Do you consider Islam a threat?

Post Reply New Topic

not really...only some stupid extremist does... but it's only a religion... i was once muslim...i see nothing threatening...

i feel quite sorry for those people....

I think all religions are bastardized from their original intent and I think religious fundamentalists are just bullies and their dogma is just another weapon.

For a chilling view of a theocratic America- read Margaret Attwoods-The Handmaids Tale.

folks, as you can see, religion's true voice as spoken by our friend here. And as usaul, he forgets facts because they don't suit him, like how Obama won because the majority of US citzens told people like Brus here to STFU and GTFO NAO! Its people like him that are usally the cause of problems, and right now, he spreads his fail, and if you think everyone thinks like you, this liberal does not. The past 8 years and the destruction of America were brought about by your right wing christains and as usual, the intillegent people have to mop up after your mess, much like an older sibling has to clean up a whining toddles piss mess. Also, there is no "white" race anymore. I am white, but also 1/16th irish, 1/16th scottish, 1/8 italian, and 1/24th black foot indian. America is a mixed country, just like our president is mixed. Also, you lost the civil war, he is your president, deal with it. I also suggest you quit hitting the bong so hard, because you are talking total nonsense.

Religion in general is a threat.

Some thoughts...

I'm inclined to agree with your general sentiment, but I think it's more complex than that. Yes, religion is often used as an excuse to hide political and economic goals, but religion is also a symptom of the human condition that allows war to occur in the first place.



You are making a lot of assumptions about how others feel. You should recognize that perhaps you are surrounding yourself with like-minded people, and that perhaps you are in fact the minority opinion on this subject.



Well-put.

In fact, your whole post is amazingly reasoned.



There is no such thing as a "native people". They were just there for a while. This is incredibly close minded, and frankly, just untrue. It's not "natural", if it was, there wouldn't be so so many people welcoming and accepting their new foreign friends.



Yes, but what you are inferring goes well beyond how you personally relate to foreigners and minorities.



One thing that makes America great, you don't get to decide what it means to be an "American". In fact, I'd go so far to say that many immigrants show more of those great qualities that I consider "American" than you do.



But you do desire to control the part of the world that you inhabit, and you have absolutely no right to do so. You only have the right to control that which is your personal property.



I am not a Communist, but this statement is fallible. The correct statement would be "Communism hasn't worked yet".







The extreme far-right is a form of Anarchy. Now, I realize the left-right view of politics is less than ideal, and as such, doesn't really cover where you're coming from. To really pin down your politics, we'd need 5 dimensions : economic liberal/conservative, social liberal/conservative, statist/libertarian, isolationist/imperialist, racist/multi-culturalist.



Worst book ever. This book should be used only as an example of how not to think.



This is what we call in the poker world being "results-oriented" (which is a bad thing that shows a narrow viewpoint that ignores various contexts). If the Christians had their backs against the wall, they would likely resort to similar tactics. Terrorist groups use terrorism because they view it as the only effective means of waging their war, they don't have standing armies or sophisticated technologies. Blacks that riot do so out of pure desperation. Of course, some will take advantage of the situation, but that's just human nature, not "black nature". Christians do not feel helpless, have access to government persuasion, and as such, have no need for more extreme measures. It's not because they are somehow more morally pure, it's just that they're better off.



They already are.



Eh, economically they were pretty strong.



This is just stupid. The government works for whoever pays them and keeps them in power. Jesse Jackson and friends have some pull, but not nearly as much as larger (and richer) lobbying groups.



Although you may like it to be so, you are not the king of reality. You are stating absolutes with regard to your opinion. I'll say it again, you shouldn't have read the Ayn Rand crap. It is so unfortunate that the Rand crowd use an obnoxious and absolutist simpleton to enforce their relative opinions as fact.



I'd suggest you take your own advice. If you go in thinking one thing, you will inevitably use that filter to indoctrinate yourself. True education demands an honest and open mind.



Why? You are racist, and you are fascist. You may not think you are, but I don't see how any objective understanding of your politics and the definitions for these terms can not find a strong link.



I absolutely agree with you. The problem is that you're not saying it like you feel it. Yes, they have the right to "control their learning environment" in so much that you can put them in private schools, or home-school them. But, what exactly does "take the appropriate measures" mean? If by that obtuse term you mean "enforce my perceived rights above the actual rights of those I don't like", then, well, that is of course, not your right.



