You are not logged in.
<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1><b>quote:</b></font><p>John O'Sullivan and Christopher Hitchens see Muslim immigration as a cause of a rightward political reaction in Europe. <BR> <BR>"Muslim immigration of a very considerable size has meant that the liberal traditions and liberal political values of some of these countries have come under attack," says O'Sullivan. As a result, many voters "have switched to the right because they're worried that Muslim immigration is transforming their societies in illiberal ways as well as in more obvious cultural ones." Hitchens saw this illiberal spirit during mass demonstrations in Britain by young Pakistanis who not only wanted to burn The Satanic Verses, but who "wanted to burn the author, Salman Rushdie, too." <BR> <BR>This rightward swing may also translate into less power for Brussels and more power for the national governments if the rightwing parties are less supportive of the whole EU enterprise. <BR> <BR>By Randall Parker at 2003 January 03 03:09 PM Immigration Border Control <BR> <BR><!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.parapundit.com/archives/000852.html" target=_top>http://www.parapundit.com/archives/000852.html</a>
Offline
Can anyone explain why these European countries are accepting this overwhelming tide of Muslim immigrants into their countries and then bemoan the Muslim influence on their culture <BR> <BR>I used to live in Malmo, Sweden and have read recently that Malmo has become a huge Muslim enclave, changing Swedish lifestyle and even laws. Well, why do these countries allow the immigration?
Offline
There should be deportable offenses if they are citing riots or the like. IMO. This is true until they become a citizen, then the justice is meted out by the country's justice system. Whether they can limit immigration, depends on the laws of the country.
Offline
It varies by countries. Algerian citizens were also French citizens, and so could immigrate to France and be a citizen there. Ditto from some of the former British colonies where Muslims lived. <BR> <BR>With globalization of our entire economy, it is becoming as increasingly difficult to segregate citizenships as it is for country of origin. The U.S. uses manufactures throughout the world for their cheaper goods. <BR> <BR>It is always amazing that the U.S. who removed nearly all the native citizens in N. America and took the country over and were the original immigrants, are now worried about immigrants today. The economy depends on the work of immigrants. The group with the highest per capita income, higher than nativeborn U.S., are the Indians. The food production is largely dependent on immigrants. Without them, we might have to pay twice as much for our food. There are consequences to action that may seem, at first look, as beneficial, but for the long view, may be like cutting our nose to spite our face. <BR> <BR>It's easy to rail against something, but to solve the problem today, what are your suggestions?
Offline
If a certain country's immigrants are continually causing problems on our soil, cut off all immigration, and the citizens have to have our justice meted out to them. <BR> <BR>I suggested once on SDAnet that we should be more interested in the curriculuum of Arab schools on our soil given that the Koran can be taught in a way that could bring destruction to us. I nearly got thrown off the forum, I think because they fear the same review of SDA curiculuum, in the same manner.
Offline
Should all religious schools: Catholic and Adventist, be eliminated? It would not be possible in the U.S. to demonize and prohibit one religious schools and not all of them. <BR> <BR>Maybe you should read the latest Newsweek story of a Guantanomo guard who became a Muslim. Understanding Islam should be a requisite of anyone who wishes to speak about religion in the U.S. To date, there is freedom to practice any religion that does not interfere with civil laws, just as some who wish to prohibit gay marriage, unless it does some harm to you, it should be allowed for those who desire it. Why not allow freedom of belief for those who may disagree with you?
Offline
The Bible contains more violence than the Koran. <BR>Make of that what you wish. Neither should be used as a perfect guide to life as practiced by the writers of those books.
Offline
If one school produces terrorists, and you don't have to go talking about abortion clinic bombers, but if the curiculuum produces people ready to strap on dynamite to destroy others, or to destroy abortion clinics, then either the curiculuum needs review or pschyological evals on all students needed. <img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/uhoh.gif" border=0>
Offline
Until there is evidence for your projections, it is sheer speculation. <BR> <BR>Yes, the Madrassas in many countries do teach such, but where is the evidence that any in the U.S. engage in such teaching?
