Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Sign in to follow this  
zukiful

Mi5 Admits They Have Run Out Of Leads Of London Bomb

Recommended Posts

How can you assimilate people that do not wish to assimilate. Read the "Are you proud to be British" thread.

 

Assimilation works both ways bro. We have to welcome them and they need to try also...

 

But it won't help if the media, politicians and experts keeps bashing Muslims or other third worlders...

 

Constantly referring to 2nd and 3rd generation's born in Europe (for example, France during the riots) and Muslims/or of African descent doesn't help matters...

 

There are some who refuse assimilation, but we end up blowing the fugures out of proportion and make it seem like the overwhelming majority are as such...

 

I saw the British thread and you really can't build a case on a few people who said they weren't proud. There were who those who weren't ashamed of being Brits, and a huge amount of members didn't render an opinion whatsoever...

 

it's about having your loyalties lie elsewhere, (in muslim lands), yet choose to live in a country that you a critical of. Hypocrisy!!

 

Divided loyalties can be seen everywhere by almost everyone, I'll give some examples:

 

1st example--after the last presidential election, when Bush was re-elected and the nation was divided in to red and blue states. Quite a few people inquired about moving to Canada, a very small minority did so, the bulk stayed and refused to surrender and wanted to make a difference and to change the current situation from within...

 

2nd example-- You have members of the Jewish faith here, who are bound to serve the israeli Army, members and organizations that attempt to place israel's well being above that of my country, spies caught who end up saying that their loyalty to israel outranks their loyalty to America. You have Politicians that kick off their political campaigns by going on a political pilgrimage to israel and publicly giving their oath of loyalty and protection to that nation before they do so in America...

 

Many immigrants (from Europe & elsewhere) still retain much of their homelands traditions and values till this day,

and they always identify themselves as Italian Americans, Irish Americans, Portuguese Americans, German Americans, Chinese American, or Just plains Latino/Hispanic and no American at the end. They even teach their kids to speak Spanish before English...China Town's signs are both in Chinese and English...

 

Those minorities pack the political and economic clout to dictate to the majority...

 

Total assimilation is total disappearance from existence...

 

The Colonials who lived in third world countries for decades and centuries, retained their European identity, faith and tradition's, and they despised the indigenous people's as being dirty, backward heathen's, yet they still remained...

 

When the blacks finally took back Rhodesia in Africa from white Europeans who have lived there for generations, the Europeans had no loyalty to the land nor people, and returned to Europe. So basically, they stayed to use and take advantage of the land and it's people...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
When the blacks finally took back Rhodesia in Africa from white Europeans who have lived there for generations, the Europeans had no loyalty to the land nor people, and returned to Europe. So basically, they stayed to use and take advantage of the land and it's people...

 

A bit off topic, but ever since the "white Europeans" were kicked out, Rhodesia has ceased to be the breadbasket of sub-Saharan Africa. They weren't all bad, there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A bit off topic, but ever since the "white Europeans" were kicked out, Rhodesia has ceased to be the breadbasket of sub-Saharan Africa. They weren't all bad, there.

The main reason that Zimbabwe is no longer 'the bread basket of Southern Africa' was the change in policy forced on the Government by the IMF and The World Bank in return for loans. This required them to greatly reduce their reserves of grain. Unfortunately this is needed as a buffer because 1 in 9 harvests fail and this is needed to provide seed grain and to feed people.

 

So when the first harvest failed after this agreement, seed grain had to be purchased from abroad at premium rates and food also bought in. Unfortunately the next harvest failure was within 3 years and this sent the agricultural economy into a downward spiral.

 

This happened prior to Mugabes land reforms of recent years.

 

All white Zimbabweans haven't left the country although many have, many white farmers who have left have started farming in nearby Zambia or Mosambeque.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D

 

mugabe is a dangerous murderous thug, that cares nothing for anyone. he starves his people and murders them.

 

like it or not, the white farmers brought a prosperity to zimbabwe. people were fed , clothed and employed. now they have nothing. the other countries whom now have those white farmers have never had such productive seasons. they are happy the zimbabwe farmers are there, and are prospering because of them.

 

racism is a terrible thing. in this case the whites were in the right. i dont care how anyone paints it. they did good for zimbabwe. mugabe is a beast.

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
name='thezman' date='Feb 2 2006, 09:17 PM' post='236509']

Assimilation works both ways bro. We have to welcome them and they need to try also...

 

Over the past 40 years i doubt there is a country in the "west" that has been more welcoming to muslim immigrants, and more respectful of their customs, religion and traditions than Britain. Of all the communities that have chosen to live in Britain, muslims still remain the least integrated. Surely other communities such as the Chinese, Hindu, Sikh and Jewish communities would have faced the same hostility that the muslims perceive themselves to have been met with.