I actually believe you're a pretty smart guy, so statements like this just befuddle me. It is the right of the employer to take whatever steps necessary to create a working environment of their choosing. It is your right to either accept the terms of your employment, or quit. If you're simply "unhappy" with the terms of your employment, well, that's the breaks.



This. This is incredibly well-put. I was going to add my own piece at the end of this, but it would basically just be a longer tangent-based version of this. So I'll just say this. This.

I'll kick it off with this. In the first place, I'm not one of those Ayn-Rand-o'philes, and I am amblivent to her at best. I merely thought that that one quote was quite profound.



Well, YOU certainly aren't going to sit there and dictate to me what rights I do and do not have. If you do, or the communists do, you better be prepared to back it up with an army. In all honesty, I don't care what you do or don't do; You can be their "homies" and celebrate Kwanza with them and eat watermelon or whatever. I will tell you three rights I do have(and if you differ, too bad.)...... I have the right to privacy, property, and freedom of association. In addition, I also have the right to congregate and vote with like-minded people to create a council, regulate our community, and keep out people we don't like. I understand the need to protect the rights of sub-groups of people, but big-government has turned that on its head and has turned positive-discrimination into a vehicle for minorites to dictate policy in this country. Anyway, big-government and limp-wristed, pantywaist liberals aren't going to force acceptance of their agendas on me.

Now I am not saying that I can control or I care who lives in every house in my town. I'll just get up and move. I already did it once, and I moved to a place way out in the country where I have no neighbors at all. However, the government is trying to destroy this cause of action as well. They take minorities and purposefully give them free housing everywhere in white areas to destroy white-flight and enforce miscegenation.



Yes, it is our country. It should work for the white majority.

Look, I'm not doing or thinking anything that blacks or other minorities aren't doing to protect or advance their cultures. If I was a black man, no one would take issue with me hiring only blacks or wanting to live in an all black area. And actually, I don't even hate blacks..... I just want them to stop expecting whites to pay their way in this world and living a double-standard when not one of them living today has ever been a legal slave. I don't feel that they are genetically inferior, our communities would be better off being separate. As for other minorities....... They should just pack up and leave.



Again, no liberals will come tell me what rights I have or don't have. If any group is engaging in group-think or is trying to impose their agenda in this country, it is the liberals trying to do so because they think that they are somehow more intelligent or know what is good for us. Liberalism/Multiculturalism is the new Fascism.

I forgot that Diversity "enriches us." OK..... I feel real enriched.



We beat this horse over and over again........ It is about both race and culture. More so about culture.



Well the majority of white voters in this country voted for McCain, and I am only concerned with American whites as far as for whom I advocate. That the Rainbow Coalition got their boy in office is irrelevant to me. Black and minority illegal America is separate from me.

Barry isn't half-bad anyway. He seems like one of the more decent ones. Its just the people who voted for him who are well....... you know. And that ugly, anti-white racist wife of his........I would not be the first to make a simian comparision.



I'm not that far to the right.



It has been proven not to work in its pure form. It can only sustain itself temporarily by adopting capitalist measures.



The Metics have no right to be here in the first place. They are at our mercy if they choose to live here. We could have saved alot of trouble by never even letting them in in the first place. They should try to fix things in their homeland instead of trying to colonize America.



I didn't "go into" education thinking one thing, that is for sure. Contrary to what you think, I was never spoon-fed anything by my parents or the Mormon church or whoever. I have a very open mind and I am far from being one who would shut down opposing viewpoints or advocate a fascist government. Actually, I like hearing a spectrum of opinions. It just so happens that most of my views fall on the right-side of the fence with a few exceptions(I am anti-Death penalty.) You know nothing about me in the first place, and if you met me, I bet you would be surprised by what you would find. I am probably not quite like what you imagine. In any case, I don't or didn't sit in class with preconceived notions that filtered out ideas that I didn't like. I was objective in coming to a conclusion such as it was arrogant liberal professors who were trying to spread their diversity-poison diesease. I was the "minority" in school in the sense of where I fell ideologically on issues, so in a sense I was the one who had to fight off group-think and advocate for myself, much more so than the other way around.

It is really the liberal teachers and professors, if anything, who have that "filter." These people deny cultural differences and spread the leftist garbage that was spoon-fed to THEM. Take a good hard look at which side is really propegating their group-think and is intent on crushing opposition. I went to school eager to learn, with an open-mind, with respect for all of my teachers, regardless of their political leanings, but it was the leftist Obama-mamas who were intent on forcing conformity. When they/you insist on a "weak-mind" or an indoctrinated mind, they really mean someone who is at odds with themselves.