Offline
You want to wait for the aftermath???? <BR> <BR>Seems like we did something like that already, like not ask why Arab types wanted to learn at our flying schools how to fly planes but not land or take off. Viola, 9/11.
Offline
And how could either you or I have prevented that? There were alerts in the Oval Office that were dismissed.
Offline
If I was a flight instructor, don't admit and ask questions later.
Offline
If you recall, there was a notification from Minnesota (?) of a suspicious Middle Eastern who wanted to only fly, not land. The reports were dismissed, so what was she to do? <BR> <BR>She raised the questions with the FBI, but it was dropped.
Offline
You don't remember the 9/10 syndrome do you. Fear of Racial Profiling, and the laxity this country is now returning to, do you?
Offline
That fear produced the erosion of many of this country's constitutional rights. In the name of protection citizens gradually lost some of those rights. Our rights are no better than our worst enemies. If they can be denied rights, we can, also. So, to protect us, we give up something? <BR> <BR>"There will always be those who are willing to trade freedom for security."
Offline
What did you have ot give up, Elaine, beside airport security when flying to see your grandkids???
Offline
The ability allowing the government to eavesdrop on citizens, investigate without warrants, the holding prisoners without charges for years on end. Need more? Those are sufficient if you were the one effected. <BR> <BR>To only be concerned when your own private person is endangered is to ignore what may happen to others, but maybe you have no concern for others and their rights. Is that the Christian concern you espouse?
Offline
Your concern, some secret happenings at Fresno Adventist you didn't want listening in on to happen. Not to much going on, terrorist wise in our household. If you were phoning Osama Bin Laden from Fresno, I'm sorry, Elaine, I would want you listened in on, with or without a warrant. <img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/angry.gif" border=0>
Offline
And how could the necessity for a warrant be issued without some prior information necessitating it? <BR> <BR>Just as J.Edgar Hoover had dossiers on many people, hoping by some accident to find some "dirt" with which to blackmail them, indiscriminate wire tapping is reprehensible. That is why there first must be a reason presented to a judge to sign all such warrants. Otherwise, we might as well surrender to a police state. <BR> <BR>FYI, there was a spy infiltrating Fresno Peace movement for several years, hoping to get some evidence of terrorism, or course it was not successful. His cover was blown when he showed up with the police later on. How many churches or mosques may have been under surveillance (we pay for it) hoping that the government will find SOMETHING. <BR> <BR>How many folks have been kidnapped and sent in rendition to foreign countries, held and tortured for years, with finally releasing them as innocent? How would you like to be incarcerated, refused an attorney, hidden from sight, no contact with your family, only to eventually be released as no charges ever filed? <BR>This has happened to U.S. citizens. <BR> <BR>I know of someone whose home was searched because of a false allegation given the judge who signed a warrant to search. It was completely false. Nevertheless, the resident lost computer, private files and more for over a year. Finally, after a year the resident was told that the property could be picked up. In the meantime, a new computer had to be purchased, costing the innocent individual more than a thousand dollars for replacement and valuable files were lost. <BR> <BR>If a neighbor lies about you, reporting that they suspect your are involved in drugs, child porn, or similar, and was friendly with the judge, it could be your privacy invaded.
Offline
Look, let me say it a different way. If I knew Osama bin Laden's team and each of their cell numbers, with or without a warrant after 9/11 we should be listening in, to placed and received calls. I would hope the warrants were obtained early and often, if necessary. Now for John and Elaine calling friends in Europe, maybe no need to listen in, but lets not go back to pre 9/11 laxity because we're trying to save our way of life, yeah right!!!<img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/uhoh.gif" border=0>
Offline
Save your worry. The Feds are quite capable of listening to all the calls they wish and do not need our suggestions. <BR> <BR>Now, if you want to suggest what should be done about N. Korea, maybe the guvmint will listen to you?
Offline
Guy on Fox tonight said the launch was total failure and that just let the N Koreans implode. Do nothing, they are a joke.
Offline