Anti-islamic party wins European elections

[Traianvs]

No, the problem is uncontrolled immigration, which welcomes the sort of people who are boldly and openly fighting a war against us in the streets of our own cities. If there are peaceful muslims who abide by our liberal rules of law and don't fight a constant jihad against people who don't want to live in a medieval tribal society, they can live in Europe and practice their religion in peace, in privacy. But if there were only peaceful muslims, then Wilders wouldn't be living in a 24/7 police protection and fear for his life, now would he?

Open doors and cowardly appeasement in front of aggression did not work for the ancient Romans in front of the barbarian hordes, they do not work for Europeans in front of African and Middle-Eastern muslims.


I love it how you say "think he can contain". As it's his responsibility if (or should we be brutally honest and say "when") militant muslims decide to turn violent. So we should do nothing out of fear of reaction from muslim immigrants who want to transform our society into the sort of monotheistic tyrannies like where they have arrived from? We should censure ourselves out of fear of those muslims who want to get rid of our liberal democracies?

Hey, freedom of the press in the Netherlands was already defenestrated in case of Mohammed Rasoel's book because "muslims might get offended"; let's get rid of Geert Wilders' freedom of speech as well because "muslims might get offended"


Something needs to be done, and that something starts by raising awareness. As a nation and as a people, you can not come up with a solution if you refuse to admit that you have a problem. I think your backbone is in very bad shape if you refuse to raise a problem to public discussion out of fear of "antagonizement".

This is so typical. Normal people don't object to raising a problem to public discussion, but I and many others don't see the point of doing it Wilders-style.

Your reference to the Romans is charming by the way, since it shows how you barely have a clue what the reasons of Rome's demise were

[a.kitman]

so are you gona give me something to read or just spit retorics at me?

[a.kitman]

Open doors and cowardly appeasement in front of aggression did not work for the ancient Romans in front of the barbarian hordes, they do not work for Europeans in front of African and Middle-Eastern muslims.

just to clearfy iam a strong beliver in takeing the custom where you go. ie they come here they better get used to not forceing there duaghters to marry at age 12 and such bullcrap.

But your just going so over the top its comical, crying wolf when there isnt even a ****ing kitten in sight.

[RGBVideo]

This is so typical. Normal people don't object to raising a problem to public discussion,

Then you shouldn't be sad to see Wilders talking about it, at most laughing at how important he sees it to be if you consider it to be irrelevant.

but I and many others don't see the point of doing it Wilders-style.

Perhaps the point of "provocating" is to see what is allowed and what is not?

Your reference to the Romans is charming by the way, since it shows how you barely have a clue what the reasons of Rome's demise were

The reasons for Rome's demise depend on the age they're talked about. There have been countless theories in different academias since 476.

You presume me to point out what happened in history to a particular nation to be an explanation of an age-old question about that particular nation, a some sort of offer of "set of reasons", the ultimate truth? The fact that you even consider there to be a "set of reasons" only hints that your professor has found a loyal student for himself.

"you barely have a clue what the reasons of Rome's demise were" go ahead, tell me the reasons of Rome's demise

[Traianvs]

Then you shouldn't be sad to see Wilders talking about it, at most laughing at how important he sees it to be if you consider it to be irrelevant.

What is this sentence supposed to mean?

Like I said he can talk about problematic issues. Just lay off the hatemongerin speech dude. It serves no purpose whatsoever.

The reasons for Rome's demise depend on the age they're talked about. There have been countless theories in different academias since 476.

You presume me to point out what happened in history to a particular nation to be an explanation of an age-old question about that particular nation, a some sort of offer of "set of reasons", the ultimate truth? The fact that you even consider there to be a "set of reasons" only hints that your professor has found a loyal student for himself.

"you barely have a clue what the reasons of Rome's demise were" go ahead, tell me the reasons of Rome's demise

Wow.

I don't know your problem is, but considering your support to a raging buffoon like Wilders it doesn't come as much of a surprise you talk to me in that demeaning and hostile tone of yours..

Why are you talking about a nation by the way? Rome back in the day was an empire.

