times, "white people are evil"

Click to expand...

i really can't believe you would accuse anyone of wanting homogeneity after you just defended the ku klux klan motto of "keeping america american" and "keeping germany german".

it is people like you who want homogeneity of whites, because in your own words all examples of black culture are "retrograde" and you wish to defend "real america" from the "multicultural wasteland of bullshit".

Dr Kynes said:

all black african cultures are simply footnotes, quaint examples of backward social structures, retrograde technology, and ultimately, failure.

Click to expand...

Dr Kynes said:

defend REAL AMERICA from the multicultural wasteland of bullshit

Click to expand...

your second quote came from when you were defending the john birch society, a racist group which wishes to restrict immigration and keep america under its supposed "white christian identity", much the same way your hero rushton speaks up for defending america's "european identity and judeo christian heritage" from "islam, immigrants, and blacks".

please do not try to accuse others of the racism and homogeneity that you espouse.

Dr Kynes said:

no. all immigrants are not the same.

some come to a new land looking for a better life.

Click to expand...

AlecTheGardener said:

Emigration=bad

Did I summarize correctly?

Click to expand...

I read that as our reaction to immigration as bad, not immigration itself. I may be wrong but I think you unfairly put a position on him that he didn't take.

I can disagree with his sentiment, I'm more of an open border person. I feel that as an earthling, I should be able to freely travel the earth as I please as long as I don't infringe upon others. That doesn't mean I read his words and jump to the conclusion that he wants to build a wall around the country.

ginwilly said:

think you unfairly put a position on him that he didn't take.

Click to expand...

no, alec read between the lines because he, unlike you, is a smart person.

no one who is not in favor of restrictive immigration policy defends the john birch society like kynes does. and a simple search of the word "border" along with his name shows how obsessed he is with sealing that fucker off tight.

AlecTheGardener said:

Emigration=bad

Did I summarize correctly?

Click to expand...

No, you did not.
fleeing a backward shithole by immigrating to another country is a great idea.
dragging all the fail of somalia, syria, guatamala or laos with you when you flee is COUNTER PRODUCTIVE

even an idiot recognizes this simple fact, but leftists are apparently stupider than the average idiot.

if somalia were such a great place to live, why would somalis flee to america (or france or germany etc) in the first place?
if, as we must assume, those somalis were trying to escape the wretched life they had in somalia, WHY THE FUCK would i want them to bring that same shit with them to my country?

therefore, we must assume that lefties WANT the US, france germany etc to become MORE LIKE SOMALIA, but they cant very well make that statement so the instead cry "That's Racist!!" and invent other avenues to ensure that the beautiful somali culture of sectarian violence, warlords, janjaweed murderers, famine, failed marxism, successful anarchy and festive holiday cannibalism are protected and allowed to flourish here in the US

meanwhile, other somalis who escaped that wretched land and made it to america's shores DONT WANT TO GO BACK, and would rather become americans like so many other immigrants have before.
those guys we should keep.

AlecTheGardener said:

Surely you must believe that for a nation state to be successful it must have some forms of emigration and different forms of individuals within it. Or do you really prefer that like keeps with like?

Click to expand...

NO. i do not believe that immmigration = success.

success encourages immigration. thats why so few people build rickety rafts in florida in the hopes of paddling through shark infested waters to the marxist utopia of cuba.

failed states drive people out, successful states attract people, but if the successful states allow the immigrants to bring the very fail that destroyed their last home, how long will they remain successful?
adding in the thinly veiled "That's Racist!!" clause at the end was transparent.

AlecTheGardener said:

Not a troll, trying to understand what you think is acceptable. Make immigrants assimilate? What is your ideal America?

Click to expand...

those who dont assimilate are NOT immigrants. they are visitors, or squatters.

AlecTheGardener said:

You also sound scared of the homogenization of the planet, I can understand if I had any nationalism or racial pride that this would be intimidating. Perhaps you should stop being proud of something you didn't accomplish if those are your feelings.