As far as I go, I can't understand why you and others keep inisting that I was somehow indoctrinated with "wingnut, right-wing propaganda," when you know that that is not how it went down. My parents had a marginal impact at best on my ideological development and I hardly sit here and thump quotes from the Book of Mormon or such sycophantic things. I don't think I have listened to an hour of "wingnut hate-radio" in my life. I arrived at whatever I am today in a completely independent fashion, a combination of education and life-experience; I have never had a mentor or any such thing. I merely disagreed with my liberal collegues that the way to learn from history was more apologism, more welfare, more "tolerance." In truth, we/they got it all wrong in what they gleaned from historical lessons and events. It is my opinion that the entirely incorrect conclusions were drawn from Modern History by the liberal educational consensus. The answer is not diversity and emasculating our societies.



Well, I am "Racist" and probably "Fascist" as well by the liberal, namby-pamby, pusscake standards of today. I'd probably be happier living in a different Era.

I can see why many would feel me to be a racist, which is fine. I am not offended in any way by being called that. And I can see why you would call me a fascist as well...... Well, actually I can't. I don't see how someone who professes to have a modicum of intelligence can run around throwing the Fascist card at me when the fact is that me being a Fascist is the farthest thing from the truth. I want very little "big-government," and the fact is that Fascism is the ultimate form of big government. As I said earlier, I advocate separation and minimalism. I have never expressed any desire for a corporate, single-party state. Fascism is defined only by what it opposes, and I define my views by what I favor more so than what I oppose.

Then again, it is common Liberal strategem to run around and play the racist card or the nazi card to try and crush dissenters.



Well thanks, and I begrudgingly return the compliment. At least you are past calling for my chemical castration or such things.

Incidentally, the only time in my life I wore a mohawk was when we were getting ready to go into Tikrit in 2005. We both wore mohawks, but for different reasons. I don't care if those people are your 'bros or whatever, but they aren't mine.

A-f***ing-men! After I read that novel I had a nearly uncontrollable urge to throw a brick through the window of the nearest church. However, I controlled myself. I am a strong believer in private property.

Please keep in mind that in the Real World, main line Christians are not that kind of a danger to the rest of us. There may be some Over the Line Fundies here and there that blow up abortion clinics (a very rare happenstance in the U.S.) and of course Jihadi type Muslims, the kind that strap on the bomb.

Orthodox Jews are harmless to everyone except other Orthodox Jews.

ruveyn

okay, fact check, the majority of white voters voted for Obama, not McCain. second, there is no white race save for inbred ret*ds like yourself. Everyone is mixed heritage, the only "pure" white people are ret*d and inbred to the point of death. And as usual, you fail at facts. You prefer to call names and be a general dumbass instead of thinking. You are taking this waaay to srs. us "liberals" are in power because people are rather sick and tired of your small minded ideas and fear mongering. This is 2009, not 1909, grow up. Get over your small penis neurotism and think for a change. Its standard displacement, instead of taking responisblity like a mature adult, you act like a child and blame everyone else for your massive failure in life. Whatever america you think it is, its not. Its a mixed race, and as of 2009, rather liberal place. So you can either A. Kill yourself (I am realyl for that option) or B. Move to another country. And if you refuse to accept minorites, I suggest you stop using peanut butter (invented by a black man) pace makers, trains (braking system invented by blacks) and give up your miradana warning, right to habus corpus, and other legal decisons brought about by minorites. I also suggest you stop smoking meth and banging your sister to boot. In summary, your "white" race doesn't exist, your god is dead, and gays are getting married and have butt secks. Us liberals are in control of the country, so pelase cease your fail and accept the fact you are tiny dicked KKK bumpkin who needs to be put down like any brain damaged animal.

oy cognito....I think you're going a mite too far there..... o.O Wishing death on someone else should be kept to yourself, not in a public forum =.=

Fair enough, but in my view, any rights you feel you have, must be applied equally to those you disagree with or do not like. I'm not going to tell you what your rights absolutely are, but I would hope you recognize that your rights are everybody's rights.

When I talk about rights, I'm using what I call Libertarianism 101 - You have the right to do anything, so long as it does not directly affect the rights of others.



