Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Nowhere Man]

And I'll summarize what you've taught me, Big V.

Mohamed was a pedophilic shepherd/yak herder.

Islam is about Dhimmitude/the Hadith/the most extreme characterization you can find.

[thepeel]

[thepeel]

Yup, no problems in Malmo.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2006-05%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=malmo+rape+islam

I bet, DD, your Bro lives in a nice area (but with the way you speak I'm sure you'll describe him as a social worker for Muslim women gang-raped by pro-American MBA students who lives in a housing project, because that is how badass and real he is. Right?) and reads the amazingly state and self censored Swedish rags.

http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/12/immigrant-rape-wave-in-sweden.html

But, I suppose the above is right wing propaganda and all those girls aren't being raped for being non-Muslim.

Either way, I've been to Europe. Stayed for a short while. I was expecting to see intellectuals chatting it up about life and love in cafes. But, instead, I saw low-class idiots who wouldn't know a "social issue" (that you apparently think they do nothing else but discuss) from their drunken, soccer obsessed arses.

And, in your first post you talked about Americans watching reality TV. Dude, where do you think reality TV came from? You may not be aware, but England has a fairly active tabloid press. My oh my, those folks sure must be busy, what with their social activism/protesting and such AND still having the time to obsess about Jordan's boob job.

You are deluded in your notions of Eurotopia. You want an active civil society that is engaged in and understanding of world issues? Move to New York or San Fransisco.

[bigverne]

[thepeel]

BV, you know darn well that they simply cannot attack anything that you have written because you have been careful to use Islamic material and texts to justify your assertions. The Koran does stipulate that, at times, it is acceptable to kill non-Muslims. This is a fact.

And it also leads to a larger question. Why on earth would anyone want to defend a religion (which is nothing more than institutions organized around an imaginary friend) that directly causes the oppression of women/sexual minorities/religious minorities etc? When Christians act crazy those same people who demonize you will be demonizing them. They live by one rule -- Thou ought not criticize brown people -- when they should be criticizing anyone who makes this world a less safe, less free and less fun place to live.

[On the other hand]

[thepeel]

Good eye OTOH!

[khyber]

I don't understand: She provided false information on a naturalization certificate. Doesn't that ALONE make her a terrorist?

[thepeel]

[Hollywoodaction]

Her full name is Ayaan Hirsi Magan Isse Guleid Ali Wai'ays Muhammad Ali Umar Osman Mahamud. Ayaan Hirsi Magan or Ayaan Hirsi Ali are Europeanized versions of the same name. Besides, didn't they see what was on her passport? Whatever she fills out on the form is rather meaningless, in my opinion, if her passport was legit.

In Canada she would have been entitled to use any form of her name when she applied for immigration. Heck, immigrants in Canada can legally change their names to whatever they chose to at no cost, which made our job a little bit more interesting. It was real fun trying to figure out if immigrants had two or three social insurance numbers, especially if the name and surname could have been mixed up. For example, say Mr. Kim Dong Suk changes his name to Johnny Kim because of the unfortunate meaning of his name in English, well, we had to check in the database for a Dong Kim, Dong Suk Kim, Suk Kim, Dong Kim Suk, Johnny Kim, Johnny Dong, Johnny Dong Suk, etc. Same goes for Canadian citizens who had several given names. Imagine the fun we had going through the batches of forms from Quebec (4 or 5 given names and lots of hyphenated surnames).

[On the other hand]

Ian Buruma in the NYT:

[Kuros]

Hitchens from Slate responds to Ian Buruma:

Quote:

[Ayaan Hirsi Ali] has several times explained, in public and in print, that, among other things, she changed her name to get political asylum in the Netherlands. This was partly to prevent her family�her father being a well-known Somali politician�from discovering her whereabouts after she had fled an arranged marriage to a distant relative... ...Writing in the New York Times last Friday, Ian Buruma said that Ayaan Hirsi Ali ought to have spoken out more for those who had been denied asylum in the Netherlands. (He is the author of a forthcoming book about the murder of Theo van Gogh, who was Hirsi Ali's partner in the making of a film about the maltreatment of women in the Muslim ghettos of Dutch cities.) This point doesn't seem to me to carry much weight. If she had become the spokeswoman for other refugees, her own story of making a partially false application could (and would) have been used against her even more. Instead, she pointed out that many perfectly legal immigrants to Holland were trying to import dictatorship rather than flee from it, and for this she attracted lethal hatred. If it had not been this charge, it would have been something else. She has already been made the object of a murder campaign, put under virtual house arrest in the name of her own "protection," evicted from her home, and accused of all manner of incitement... ...In point of fact, as was said several times in heated debate in the Dutch parliament, the discovery of a false statement on an immigration form (even when the proof is not provided by the person concerned, as in this case) is not automatic grounds for the removal of citizenship.

Hitchens is too harsh on the Dutch as a whole, but I think it would be difficult to portray Rita Verdonk in a generous light here.

[daskalos]

On muslim immigration to Europe specifically and any immigration to anywhere broadly, why is it diffifult to grasp the concept that a society has an obligation to itself to insist that its immigrants conform to its basic principles? Doing so isn't racist. Not doing so is suicidal, as Europe may well discover if it doesn't pull itself out of its fear of offending a people who, by and large, loathe it and most of what it stands for. (EUROPE IS THE CANCER, ISLAM IS THE ANSWER and WE WILL BURY YOU -- seen on signs during the recent cartoon travesty.)

Imagine hoards of Europeans who, for some inexplicable reason, decided to swarm into the desert king&sheikdoms to live but who refused to buy off on, say, clitorectomies and stoning adultresses and who protested en masse in the streets of capitals (just the one time, of course) over polygamy.

Has the West become so spineless and effete it can't even muster the will to say, "Hey, we think we've got some pretty important things sorted out for how we'd like to live together, and if you want to live with us, you need to agree with us about these basics. Otherwise, stay away. You're not welcome, even if your life at home does s*ck."

Oh wait, I get it -- if we did that, unequivocally, the king&sheikdoms would call us racist, then raise the price of oil and refuse to buy our products. My bad -- it's just blackmail, then. This, then, would be the best argument going for the development of finding something besides oil to power the world.

[Kuros]

No more insulting the Dutch, okay?

Justice hasn't even come that late.