I actually believe it will be a combination of huntingtons scenario and ressource wars that will set the stage for the actually hot ww3.
Btw. if you think Islam is a force of peace, watch the movie, that’s why I posted it, it’s a 90 minute documentary. I am always stunned about people who actually know zilch about Islam and claim it’s a peaceful religion, just because it’s a convenient delusion.
Folks…if you honestly think Islam is a force for evil, think again…
It is right now, in the dark ages the extremist were the christians but now there is an world army of little Hitlers , all of them hidding behind the shade of the half moon and the Coran.
Don’t believe the Lord Chief Justice any more than the Archbishop of Canterbury, say Stephen Schwartz and Irfan Al-AlawiA senior establishment figure has once more raised the question of whether sharia law should be introduced as a parallel system of justice for British Muslims. Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, was following in the footsteps of the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, who in February suggested that the institutionalisation of unspecified aspects of sharia law is ‘unavoidable’.
Rowan Williams gave the appearance of mere cluelessness; discussing sharia in a vague, multiculturalist manner apparently intended to project warm feelings toward British Muslims. But Lord Phillips, in attempting to move from nebulous clichés to specifics, has done far more damage than the Archbishop.
For non-Muslim authorities to propose the introduction of sharia as a legal standard for Muslims in any non-Muslim land is not only absurdly patronising and discriminatory, but also violates the canons of traditional sharia law. Sharia has always held that Muslims emigrating to non-Muslim lands are obliged to accept the laws and customs of their new homes, and must not attempt to change them in an Islamic direction. Precedent for this goes back to the counsel of the Prophet Mohammed himself, when his followers, persecuted in Mecca, sought a temporary refuge in the nearby Christian kingdom of Ethiopia.
Iraqi Shia Ayatollah Ali Sistani, one of the world’s preeminent sharia authorities, teaches that, ‘If [a Muslim] has given [a non-Muslim government] a commitment — even if indirectly (as is implied in the immigration documents) — to abide by the laws of that country, it is necessary for him to fulfil his commitment.’ If they cannot do this, they should return to Muslim territory.
|
Soon after Archbishop Williams’s gaffe the Centre for Islamic Pluralism conducted a field survey of attitudes towards sharia in the main Muslim communities in Britain. We visited Birmingham, Manchester, Bolton, Bradford, Sheffield and Leicester, in addition to ongoing and extensive investigations in London’s East End. Interviewees included imams, muftis (legal authorities), spiritual shaykhs, British Muslim barristers and solicitors, social workers and rank-and-file mosque attendees. The full results will be published, with similar data from Germany, Holland, France and Spain, next year.
Our survey was made easier by Muslim debate over the Williams affair. The overwhelming majority of our sample — we estimate a minimum of 65 per cent — brusquely repudiated the imposition of sharia in Britain and even expressed resentment at the interference of individuals like the Archbishop in British Muslim affairs. Unfortunately, the real beliefs of British Muslims are unlikely to get sufficient attention either from non-Muslim leaders or from most of the British media. For the elite, multiculturalism is the order of the day, and sharia must be offered, notwithstanding the utter ignorance of it among the non-Muslims who advocate it. In the tabloids, sharia is identified with such punishments as the stoning of adulterers — an issue Lord Phillips ineptly tried to address. Little sensible commentary may be expected from the public prints.
At the Madina Mosque in Bolton it was pointed out to us that tens of thousands of British Muslims practise as solicitors and barristers, and have no interest in surrendering their positions to sharia advocates. A parallel system of sharia law would be a disaster for the British Muslim community, producing legal chaos, according to the barrister Aseid Malik. British Muslim legal professionals observe that Islamist radicals prefer to enter the scientific and medical professions, because there they can avoid participation in the British ‘unbeliever’ state required of solicitors and barristers.
Maulana Mufti Ayoob Ashrafi, a leading British Muslim traditional jurist, opposed the introduction of sharia, asking why Islamic law must be introduced in non-Muslim societies when it does not function in the majority of Muslim countries. At present, only Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, and some remote areas of Africa and south-east Asia grant precedence to sharia over European-originated civil law — another surprise, no doubt, to most non-Muslims.
We conducted a significant part of our survey in Bradford, the city widely known as ‘Little Pakistan’. Sayyid Irfan Shah, a jurist known as ‘the Lion of Bradford’, who maintains a girls’ school, also rejected the intrusion of sharia in Britain. He declared that Muslim opponents of the introduction of sharia are much more sophisticated in their understanding of the distinctions between private and public law than many non-Muslim critics of Islam in Britain.