I'm 100% with you one the first two, and more or less with you on the last one, depending on exactly what you mean by this. If you mean you have the right to decide who you converse with, who you befriend, who you spend time with, etc, I agree. If you mean you have the right to decide who your neighbor is, who you co-worker is, or other similar relationships, I don't agree.



In my view, you have the right to congregate, the right to vote with like-minded people to create a council, the right to "regulate" your community, and absolutely no right to keep out people you don't like. You have the right to regulate in the sense that you can make a rule of "no smoking in public parks", but you do not have the right to make a rule of "no blacks". If you really want this ultimate control, you can always buy up a huge piece of land and create a compound. Because it's your personal property, you then do have this ultimate control. However, when the community you seek to absolutely control involves public land, that right to absolute control goes out the window.



I disagree with both sentiments.

It is the country of everyone that lives here, whether born here or not.

It should work for everyone. I could accept an argument that it should work primarily for tax-payers, but that's as far as I would take it.



In fairness, what you are doing is merely what a fringe minority within "black society" is also doing. Black nationalists make up a small percentage of the overall black population of this country.



Again, you are suggesting that all black adhere to this thought process, when only a minority actually does. I am vehemently anti-welfare, but for very different reasons than you. I adhere to the idea of "give a man a fish...." Welfare induces complacency and negates social mobility. However, a life on welfare is really no life at all, so let's not make it out to be better than it is.



I'm not a liberal.

I accepted that we would need a very complex political view to pin down your political views, so do me the same favor and don't try to pinhole me into a very narrow context. I am socially a liberal, yes, but economically, I am very conservative.



That's just not true. Even if it was tried hundred and hundreds of times, and failed every time, that would still not prove that it "can't" work, only that it "hasn't" worked.



I'm with you on this to some degree. I am generally disgusted by the group-think of the far-left, but that doesn't necessarily resign me to a position where you in fact came to education with an open mind. I am not saying you absolutely indoctrinated yourself, but at the very least, perhaps your revulsion of said group-think made you a touch reactionary, and as such, reinforced certain viewpoints you had going in. I am suggesting this as a possibility (one that I have a hunch about), not an absolute fact.



I'm not insisting that at all. I am suggesting a possibility. More likely, I think you had certain leanings going in, and your experiences with higher-education led you to become more hard-line in said leanings, and to seek out certain viewpoints that were more in line with where you were coming from. I think it was very much a personal journey that led you to where you are, I absolutely recognize your individualism. However, I still think that your journey had some serious flaws in its approach.



The silly qualifications do not serve you well. The only standards I am using to describe you as a racist and a fascist are the standards of Merriam-Webster.



The term goes beyond simply the governmental system of fascism. For example...

"Oppressive, dictatorial control."

"the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism."

These are the definitions of the word I am applying to you. I am not suggesting you are a proponent of...

"forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism"



I am not one to throw around the fascist label lightly. However, in your case, I find it hard to get away from the distinct similarities.



The love is just flowing in this thread. Let's do lunch.

If the followers kept their religions to themselves and worshipped privately, I don't think it would be much of a threat.... in fact that goes for all religions.... the only one that got it right is the Amish, they keep to themselves and don't bug anyone, the best part is they are not out on some holy war to convert people. Sure thay may hate our guts behind our backs, but they sure don't show it.

Well, the bombings and shootings are relatively rare, but the burglaries, vandalism, and harassment have been ongoing for decades. Here's a chronology of murders, assaults, bombing, arson, and acid attacks.
http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion ... xtreme.asp



Actually, there are some who engage in behavior quite similar to muslim extremists - their actions range from harassing women in public spaces who don't follow their standards of modesty to ethnic cleansing so they can build illegal settlements.

Brusilov---

i'm curious as to why you're so frightened. do you assume that everyone has the motive of "taking over the country" and making it one culture or another? where did this fear come from? where are the facts to back it up? (please---something other than anecdotal evidence, random examples of fringe groups; they have no power.)

also: if Obama is the world president (and perhaps he is), i would suggest this is the result of thinking like yours. "the US must kill or be killed (until it calls the shots.)" and then again---is this genuine fear--the stated fear of being invaded? or is it justification for something else? whose corporations own much of the world's resources now? (call them multi-national if you like. but who are the CEO's? generally not people from "third world" countries.)

and who is in bed with the multi-nationals?

this is still a "white country" in terms of relative power. but here's another question: what percentage of the white population actually controls the vast majority of the resources?

i think we're all fighting ghosts. the enemy you've created doesn't exist.

[/quote]

That is in Israel. You very rarely find this kind of misbehavior in the U.S.