 

But it won't help if the media, politicians and experts keeps bashing Muslims or other third worlders...

 

Constantly referring to 2nd and 3rd generation's born in Europe (for example, France during the riots) and Muslims/or of African descent doesn't help matters...

 

You've got those that believe muslims get a bad press, and muslim immigrants get it even worse. On the other hand there are those that feel muslims get preferential treatment, and the authorites show complacency when dealing with them. The truth is probably somwhere in the middle.

I recall Channel 4 pulling a show about muslims in Bradford grooming underage white girls with drugs and alcohol, for a life in prostitution. It was the police that advised Channel 4 to pull the show, due to racial sensitivity. Can you imagine the uproar that decision caused?

Nobody can afford to live in constant victim-status.

 

There are some who refuse assimilation, but we end up blowing the fugures out of proportion and make it seem like the overwhelming majority are as such...

 

I'm not reading statistics or mori polls, i live in one of the most diverse cities in Europe. I'm afraid there are whole postcode's full of muslims that have refused to assimilate. There are no-go areas in my own city, in which whites and blacks are attacked for no other reason than they happen to be on the wrong street, and non-muslim. I can't begin to tell you how much resentment this causes.

The suprising thing is that the fathers and grandfathers of these thugs were immigrants to this country, and i'm sure they went through some hard times, yet they are more integrated than their children who were born here, raised her, educated here and in some cases employed here.

 

I saw the British thread and you really can't build a case on a few people who said they weren't proud. There were who those who weren't ashamed of being Brits, and a huge amount of members didn't render an opinion whatsoever...

 

That thread was just a gauge, but still indicative. Do you honestly believe that had that poll been conducted on the streets of Birmingham, Bradford, Leeds, Luton or London, the result would have been any different with regard to muslim replies?

 

Divided loyalties can be seen everywhere by almost everyone, I'll give some examples:

 

1st example--after the last presidential election, when Bush was re-elected and the nation was divided in to red and blue states. Quite a few people inquired about moving to Canada, a very small minority did so, the bulk stayed and refused to surrender and wanted to make a difference and to change the current situation from within...

 

I'm not familiar with this story, but it seems to me that those Americans that moved to Cananda did so on pure principal, which i would have no problem with muslims doing. If you feel the country you live in is disgusting, i'll drive you to the airport!!

On the other hand, those that stayed and campaigned also deserve our respect. To remain loyal in the face of adversity in commendable, although expected. However, if you don't have loyalty for your nation in the first place, what the hell are you fighting for?

I'll drive you to the airport!!

 

2nd example-- You have members of the Jewish faith here, who are bound to serve the israeli Army, members and organizations that attempt to place israel's well being above that of my country, spies caught who end up saying that their loyalty to israel outranks their loyalty to America. You have Politicians that kick off their political campaigns by going on a political pilgrimage to israel and publicly giving their oath of loyalty and protection to that nation before they do so in America...

 

I would not be happy with a British Jew doing the same thing. If you have given your oath and loyalty to another nation then you should take up that citizenship, renounce the citizenship you have disgraced and consider relocating. You can stay as a visitor, as long as your agenda is not to the detriment of this nation.

Which politician did this? Is he/she still in power?

 

Many immigrants (from Europe & elsewhere) still retain much of their homelands traditions and values till this day,

and they always identify themselves as Italian Americans, Irish Americans, Portuguese Americans, German Americans, Chinese American, or Just plains Latino/Hispanic and no American at the end. They even teach their kids to speak Spanish before English...China Town's signs are both in Chinese and English...

 

Those minorities pack the political and economic clout to dictate to the majority...

 

Total assimilation is total disappearance from existence...

 

I have no problem with immigrants holding on to their traditions and culture, but as long as it is done in the context of British law and civil society.

I enjoy the Chinese new year, holi (sp?), eid and countless other religious and cultural celebrations held in this country, but i hate it when religious minoroties dictate how Christmas and Easter should be celebrated. No lights, no Santa, bloody Winterville!! And i'm not even chritstian!!

Be proud of your heritage, but not to the detriment of your nation and the society you choose to live in. Can you imagine the outcry if the local council dictated to muslims how they can celebrate

Eid, and what they must leave out so as not to offend their non-islamic neighbours. Would you make the compromise?

 

 

The Colonials who lived in third world countries for decades and centuries, retained their European identity, faith and tradition's, and they despised the indigenous people's as being dirty, backward heathen's, yet they still remained..

 

The majority of colonials were a disgrace. If we are going to set our moral compass by their standards then we really are in trouble.