Tasleem Ahmed, a Muslim woman employed at the Bradford Advice Centre, administers community programmes to assist Muslim women with economic and social problems. She observed that women seldom attend mosque services or apply at mosques for help with their problems, and that, failing to gain support in their families, homes, and local communities, they may go to informal sharia courts for assistance in marriage and divorce cases, even though the latter tribunals — the most notorious functioning in east London — charge thousands of pounds for decisions that are almost always improvised and may not even conform to traditional Islamic law. Ms Ahmed said that because British Muslim women do not know their British civil rights, they have an incentive to turn to sharia.
Lord Phillips sought to mitigate the fear of the British non-Muslim public regarding sharia punishment for moral and criminal offences by arguing that it would be limited to the financial and marital areas. But the experience of British Muslim women with the sharia divorce courts demonstrates just how dangerous this seemingly anodyne proposal is. The sharia divorce courts are in the hands of radicals who use them to promote extremist ideology while making money. The same outcome would be likely if sharia courts were granted authority for mediation of financial disputes.
Nearly everywhere we went, Muslims rejected the idea of incorporating sharia into British law. In Sheffield, Muhammad Islam Qadri, a prominent religious activist, declared ‘the demand for sharia is a political slogan from which the Sunnis will not benefit’. In Leicester, Britain’s main centre of radical Islam, local leader Mohammed Ramzan asked, ‘Who is Rowan Williams? His comments were unimportant; he is not a political leader like Tony Blair or Gordon Brown.’ He also criticised the British authorities for supporting ‘dialogue’ with Islamic fundamentalists and stated that the problem facing British Muslims is terrorism, not a lack of sharia. According to our findings, Lord Phillips’s speech will be seen by most British Muslims in a similarly disapproving light.
Sorry for bumping this up, but I’ve been reading more or less all of the 14 pages of this thread.
Concerning the discussions between Drake and Nickfresh, I think I know where the discrepancy lays.
Most Muslims in the US are either fairly educated people, who are ready to adapt to local laws and rules or they are homegrown “black” Muslims, who, for all of their rebellious poses, are culturally firmly rooted in the American system.
The problem in Germany (explaining the perceptions of Drake) is that the biggest number of our Muslims were originally “Gastarbeiter” from Turkey, hired in the 1950-1960s to do the dirty manual jobs no German wanted to do anymore during the economic miracle post WW2.
These people were mostly barely literate peasants from the feudalist areas of rural Anatolia, who were firmly rooted in their extremely conservative village traditions and due to a lack of education, also often not very willing to adapt. Instead they tended to enclose themselves in cultural islands in quasi ghettoes, where they tried to organise life in similar ways as in their home villages (often coming into conflict with German laws) and often developed a laager mentality against the “sinfull” influences from outside.
That they appeared strange to the Germans didn’t help either, as did not a simplicistic “tolerance” given by authorities and courts of justice, who often let e.g. the perpetrators of “honour killings” get away, arguing that such behaviour was customary in the villages the immigrants came from and therefore they couln’t know better.
Another thing is that, e.g. unlike East Asian immigrants, they don’t seem to put much emphasis on the education of their children.
BTW, similar to what Rising Sun* mentioned, we had similar problems with staunch Roman-Catholic Gastarbeiters from rural southern Italy in the 1960s.
The groups which best adapted were either East Asians (Chinese, Vietnamese, Filipinos, Koreans, Japanese, Indonesians), who readily mixed with the local population and made sure that their children would improve through education, or the Spanish, who in the 1960s were for most part refugees from Franco’s fascist regime and knew that as long as Franco was alive, they could not return to Spain. Unlike the Turkish or Italians, they didn’t have a back door open to return to their original country, so they decided to make the best of their life in Germany (even actively petitioning the German state ministers of education NOT to introduce Spanish language schooling for their children in German schools, for them their children should learn perfect German to fit into Germany). The results can e.g. be seen in the statistics about higher education, where the percentage of students with Spanish origin with university degrees is equal to their German counterparts, while the Turkish and Italians lag behind.
BTW, I’m an atheist, but my first wife was a Catholic from the Phiulippines, my second one was originally a moderate Muslim from West Africa, who later converted to fundamentalist evangelical christianity (one reason for our divoces, besides I’m working in aviation and we invented a new meaning for the word “AIDS”, Aviation Induced Divorce Syndrom, due to long shift hours and absence from home (often overseas work)), while my present fiancee is a non-practicing Catholic from the Chinese minority in the Philippines.
For myself, I’m originally a Berliner and have lived for many years in a predominantly Turkish neighbourhood in the district of Neukoelln in West Berlin.