Orthodox Jews do not bother non-Jews on matters of religion or attempt conversion. Being Jewish is too good for the goyim. This is quite different from the way Fundies operate.

ruveyn

Hmmm you sure about that ruvie? I thought those orthodox jews were the ones against Israel's creation in the first place. <.< (or if it's not the orthodox, i do know that some jews do not recognize the state of Israel for religious reasons)

Well, it is certainly a great time to be alive right now if you hate white people.....

Cognito Wrote

Check your facts yourself. This is a blatantly incorrect statement. I quote wikipedia.....

"It was observed that this election exhibited the continuation of some of the polarization trends evident in the 2000 and 2004 elections.[204] McCain won whites by 12 points, while Obama won blacks by 91 points, Hispanics by 36 points, and Asians by 27 points."

And thats not even counting Middle-Easterners, whom the government has wrongly been calling white for 130 years. Regardless, Obama's 53% of the popular vote is hardly indicative of a tremendous landslide that you seem to be suggesting. Whatever white voters did switch to the Democratic party probably did so more for perceived economic reasons as opposed to a sudden zest for liberalism, as you seem to suggest(Obama promised a bigger stimulus check.)



Clearly you fail at facts. I was not disturbed so much by the utter tastelessness of your post(s) as to your knowingly false statement.



Well thanks for basically confirming what I said about a jealous liberal and homosexual coterie zealously trying to crush all opposition and basically corroborating everything else I stated. Gesticulating homosexuals are the ones out there trying to put down everyone who is against their sodomite, feminizing agenda, not the other way around. Heck, that MS USA contestant virtually lost her crown because she dared voice opposition to gay-marriage. It is people such as yourself who are really the small-minded fascists in this country, attempting to destroy all dissenters. You may think you know what is good for us, to have no God and be multi-racial and gay, but the fact is that you are just flat-out incorrect and pathetic.



Your America is liberal, and that is fine. I disapprove of things like Marxism and mulitculturalism in general, but I will defend to the death your right to voice Marxist or liberal opinions. Though Marxism is incorrect, I am not the one who is trying to impose "his way or the highway."(Execpt for immigrants.) Again, you are the one trying to silence the opposition by making offhanded insults based around white-redneck stereotypes.



Well, this sentence is just soooo demonstrative of your "open mind" or professed liberal tolerance. Glad to see its not all about egotistical control. Of course, you are very "tolerant," but only if it concurs with your nihilism or decadence. Your "control of the country" only extends as far as who you favor.



You are right..... This was brought on because of a minority. Because Arturo Miranda was basically a scuzball crapbag career criminal and low-life who stumbled into a legal loophole. It wasn't like he was some great legal mind or any sort of positive influence. His lawyers were responsible for Miranda.



Yes, because they were the criminals and the defendants.



What minority had anything to do with bringing about Habeus Corpus? Clearly you are the one "hitting the bong too hard." Habeus Corpus was a purely Anglosphere legal precedent.



Yes there are. There are clear alignments into tribes, nationalities, and other demographic structures. While we all sprang from the same source, differences have arisen over the last 10,000 years or so.



Only those few who have been halfway brainwashed. Anyway, how many are really that accommodating or are just harboring silent resentment and anger at these unwanted guests. Many people are nice to you to your face.



All but immigrants.



Not all blacks subscribe to black-nationalism, but that wasn't the point I was making. I was saying that it is acceptable in America for blacks to be protectionist and "proud." If a white tries to do the same thing, he is labeled "racist" and is ostracized from politics and other social areas and is exiled to the fringe. A different standard exists for acceptable behavior and attitudes between whites and minorites. I wasn't stating that all blacks are necessarily monolithic, although they subscribe to a conformity that is far more regimented than what we see in white America.

If Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton were white and they got on the news and substituted white for black but kept the same ideological viewpoints otherwise, they would be treated like David Duke. These black leaders get to sit at the mainstream political lunch-table. If I was black and I sat here and advocated "black-separation" or whatever, no one would bat an eye or hardly think anything of it. They might object, but I would take hardly the same heat I currently take for advocating White-separatism.





So if I owned a business, I could refuse service, according to you, on ANY grounds?



I wasn't referring to you specifically as "liberal." I was talking about the general opposition. I understand your libertarianism.

In any case, I thought my views for the 5 facets had already been made explicit...... But I guess not.