 

 

When the blacks finally took back Rhodesia in Africa from white Europeans who have lived there for generations, the Europeans had no loyalty to the land nor people, and returned to Europe. So basically, they stayed to use and take advantage of the land and it's people...

 

I disagree with your stance on Rhodesia. It's far more complex an issue than just black and white. You seem to give the impression that the "whites" were in the wrong and the "blacks" correct. I think history will take a different view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with your stance on Rhodesia. It's far more complex an issue than just black and white. You seem to give the impression that the "whites" were in the wrong and the "blacks" correct. I think history will take a different view.

Peace SBP,

 

That wasn't my intention at all.

 

All I was trying to convey was that once the whites lost the power in Rodesia, they left when the going got tough. They didn't want to weather the storm. There was no bonding with the land nor the indigenous population...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Muslims will never properly intergrate into any Western nation. Their religion prohibits that. They will always be viewed as outsiders because that's what they choose to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace SBP,

 

That wasn't my intention at all.

 

All I was trying to convey was that once the whites lost the power in Rodesia, they left when the going got tough. They didn't want to weather the storm. There was no bonding with the land nor the indigenous population...

 

 

Thezman, i'm sorry if i got the wrong end of the stick, but i'm still having difficulty following your logic.

Are you equating the position of white farmers in what is now Zimbabwe with the position of muslims in Britain?

Please correct me if i'm wide of the mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Muslims will never properly intergrate into any Western nation. Their religion prohibits that. They will always be viewed as outsiders because that's what they choose to be.

 

 

As much as i'd like that NOT to be the case, i'm afraid it is hard to refute.

It dosen't bode well for the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Europeans had trouble integrating with the locals... so they killed them(North America, South America, Australia...).

 

You should be happy Islam teaches us peace.

 

 

How do you define integration'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You should be happy Islam teaches us peace.

How do you define integration'?

Shagird, being a Muslim, you should understand this. Integration includes both work and social activites. And frankly, I can't see a properly practicing Muslim socializing with Westerners. We mix sexes when we socialize. Muslim men are not allowed to socialize with non-Muslim women. So, you can never truly be integrated. The same goes for Muslim women and non-Muslim men.

 

I can see Muslims being able to function, strictly in a business sense. But integrating into the West is much more than this. If you keep yourselves isolated, socially, you'll always be an outsider. That's just the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Europeans had trouble integrating with the locals... so they killed them(North America, South America, Australia...).

More died from disease, than anything else. While there were some racist Europeans who killed many natives in the new world, there were even more who didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam,

 

remember, whilst some Europeans were off colonizing the world, Europe was also experiencing its most violent centuries EVER. Between 1500-1715 I believe there were only 30 years of peace. Empire building and colonization occured when life in Europe was very nasty, very brutish and very short. This creates a certain culture which, unfortunately, the colonists took with them whereever they went.

 

HOWEVER, since then Europe has changed significantly. The treaty of Westphalia (each country is sovereign within its national borders) set the tone for a future in which peace, prosperity and freedom are so common here we are able to take them for granted.

 

Given societies change over time, in Europe certainly the change has been for the better over the last 500 years, why are there still constant references to 'oh, the Europeans killed a great many people when empire building' as if this has an impact on the way Europe operates today?

 

If any country today behaved as europe did in the past we rightly condemn that behaviour, it's not hypocrisy, it's learning from one's mistakes.

 

Zukiful, regarding your post re: White settlers in Zimbabwe, I agree with you entirely, good post!

 

I think Muslims also have a harder time intergrating because alcohol plays such as big part in society as well. It is changing slightly now with the influence of the coffee bar, but the traditional place to socialize is the pub, combine this with an active lack of segregation based on gender and I can see why it is that some Muslims do have more trouble integrating than other migrant groups in the past.

 

Peace and Love,

 

DARLA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shagird, being a Muslim, you should understand this. Integration includes both work and social activites. And frankly, I can't see a properly practicing Muslim socializing with Westerners. We mix sexes when we socialize. Muslim men are not allowed to socialize with non-Muslim women. So, you can never truly be integrated. The same goes for Muslim women and non-Muslim men.

 

I can see Muslims being able to function, strictly in a business sense. But integrating into the West is much more than this. If you keep yourselves isolated, socially, you'll always be an outsider. That's just the way it is.

 

I agree we will not socialise to that extent, but even those who do are still seen as Muslims/outsiders.

 

Prejudice is as much a barrier as our social limits. The crazy guys on either side will translate this as hate and really confuse matters.

 

 

While there were some racist Europeans who killed many natives in the new world, there were even more who didn't.

 

It's always the minority...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Europeans had trouble integrating with the locals... so they killed them(North America, South America, Australia...).

 

You should be happy Islam teaches us peace.

How do you define integration'?