Jan
Mate, I think you’ve hit the nail on the head.
Your perceptive analysis explains a dichotomy in my own thinking. On one hand I’m what is (usually contemptuously) called a civil libertarian who resists Islamophobic opinions and laws. On the other hand, like many Australians, I have huge gut contempt for several groups of scum and criminal elements here, which happen to be Islamic and flaunt it, but this doesn’t sit well with my more intellectual civil libertarian attitude.
The Islamic groups for which I, and most other Australians and not necessarily just those of Anglo-Celtic descent, have contempt need not be identified, but they sure as hell didn’t come here to work as they’re on their third and fourth generations of existing on social security which often is supplemented by crime. Although many are from Turkey most are not, but your comments otherwise describe our lot correctly:
These people were mostly barely literate peasants from the feudalist areas of rural Anatolia, who were firmly rooted in their extremely conservative village traditions and due to a lack of education, also often not very willing to adapt. Instead they tended to enclose themselves in cultural islands in quasi ghettoes, where they tried to organise life in similar ways as in their home villages (often coming into conflict with German laws) and often developed a laager mentality against the “sinfull” influences from outside.
Conversely, I deal with a lot of educated people from Asia and the Middle East, who happen to be Muslims, and they are very different groups, in every respect.
The problem is much less to do with religious affiliation than with, politically incorrect though it may be to say it, introducing a relatively, in social and economic terms, primitive community into a much more sophisticated one where the new arrivals lack the background to adapt to a very different way of life.
A large part of the problem is that these migrants come from backgrounds where there is no police or legal system even vaguely like Western ones, nor many of the other institutions we take for granted in the West. Instead, there are various forms of what amounts to tribal punishment and compensation allied with ways of trying to defeat or deceive corrupt elements above them in societies based on clan and tribal obligations and feuds and primitive notions of family honour, bride price, male surpremacy, and so on.
Have you thought of trying a more conventional path, or are you a committed marital and social adventurer? 
Yes, you’re right about Israel just like those bloody Jews murdered all those poor school kids in Beslan.
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=TwqYRAtyc0c
Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer
Same as you, I never had problerms with Muslims from a similar educational background as myself (e.g. university classmates) or those of more secular branches of this belief (like the Turkish Alevits, a breakaway Shi’ite group, who believe that religion is a personal matter which needs no outside display, who believe in seperation of government and religion, who don’t have mosques to pray in and where men and women are equal, . This group is being persecuted by mainsream Sunni Muslims in Turkey, even though they are the strongest supporters of the Turkish constitution).
I took the Turkish as an example, because they are by far the biggest group of immigrants into Germany and also the biggest Muslim group.
I have heard urbanised, educated Turks criticize the rural Turks as “backwards” and that we in the West would get a totally wrong impression of Turkey by being confronted with those country yokels.
I also never had problems with people from these regions (Middle East), who rebelled themselves against the restrictive practices and customs.
One thing I’ve noticed as well is that emigrants over the years develop an idealistic picture of their country of origin. E.g. the Turkish Gastarbeiter who came here in the 1960s, forget about how hard life was in a remote mountain village, trying to grow some crops on a stony field, no electricity, no water (except from the well), freezing cold in winter, being watched and controlled by the whole village population as a teenager etc…
Now in their memories it is an idyllic scene, where everything was predictable and tidy, everybody knew his place etc., completely forgetting that their country of origin has changed over the last 40 years as well.
So e.g. many modern Turks coming to visit Germany now are aghast about the cultural backwardness they find in the Turkish ghettoes in Germany.
BTW, slowly the groups of population are mixing. E.g. one of my subordinates, a young, very good and promising aircraft mechanic, is happily married to a Turkish woman. I think he (he looks like an SS recruiting poster, athletic, tall, blue eyed, blond) is just as exotic to his wife as she is to us (she is petite, dark haired and slightly tanned). They have two children, who funnily take after their dad (normally the dark hair and dark eyes are the stronger genes).
I know that for my fiancee and her family I’m pretty exotic.
Jan
There is something in what you say, although I feel that it would generate a false sense of security amongst people i.e. that uneducated peasant Muslims would be a problem but that the urbane upper class city types would be okay. Funnily enough, I didn’t notice any Turkish Muslim peasants flying aircraft in to tall buildings on 9/11. Yes, for sure there is a problem that many of the Muslims who have immigrated in to Europe have come from a background of peasant small holders or the urban poor and unfortunately the political correct policies of European Governments have encouraged these people not to intergrate in to European society and to maintain such practices as honour killings. At the same time, many of the most educated people in the Middel East are the most extremist fanatical haters of the West, I would leave Turkey out of the equation in that Turkey has had both a Westernizeing influence in the person of Kemal Ataturk and also at the same time many Turks well realize that they are not Arabs and in a Europe in which Arabist ideology and culture would obtain primacy, the Turkish communities in Europe would come to a quick and bloody end.
Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer
I’d agree with Walthers analysis on my perspective (*), the problem is however not limited to germany, that is why all the explanations about the particular situation of a specific immigrant group in germany fall short. The dutch, the belgians, the french, the british, the danes, the swedes, the norwegians, the italians, the spanish, every single one of those diverse societies have the same set of problems with a specific group of immigrants and it gets worse every day.
(*)Though I think the whole turkish gastarbeiter story told to the germans is one of the greatest lies in our history. It was a purely political decision (thanks SPD), never an economical one, not asked for from the economy and particularly the population. We’ve been badly screwed over and then again in the 80ies when nobody was willing to send them back. I guess in a couple of hundred years this will be quite an interesting story for the historians, they’ll get insights we don’t.
Ah, just the most recent example of how muslims understand human dignity:
The worst human rights violations aren’t mutilated girls, stoned women, raped children forced to marry old pedophiles, killed apostats and critics, no the problem is obviously youtube and criticism of the aforementioned.
http://www.arabtimesonline.com/client/pagesdetails.asp?nid=22943&ccid=22
“uttering profanities against Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the worst form of human rights violation in the world. Attacks on the values and tenets of Islam are extremely dangerous and unacceptable.” What a joke.
Ok, I typed a reply to your post (it took me more than 30 minutes), but them my 'puter crashed and I lost everything 
Now,
Regarding your post about the well educated people killing themselves and others in the 9/11 terror attacks or the attempted attack on Galsgow airport last year:
It makes sense if you regard these groups not as political movements, but as cults similar to the Mooneys, Jim Jones’s “People’s Temple” cult (were the members committed mass suicide in 1978), Dave Koresh’s groups in Waco, Texas or the Japanese Aun sect, which poisoned lots of people with Tabun nerve gas in the Tokyo underground system a few years ago.
All of these groups used psychological brainwashing methods to make their members suicidically obedient to their leader and to make them feel as THE chosen elite. They deliberately target people with low selfesteem, who are easily influenced and don’t have a group, where they feel at home. Often these people also are not able to make descisions for themselves and want strict guidelines on how to run their daily life (my African ex-wife e.g. came from a moderate and secular Muslim family, but she could not cope with the freedom of living in modern Germany, so she joined a strict evangelical church and basically read the bible and talked to her pastor before making even the smallest decisions).
IMO, the Salafi and Wahabi radicals operate in the same pattern
An example:
At the moment German police is hunting for a young German man, who a few years ago converted to Islam, joined a militant group and was last seen in a terrorist training camp in Pakistan. He has posted Youtube videos, where he announced that, together with his equally wanted, Lebanese friend he intends to carry out a suicide attack in Germany against the “infidels” (with which he means everybody living in Germany, who doesn’t support his Wahabi or Salafi belief).
According to his sister, he was an instable, introvert, but intelligent young man, without many friends, who was very impressionable. According to her, if he hadn’t joined the radical Muslims, he would have as well joined the neo-Nazis or a cult (or maybe, 35 years ago, the communist Baader-Meinhof-gang).
Anything, which would give him the impression that he belonged to an “elite” group and makes him feel “important”, would give him some “sense” in life, even if it would be just the few minutes before he blows himself up.
From what I’ve read about him, he started up normally, in a regular smalltown German family, he started an apprenticeship and then met this Lebanese guy.
This Lebanese introduced him to his mosque community, where everything was done to make him feel welcome (I had similar experiences once, when I met a nice Japanee girl, who belonged to Moon cult).
Slowly the indoctrination began. Affter a while he started to change. He had himself circumcised and converted to Islam. Then he changed outwardly as well. He grew a beard and started to dress in Arab style. He also dumped his previous friends and even shunned his own family as “infidels”. By and by his only contacts were the men from his mosque.
Eventually he was sent to Pakistan for training.
I have read similar stories about the 9/11 terrorists, how they started as normal young men and then, possibly under the influence of Atta, who seemed to have been the most radical of them (I actually suspect that he was a closet homosexual, if you have read his last will, he was extremely obsessesed that no women should touch his dead body and nobody should touch his todger, as if much would be leftover after the crash), they started to behave oddly, at least for the people, who knew them closely.