Click to expand...

i am not "scared" of homogenization, i reject it.

if the standard view of "multiculturalism" were the same today as it was in the 18th century europe would still be "colonizing" and "civilizing" the third world in an attempt to force their social norms on others, instead the post-modernists have flipped the script and are trying to force third world values on the rest of us.

your rejection of your own cultural norms, your own social structures and the foundations of the very society that allows you the self-indulgent freedom to reject it, is YOUR problem, not mine.

if you want to be a sad little hipster and prove to everyone how unbiased you are by embracing everything that you know is crap, then wallow away.

if you eventually realize that your entire worldview has been carefully manufactured by post-modern deconstructionists for the express purpose of making you a compliant consumer and a willing participant in your own destruction, then maybe you can join the grownups at the table.

until then, i recommend self-reflection.

ponder WHY you equate being part of the greatest and most successful society in history is wrong, consider why the acheivements of your grandparents should bring you shame, and contemplate what the world might look like if everyone actually embraced the contrived self-referential hipsterism that you have, where everything is equally important and equally valued, which naturally means NOTHING has value.

if you think universal dadaism is a utopia, then you werent gonna contribute anything to society anyhow.

UncleBuck said:

no, alec read between the lines because he, unlike you, is a smart person.

no one who is not in favor of restrictive immigration policy defends the john birch society like kynes does. and a simple search of the word "border" along with his name shows how obsessed he is with sealing that fucker off tight.

Click to expand...

Reading between the lines is your specialty isn't it?

Just because you make assumptions of people you don't know at all doesn't make you right, just makes you a pretentious and presumptuous ass. My PSA for the day.

ginwilly said:

Reading between the lines is your specialty isn't it?

Just because you make assumptions of people you don't know at all doesn't make you right, just makes you a pretentious and presumptuous ass. My PSA for the day.

Click to expand...

i didn't have to make any assumptions, i simply recalled kynes' long-winded defense of the john birch society.

https://www.rollitup.org/t/john-birch-society.542346/page-9#post-7677086

The society opposed the 1960s civil rights movement and claimed the movement had communists in important positions. In the latter half of 1965, the JBS produced a flyer titled "What's Wrong With Civil Rights?", which was used as a newspaper advertisement.[15][16] In the piece, one of the answers was: "For the civil rights movement in the United States, with all of its growing agitation and riots and bitterness, and insidious steps towards the appearance of a civil war, has not been infiltrated by the Communists, as you now frequently hear. It has been deliberately and almost wholly created by the Communists patiently building up to this present stage for more than forty years."[17] The society opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, claiming it violated the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and overstepped individual states' rights to enact laws regardingcivil rights. The society opposes "one world government", and it has an immigration reduction view on immigration reform.

also, i recalled his repeated defenses of white supremacist phillipe rushton and the causes he advocates for.

In 2009 Rushton spoke at the Preserving Western Civilization conference in Baltimore. It was organized by Michael H. Hart for the stated purpose of "addressing the need" to defend "America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and European identity" from immigrants, Muslims, and African Americans.[36][37] In his speech, Rushton said that Islam was not just a cultural, but also a genetic problem. He thought the religion and issues associated with it were not just a condition of the belief system. His theory was that Arabs have an aggressive personality with relatively closed, simple minds, and were less amenable to reason.[38] The Anti-Defamation League described the conference attendees as "racist academics, conservative pundits and anti-immigrant activists".[39]





please do not call me pretentious, presumptuous, and assumptive for actually reading what your little white supremacist buddy has to say. blame yourself for being a self-deluded ignramus before pointing the finger

ginwilly said:

Reading between the lines is your specialty isn't it?

Just because you make assumptions of people you don't know at all doesn't make you right, just makes you a pretentious and presumptuous ass. My PSA for the day.

Click to expand...

lemme guess, The Slug King has oozed out of his lair and is crying "That's Racist!!"

i bet he is trying to continue his attempt to argue that Chicanos are imaginary as well.

lemme know if he makes any statements of fact, so i can discredit his bullshit again

statement of fact: in 1922, the ku klux klan had a motto of "keep america american"

statement of fact: throughout this thread, kkkynes has argued for the sentiment of "keeping germany german", ditto for "frenchness, englishness, irishness, swedishness, americanness etc etc".

(shockingly all white nations!)

can anyone not see right through this?