Most Europeans want immigration ban from Muslim-majority countries

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by onefourbravo, Feb 8, 2017.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Tavor

    Tavor On ROPs

    The answer is obvious, surely. Just ban those who follow the Qu'ran so the rest of us can have our laptops and tablets and other tech onboard aircraft.
    • Like Like x 7
  2. I am liberal, the left has not been liberal for about 100 years.
    It is now dictatorial.
    • Like Like x 12
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. I've just seen this. The zooms are digital zooms done in post (called 'Ken Burns' for some reason). The camera has been left in different places over a period of time.
    • Informative Informative x 3
  4. I've never been a fan of fiction, especially the really unbelievable sort.

    On a side note: have the Israelis banned laptops, kindles & tablets(no; not the stone ones...)?
    • Like Like x 2
  5. ...that made me Like for you !.
  6. The Stone ones are still in customs somewhere.......
    • Funny Funny x 2
  7. This revelation doesn't surprise me in the slightest. It doesn't take a degree to see that Islam has tenets that are fundamentally incompatable with Western ideals, although it might take one to turn a blind eye to what those particular tenets actually involve.

    I don't like this. Our culture exists in no small part to protect the rights of the individual over those of the collective, so it rankles me that it could be necessary for the state to intervene in the case of Islamic migrants who will not integrate. I do not like that a liberal democracy has been put in a position of having to restrict movement or turn away those who might be in need, but the fact of the matter is that the conflicts here are irreconcilable and I don't think there can be a peaceful resolution under the current status quo.

    We have a strong seperation of religeon and politics, and do not broach descrimination based on faith. We do not tollerate violence of any stripe as a tool of religeon, including cultural practices like genital mutilation. We are fundamentally egalitarian. Our laws are not mutable in the face of ANY faith and we cannot, on principal, tollerate a double standard in those systems to accomodate sharia.

    If practitioners of Islam cannot adjust or adhere to our standards over their religeon's enough to integrate, they do not belong here. They will inevitably push for an erosion of those ideals to match their own, to the detriment of all, or feel persecuted and justified in lashing out when they find they won't bend. There is no way either circumstance can have a pleasant ending, and compromise is impossible with such radically opposed stances. Someone is always going to have to give up something they find sacrosanct.
    • Like Like x 14
  8. I always find it odd that 'compromise has to be found'.

    Why? Why should anyone here compromise? Want to live in the West, then become Westeners, don't want to become Westeners, don't go and live in the West.

    Why should the West change themselves to fit others backarse religion and culture.
    • Like Like x 24
  9. The problem with compromise is that 'compromise' always boils down to 'which values are we prepared to give up to appease the rabid fundamentalists?'. Pretending of course that it is possible to appease rabid fundamentalists, and that giving in is not simply inviting them to move the goalposts and start the next round.

    Shall it be our freedom of speech and expression, so that the prophet and Islam can no longer be criticised?

    Will it be freedom of autonomy, so women cannot go out in public alone, are forced to wear a head scarf and banned from travel, driving or holding a job?

    How about civil liberties protecting homosexuals, so they can be stoned to death?

    Accepting Sharia, so that religeous purity militias can lynch people with state approval, or courts can hold trials where the accused is not allowed to call witnesses or a defence as is done in Iran?

    Maybe just allow Islam some political influence, so the dhimmis can end up as functionally second-class citizens. Unless you're an atheist or apostate, in which case you're a corpse.

    There are many more strident examples from countries where Islam is the leading political, legal and cultural driver, just as the same was true of Christianity before the enlightenment and slow waning of dogma in face of rationalisim.

    There can only be one answer to that: None. We don't give a damn inch because to do so would be inviting the wolf amongst the sheep.
    • Like Like x 15
  10. The 'compromise' is always expected of the host too & never those demanding their 'rights'.
    • Like Like x 8
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. Merkel's actions in her throwing the doors open would seem to belie that...unless this is a reality that has dawned on her... a little too late.

    And the agonised handwringing in Sweden will not bring back lives lost, crimes committed, and the every upward spiralling costs of supporting an alien society that will take all the social support, aid and assistance given but does not want to integrate.
    Sweden will ‘NEVER GO BACK’ to mass immigration after Stockholm terror, says shocked PM

    Common sense dictated that the numbers were to many too soon, but political correctness and left wing socialistic policies prevailed. It will, perhaps has triggered a pendulum backlash that helps no-one.
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Last edited: Sep 2, 2017
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1