 

 

Oh yeah i forgot, muslims don't kill. They didn't kill, behead, rape and kidnap whilst building their own "empire".

Or was that all in context, and can not be viewed in isolation?

There are muslims to this very day that commit these horrific crimes, sometimes against their own.

I don't need a religious doctrine to tell me NOT to kill people. I certainly don't need a religious doctrine to tell me when it's OK to kill people.

If this is your defintion of "peace", you can stick it!!

 

Integration is based upon mutual understanding and mutual respsect within the context of a communal spirit. The onus is upon the migrant to accept the generally accepted principles held by the society they choose to live amongst. There is also a burden upon the "host" to show compassion and compromise for the various cultural differences of others.

I believe Britain has met it's obligation, and in most cases to much success. If one particular community fails to grasp the concept of integration then they can remain in the wilderness. Britons of all races, religions and cultures should not bare any guilt for the self-imposed isolation of a few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After that tirade of emotions, what exactly was your point?

 

Are you suggesting the Muslims settled new lands by killing the natives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After that tirade of emotions, what exactly was your point?

 

Are you suggesting the Muslims settled new lands by killing the natives?

 

 

With all the emotional outbursts on these pages it's hardly suprising the YOU would single out my previous post as a "tirade of emotions".

 

What i'm suggesting is that muslim lands were not "won" and sustained without bloodshed and booty.

I'm a bit strapped for time at the moment, but i will do some research and provide you with a more detailed answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thezman, i'm sorry if i got the wrong end of the stick, but i'm still having difficulty following your logic.

Are you equating the position of white farmers in what is now Zimbabwe with the position of muslims in Britain?

Please correct me if i'm wide of the mark.

No problem bro, I'll try again:

 

The issue is refusing to assimilate or embrace most the values of one's new homeland.

 

Therefore, when the white Rhodesian's left for whatever reason (be it forced into exile, or freely leaving after they were no longer in control), has close resemblance to refusing to assimilate to your new found home/culture.

 

For if they truly assimilated, they would have stayed in Rhodesia and fought for their rights and the land that was confiscated from them. But it looks to me that they showed no care in staying. They Just migrated to another nation.

 

Compare that with another scenario, if they had resided in a European nation, and that nation had a revolt or was invaded and taken over by another people's, would they have left or stayed behind and fought to regain control of their country once more?

 

It Just seems to me that they didn't have any loyalty to the country they ruled for a while, nor for the indigenous population and couldn't care less about it...

 

How's that? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem bro, I'll try again:

 

The issue is refusing to assimilate or embrace most the values of one's new homeland.

 

Therefore, when the white Rhodesian's left for whatever reason (be it forced into exile, or freely leaving after they were no longer in control), has close resemblance to refusing to assimilate to your new found home/culture.

 

For if they truly assimilated, they would have stayed in Rhodesia and fought for their rights and the land that was confiscated from them. But it looks to me that they showed no care in staying. They Just migrated to another nation.

 

Compare that with another scenario, if they had resided in a European nation, and that nation had a revolt or was invaded and taken over by another people's, would they have left or stayed behind and fought to regain control of their country once more?

 

It Just seems to me that they didn't have any loyalty to the country they ruled for a while, nor for the indigenous population and couldn't care less about it...

 

How's that? :D

 

That's better :D

 

I can't agree with your stance on white farmers in Zimbabwe. The question of assimilation and subsequent loyalty must also be coupled with the correct conditions for allowing for these practices.

Many farmers were expelled upon the threat of physical violence to themselves and their families by a corrupt and vengeful government. Many did stay and try to fight for their lands/rights through official avenues, but to no avail. These are not the conditions to allow for assimilation.

To equate the fleeing of a tyrannical regime to a lack of assimilation or loyalty is grossly unfair.

If these farmers faced the same troubles in a European country as they faced in Zimbabwe i doubt the reaction would have been very different. They were lucky they had somewhere to go, most of those that live under opressive regimes do not have that luxury. This should not be confused with loyalty or assimilation.

There are muslim refugees in Britain from muslim lands. Would you attribute the "white farmer" theory to these people?

 

Britain, for all it's flaws (and i'm sure you would happliy list them) has allowed for the assimilation of immigrant communities, and in most cases to great success. Muslims have more rights/freedoms in this country than many muslim countries. Legislation to allow for the process of assimilation has gone past the point of goodwill to the absolute ridiculous.

I am now of the opinion that if muslims do not wish to assimilate then so be it. The authorities should stop playing footsie, and embrace those that do wish to be part of this nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
More died from disease, than anything else. While there were some racist Europeans who killed many natives in the new world, there were even more who didn't.

I thought that it was the other way around, dint the save you from deseases? i read it in my social class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×