Islamization' of Paris a Warning to the West

[Irish_Army01]

[Video in Link]

PARIS - Friday in Paris. A hidden camera shows streets blocked by huge crowds of Muslim worshippers and enforced by a private security force.

This is all illegal in France: the public worship, the blocked streets, and the private security. But the police have been ordered not to intervene.

It shows that even though some in the French government want to get tough with Muslims and ban the burqa, other parts of the French government continue to give Islam a privileged status.

An ordinary French citizen who has been watching the Islamization of Paris decided that the world needed to see what was happening to his city. He used a hidden camera to start posting videos on YouTube. His life has been threatened and so he uses the alias of "Maxime Lepante. "

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/201...g-to-the-West/

[Saoirse]

Hey Irish,
Thats not surprising. I am sure we will see it here. That is what has happened in all of Europe. It's sad how quickly the French have forgotten the Nazi march down the tree lined champs elysees. Maybe they should remove the trees.BTW.... the link isn't working.
Slainte'

[SF-TX]

Link to the article:

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/201...g-to-the-West/

Paraphrasing a French politician interviewed by CBN, "Islam is not compatible with life in a modern society."

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by Saoirse

It's sad how quickly the French have forgotten the Nazi march down the tree lined Champs Elysees.

Not every Frenchman was in the French resistance--that is, until the war ended.

[Saoirse]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

Not every Frenchman was was in the French resistance--that is, until the war ended.

Yes Sigaba, I know. I was in school when they were still actually teaching history.

SF-TX, thanks. You must have corrected the link, its working now.

<heavy sigh> After watching that video and hearing the words, "it is France adapting to Islam", it scares me to think when I may hear those words uttered here. AND...will anyone listen? Polygemy, welfare to boot...they are bankrupting France?! And see that praying in the street..enmass...is frightening. I see it as a show of force, nothing more. I guarantee you that followers of any other religion would ever be allowed to do that. But yet, people still want to defend them.

[nmap]

Originally Posted by Saoirse

But yet, people still want to defend them.

That's the problem in a nutshell.

The West believes in religious freedom. The Islamics claim their actions involve precisely that. They also assert that everyone worships the same god, again invoking the principle of religious freedom.

The key issue, however, is not religion but behavior. The West has not, apparently, developed the will to differentiate between the two. If we are to prevail, we will, IMO, find it necessary to prohibit a variety of behaviors by Islamics. I won't hold my breath.

[Saoirse]

Originally Posted by nmap

That's the problem in a nutshell.

The West believes in religious freedom. The Islamics claim their actions involve precisely that. They also assert that everyone worships the same god, again invoking the principle of religious freedom.

The key issue, however, is not religion but behavior. The West has not, apparently, developed the will to differentiate between the two. If we are to prevail, we will, IMO, find it necessary to prohibit a variety of behaviors by Islamics. I won't hold my breath.

Nmap, I agree. Nor has the West learned to differentiate between what is a religion and what is ideology. I think the definitions of them are quite clear. I won't hold my breath either. I think we have seen and heard plenty of scholars who have either grown up as former muslims or who have studied it just for the sake of studying it ...say plenty! They have tried to teach and inform and yet, The West has continued to turn a blind eye and a deaf year because it's just NOT PC. So why is it ok for the muslims to do what they do but not let 4 young Christian men give out pamphlets about Jesus in Dearborn, MI?
People continue to argue that if we don't let them practice their "religion" then we are violating their constitutional right. On that note, one could argue, or rather re-argue the whole stance on the "separation of church and state" on a new level. My argument would be, if we indeed have that separation, then it is not up to the government to protect them. Because, by protecting them, they are infusing the will of the government into religion (providing that you believe that islam is a religion and not an ideology). Moreover, if defending the rights of the muslims is the way to go, then you are in fact providing aid and comfort to the enemy who's belief is that islam should rule the world. The only way to rule the world is by taking over..one city, county, state, country at a time. AND by doing so, wholeheartedly violating your own constitution, thus one would, perhaps, consider it treason?
<whew> did that make sense?

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by Saoirse

Entire post.

If one accepts the debatable premise that Islam is an 'ideology' and not a religion, then how is it any more or less aggressive, more dangerous, or more effective at spreading itself than any other ideology?

If Islam is an ideology, does its persistence testify to its strength--or to its enduring social, cultural, economic, and strategic weaknesses?

[nmap]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

If one accepts the debatable premise that Islam is an 'ideology' and not a religion, then how is it any more or less aggressive, more dangerous, or more effective at spreading itself than any other ideology?

If Islam is an ideology, does its persistence testify to its strength--or to its enduring social, cultural, economic, and strategic weaknesses?

I doubt it's much worse than was Pol Pot's ideology - though it does seem more persistent.

However, if one really needs a picture of the dangers of Islam, one need only examine their handiwork. Here's a LINK.

[Richard]

Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion--several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven....The higher animals have no religion. And we are told that they are going to be left out in the Hereafter. I wonder why? It seems questionable taste.