1. Economics- My main goal is the destruction of multiculturalism, not maximum profit. I suppose I am 65% Economic Liberal

2. 100% Social Conservative.

3. Toss up as far as Libertarian/Statist.

4. 100% Isolationist.

5. Racist/Multiculturalist..... Nuff said.



I wasn't one of these kids who didn't form their ideological viewpoint until Govt. Class in my senior year of HS or until a run-in with the Communists at college. I hardly entered any school as a lump of clay that someone could mold into what they wanted. Now I am not the same person I was at 12, 15, 18, or 21, and defined viewpoints have been forming all throught my life. I have never met an intelligent person who was a complete moderate, unconcerned, or who had no definite views or any polarizing biases. I would be embarassed to sit here and tell you that I did not start to form ideological opinions until Sr. year govt. class in HS or a run in with the Communists at college. No, I certainly knew politically who I was early on in life, but I never let it interfere with an objective knowledge of facts or an honest interpretation of history. The fact that I was precocious when it came to an understanding of History and Politics in no way compromised an objective viewpoint or an honest interpretation.

(I noticed btw that most run-of-the-mill students know or care nothing about politics until the 12th grade, when they take government and suddenly conform to being raging ultra-liberal dems.)

I was the kind of kid who could recite the Kings of France chronologically at age 5 or tell you every country and capital of Africa or such things. I really have never spent any time whatsoever trolling uber-conservative websites or attempting to alter history to fit a certain viewpoint. I am all for an honest evaluation of History, but from what I have seen, it is the liberal circles who are distorting history. They present an unbalanced version of "diversity history" in school textbooks in which every minority group gets patterened references to how they did whatever, without regard to any real perspective or balance. Certainly minority groups have contributed much, but things have to be put into perspective. Great Zimbabwae is not as important as the French Revolution, but each gets virtually equal space to satisfy black-demands that they get their own little chunk. And every group gets their own little space, so by the time it is all said and done, we have a version of history fabricated and distorted to satisfy an ideological agenda, and make sure everyone is happy(except whites.)

I opened up my cousin's history textbook not long ago, and no lie, there was a chapter in there titled "The role of blacks in 13th century Europe.' The liberals are doing their mixing and matching to satisfy this diversity agenda. In English classes, not to be critical of the Joy Luck Club, but every minority group gets their book in the curriculum, so by the time students are done with Native Son, an Asian book, a Native American book, a Jewish Book, a Mexican book, and whatever, there is no time for anything else. The Joy Luck Club is not quite Dickens. It is all about appeasing the minorities. I'm not saying teach the same bigoted version of the past, but put things in perspective and give credit where credit is due.



I never attempted to alter indisputable facts with some ideological standpoint. It just so happened that most of my views fall on the conservative side of the fence. I'm not closed off to liberal opinions. In any case, you could hardly understand my "journey" in its entirety, I think. I'm not sitting here or I wasn't dead-set against leftist rhetoric or arguements.



I'm not particularly offended at being called fascist. I don't even care about defending myself from anti-fascists or whatever. I favor elected, representative government as opposed to "oppressive, dictatorial control," provided that government is elected by the rightful citizens of the country.

I suppose you can call me "fascist" because you are not sure quite else what fits. It is like calling a bat a bird because it has wings and flies.



I can tell you that the USA will be majority-minority in 2038, the UK in 2085....... The Minority birthrate is 8.1 kids per family across the EU against 1.43 for everyone in the EU. The demographic numbers don't lie and the fact is that minorities are systematically breeding like rabbits while whites refuse to reproduce for various reasons. Wikipedia says that the "Muslim population of Europe is expected to nearly double by 2015." Not that anyone has a specific agenda(wink,) but they will hijack the land and culture by the sheer weight of numbers alone, and our leaders don't have the fortitude to take a stand. We keep letting more and more in and giving them more power, but to what end? We let all these strange people in whom have a completely different system of values as a culture than us, with less respect for human life and human dignity.

Granted, we forgot about 9/11 and the Rodney King riots in this country, or the Madrid, London, and Glasgow bombings. We brush terrorism under the rug and the liberal media takes 9-11 off TV, so we can forget about it..... We musn't offend the Muslims or be angry at them for blowing up our buildings or killing our own people in brutal terrorist assaults. The liberals didn't want us to be "angry" that we were attacked by Muslims or the minorites that they are in bed with, so they don't report black-on-white hate crime or such things. They insist it is "disturbing," but they don't want whites to wake up to what is really going on.