Ramadan Riots in Brussels

[jordan179]

You can find the whole story at http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/09/ramadan-riots-in-brussels.html, assembled by Baron Bodissey from a number of Belgian sources, but the gist of it is that, in what is becoming an annual tradition, mobs of

Comments

Re: bigotry FAIL

[jordan179]

First of all, I'm not "bigoted." Secondly, I'm disagreeing with you, not "failing" -- I am under no requirement to agree with you. Thirdly, you should make a point and then explain the relevance of the article you are quoting to the point, rather than simply citing it as if citing were a magical act which results in automatically winning a debate.

Fourthly, you should have the guts to identify yourself by some handle other than "anonymous."

Anyway, looking at your article, I notice one interesting assumption right in the first two sentences. The article says:

For the number of Muslims to outnumber non-Muslims by midcentury, it would require either breeding on a scale rarely seen in history or for immigration to continue at a pace that's now politically unacceptable. More likely, new controls will slow Muslim immigration.

But "new controls" are not a force of Nature, they would be a political decision of the Europeans, and one resulting from the European move to the Right. The European Left, at present, has absolutely no will to impose any such controls.

An additional assumption is that, for the Muslims to menace non-Muslim Europeans, they need to "outnumber" them. But right now, as a minority, the Muslims are behaving very aggressively toward the non-Muslims in Europe, including displaying community support for uprovoked assaults against said non-Muslims. Even a minority can represent a signficant threat, if it be a sufficiently aggressive minority.

The article is on better ground pointing out that immigrant birthrates are falling, while European birthrates are rising. This is true, and representative of a general demographic truth (the poor breed faster than do the affluent, due to the difference in their most efficient strategies for replacement owing to differing death rates). But it ignores that the immigrant birthrates are still higher (and the more so for recent immigrants); and that as long as unchecked immigration continues there is another source of reinforcement (and of the most dangerous kind, since recent immigrants are entirely unassimilated).

Moreover, the myth of Eurabia implies the existence of a united Islam, a bloc capable of collective and potentially dangerous action. The truth is that there are no powerful Muslim political movements in Europe, either continentwide or at the national level, and the divisions that separate Muslims worldwide, most obviously between Sunnis and Shiites, are apparent in Europe as well. Each major nation in Europe has drawn Muslim immigrants from distinct regions of the Islamic world, often former colonies, with different traditions and outlooks.

The Muslim menace to Europe does not require a "united Islam." It merely requires that the Muslim immigrants share certain cultural characteristics, such as intolerance of other faiths, an abusive attitude toward women, and a propensity toward personal violence in pursuit of their prejudices. Furthermore, most of the Muslim immigrants to any particular European country will come from the same Muslim country and tend to be of the same Muslim denomination. No one claimed that "Eurabia" needed to be united -- it would be scant comfort to the non-Muslim French in a Muslim-majority France to know that their new masters wanted war with a Muslim-majority Britain or Germany!