I don't know what you mean with that 'professor' comment really, but suffice to say it was a long and complex process. Very interesting you make a comparison of modern day (peaceful) immigration, with pillaging German invaders in ancient times. I honestly don't see much of a connection there, which was the point I was trying to bring across.

[RGBVideo]

so are you gona give me something to read or just spit retorics at me?

nope, no links about wilders

I only know from Wilders what I have read from the Internet during the past 3 years. What I'm suggesting is that if you think about what right-wing extremist means, you will realize that Wilders is neither right-wing or extremist. On the contrary, people who are attacking him are right-wing extremists. He wants to live in a liberal democracy.

But your just going so over the top its comical, crying wolf when there isnt even a ****ing kitten in sight.

You're right, there isn't a lot trouble in Finland compared to what's happening in Sweden. And I haven't ever even been in the Netherlands. That's why I'd like to see the troubles to stop there, so they wouldn't come in here when I'm middle-aged.

The point is to open your eyes and see what's right in front of you. In Sweden in particular, there are a lot of things you are missing if you trust your TV channel instead of what you will encounter in your own life. Of course, if you don't encounter muslim immigrants at all in your daily life, it's extremely hard to see anything that's wrong with the picture.

just to clearfy iam a strong beliver in takeing the custom where you go. ie they come here they better get used to not forceing there duaghters to marry at age 12 and such bullcrap.

Well, we agree. Honestly speaking, I don't think there are any sort of disagreements between our opinions in this matter. If you don't mix things like "left-wing" or "right-wing" or ideological dilemmas here, this is just common sense.

[RGBVideo]

Very interesting you make a comparison of modern day (peaceful) immigration

that's the point. it isn't

it doesn't come as much of a surprise you talk to me in that demeaning and hostile tone of yours..

I hope it's clear that I'm not hostile, and I didn't really mean that to be demeaning either, so sorry if it came across as such.

I don't mean to be demeaning now either, but I hope we both know that there was both immigration to Rome and wars between Rome and invading tribes. There were also entire tribes which seeked voluntary protection and thus immigrated en masse; the push came from the far east and there were many pro-Rome and/or peaceful factions in between

Just lay off the hatemongerin speech dude.

Yeah, but this comes down to what exactly is the broadly defined "hate speech". What if reality is "hatemongerin"?

[BlackCat]

What is this sentence supposed to mean?

Wow.

I don't know your problem is

He is Finnish

[a.kitman]

The point is to open your eyes and see what's right in front of you. In Sweden in particular, there are a lot of things you are missing if you trust your TV channel instead of what you will encounter in your own life. Of course, if you don't encounter muslim immigrants at all in your daily life, it's extremely hard to see anything that's wrong with the picture.

your right, i live in a little village where we are about 99% white non-beliveing christans. i dont see the "problems" muslims create first hand. but it seems to me that most of the problems can actaully be explained more thru economic reasons rather then christianty vs islam.

[Ben Kenobi]

How so?

I've lived with muslim roommates and it totally depends on which Muslims? Some are very much attenuated to the western world, while others are at a great hostility. Sometimes they both live in the same house.

[BeBMan]

He is Finnish

Ottok

[BeBMan]

Our part of the elections is tomorrow. I have no idea who I should vote for atm. Maybe the esperanto party

[C0ckney]

there are a few interesting things about these elections. it seems that parties of the right are going to gain ground at the expense of (moderate) leftwing parties. one might have expected the reverse considering the economic situation. fringe parties on the both the right and left are likely to do well at the expense of more moderate parties. also, parties who are hostile to the direction the EU is heading in are likely to do well.

[Zevico]

I do not deign to know what "the solution" is, but anti-immigrant rhetoric and jingoism is not it.
However I do agree that public awareness of fundamentalist Islamic movements and Islamist movements is necessary in order to start a discussion on how to approach them.

[a.kitman]

low voter turn out usually lead to fring parties gettign higher percentage. the fring right wing parties are also more likely to play the blame game whit foreigners and as we know they play the scape goat part very well.
its not surprising at all to me.