- Mark Twain, "The Lowest Animal"

Mr Clemons knew what he was talking about.

Richard's $.02

[Irish_Army01]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

Link to the article:

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/201...g-to-the-West/

Paraphrasing a French politician interviewed by CBN, "Islam is not compatible with life in a modern society."

Thanks for reposting the Link

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by nmap

However, if one really needs a picture of the dangers of Islam, one need only examine their handiwork. Here's a LINK.

nmap--

With respect, the logic of your argument is unclear. Is violence against women any more or less repugnant when it is conducted by Muslims? Is it America's job to spread its standards of civilized behavior globally?

[nmap]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

nmap--

With respect, the logic of your argument is unclear. Is violence against women any more or less repugnant when it is conducted by Muslims? Is it America's job to spread its standards of civilized behavior globally?

Let me try again.

The current actions of several subsets of the Islamic superset are suggestive of behavior patterns which may represent a risk to societies which permit population increases among the Islamic elements of such societies, whether through immigration or conversion.

Please note the occurrence of so-called honor killings in the U.S. LINK

Such actions are of a piece with the earlier link showing the woman with her nose and ears cut off.

One can argue what level of risk exists; however, the evidence indicates Islamics have behaviors which do represent some risk.

[T-Rock]

Is violence against women any more or less repugnant when it is conducted by Muslims?

IMO, it’s just as repugnant or more so since it is condoned throughout Islamic Law and Islamic society. Gender inequity and the oppression of women is rooted in the teachings of Islam and it’s disgusting…

The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women." (Bukhari 7:62:33)

"Men are overseers over women, by reason of that wherewith Allah hath made one of them excel over another, and by reason of that which they expend of their substance. Wherefore righteous women are obedient, and are watchers in husbands absence by the aid and protection of Allah. And those wives whose refractoriness ye fear, exhort them, and avoid them in beds, and beat them; but if they obey you, seek not a way against them; verily Allah is ever Lofty, Grand." (Sura 4:34 - Medina)
( أضربوهن (used in 4:34) Idriboohunna Beat them )

Sharia Law:

m10.12 Dealing with a rebellious wife

…He may hit her whether she is rebellious only once, though a weaker opinion holds that he may not hit her unless there is repeated rebelliousness.

(Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law pg 541 & pgs. 506-553. Book N on Divorce is really interesting)

Is it America's job to spread its standards of civilized behavior globally?

Should we accept and support misogyny, or should we look the other way?

[Saoirse]

Originally Posted by T-Rock

IMO, it’s just as repugnant or more so since it is condoned throughout Islamic Law and Islamic society. Gender inequity and the oppression of women is rooted in the teachings of Islam and it’s disgusting…

The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women." (Bukhari 7:62:33)

"Men are overseers over women, by reason of that wherewith Allah hath made one of them excel over another, and by reason of that which they expend of their substance. Wherefore righteous women are obedient, and are watchers in husbands absence by the aid and protection of Allah. And those wives whose refractoriness ye fear, exhort them, and avoid them in beds, and beat them; but if they obey you, seek not a way against them; verily Allah is ever Lofty, Grand." (Sura 4:34 - Medina)
( أضربوهن (used in 4:34) Idriboohunna Beat them )

Sharia Law:

m10.12 Dealing with a rebellious wife

…He may hit her whether she is rebellious only once, though a weaker opinion holds that he may not hit her unless there is repeated rebelliousness.

(Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law pg 541 & pgs. 506-553. Book N on Divorce is really interesting)



Should we accept and support misogyny, or should we look the other way?

Sigaba:

With respect, the logic of your argument is unclear. Is violence against women any more or less repugnant when it is conducted by Muslims? Is it America's job to spread its standards of civilized behavior globally?

There is also the perpetuation of the lie that all are equal in islam, that their women are revered and respected. And let us not forget to mention condoning pedophilia. When these poor girls/women try to flee their tormentors, they are often recaptured and returned.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/wo...ef=todayspaper

Sigaba, I would like to answer that question from MPOV. It may not be our job to spread standards of behavior; however, I do not see any problem with attempting to help those in need. When an entire ideology is hellbent on making women below second class and abusing children, specifically young boys, do we sit back and allow it to happen? To we turn a blind eye? When entire ideology and its so called "moderate" adherents sit back and do nothing or say nothing, doesn't that make them just as guilty as the offenders?
I remember seeing a video shot by a bunch of teens (can't find it on youtube) while a girl was beaten half to death, here in this country. Onlookers just stood there and watched, nobody even made the attempt to help this poor girl. People were outraged! People's sensibilities were highly offended. The question that was posed, "should the onlookers be punished with the offenders?".
That being said, when an entire ideology is making the wholehearted attempt to infuse itself into a country and it's culture only to change it and the people to their ideology and they are using bullying, violence, fear, terror, threat, usurption, not to mention that countries own laws and culture against it, what do you then? Sit back and just let it happen? Sip your iced tea and hope for the best while watching it all unfold through rose colored glasses?