Jan
Nope, the problem lays in the fact that for decades various German government, for different reasions, have ignored the fact that Germany has developed from a n EMIGRANT country into an IMMIGRANT one.
As a result, until the Schroeder government attempted it (a motion, which was shot down by the rightwing conservatives, remember Stoiber “Ich bin gegen ein durchrasstes und durchmischtes Deutschland” “I’m against a racially mixed Germany”) , there was never immigration legislation in Germany.
The Gastarbeiter were hired by the Adenauer government, followed by the Kiessinger government (both conservative), since there WAS a shortage of workers in post WW2 Germany. Hiring only stopped in 1974 under the SPD Brandt government after the oil crisis caused an economical slump.
It was back then expected that the Gastarbeiter would leave again, but obviously they didn’t (who wants to go back to unemployment or sharecropping in the mountain village if he has a regular job over here, and the first generation of Gastarbeiter worked their @rses off).
The problem came afterwards:
First, there was no immigration law introduced. The conservatives still dreamed about an ethnically homogenous Germany as hundred years before and didn’t want ANY immigration, while the leftwing dreamers took over the SPD, for whom the world was an ideal of multiculturqal cloud cuckoo land. Anybody should be welcome.
Now, with Germany being a rich country, obviously people wanted to come here, and immigrants ARE needed for certain positions.
But while the lack of immigration legislation made it almost impossible to get the people here, who would make a valuable contribution to the country, there were many loopholes (e.g. in the family reunion laws and the asylum seeker laws), which could be exploited by unscrupelous people and social parasites.
At the same time the lack of legislation made it very difficult to get rid of those who have missbehaved here.
An exmple: My fiancee is a nurse with a college degree. Currently she is working as the assistant matron in a posh nursing home in Ireland (this means she is the number two in this nursing home, the deputy boss). But she is not an EU citizen. She has a residency in Ireland, which allows her to stay unlimited in Ireland, she has a job, she pays her taxes and she has never in her life been on social welfare.
She has been contributing to Ireland and the Irish economy.
She would do this in Germany as well (ok, she would have to go to school and study German first), but the only way she can move here is by marrying me. The is no other way.
This law is also one reason for the many forced marriages. Somebody e.g. from Turkey wants to come here to live here, he has to find a woman with German citizenship or at least a residence visa for Germany to marry. This is why so many young women grown up in Germany get forced to marry distant relatives (like cousins) or friends of the parents to enable them to come to Germany.
The loophole is the asylum act. Based on the experiences during the Nazi reign, wheremany Germans had to flee toother countries, Germany’s constitution states that Germany has to give asylum to anybody who is politically persecuted.
Now, the processing of an asylum application takes years (especially the proff of persecution). During this time the applicant is not permitted to work, but instead draws social welfare.
Many applications a fraudulent anyway. Many of these applicants add to their welfare money by carrying out criminal acts (like drug trading, or registering in several welfare offices under different names, though AFAIK this was stopped after mandatory fingerprinting was introduced to have a positive ID). Compared to what they would earn back home, e.g. in Africa, it is a lot, they send money back and even if they eventually get deported, they still made a profit.
This, obviously hurts the small number of genuinely persecuted people.
Jan
True, but that wasn’t my point, I talked about how that development started and this story was nothing else but high treason.
Germany is also still an emigrant country btw.
Over 100000 germans, mostly key players, flee from this mess here every year.
Then how comes that the first Turkish Gastarbeiter were hired under the Adenauer CDU government in 1961? IIRC, the SPD were in opposition without chance to participate in government back then.
BTW, the Ottoman Empire and Prussia (and later Turkey and Germany) were since the 18th century closely allied.
Jan
I think the brainwashing methapor is a dangerous one, in that implicit in it one will make the assumption that Islamofascists can only recruit a small cadre to their cause. Really Hitler had huge support in Germany and whilst it is true that he was a very skillful showman in respect of e.g. the rallies which the Nazis organized but I don’t think one could say he brainwashed the German people. What he essential did was to strike a bargain with the German people that they given him their uncondtional loyalty and he will deliver X, Y and Z. Now if Germany had been a very different place he would have got nowhere, e.g. without an economic slump the Nazis would have remained a fringe party. At the same time, had Germany been a different society even with an economic problem, the Nazis would still have got nowhere, like e.g. the almost holiday camp atmosphere that Hitler enjoyed during his so called prison sentence. So the society had to be receptive to what Hitler wanted and had to offer, the problem is for many Muslims they do not need to be “brainwashed”, they are receptive to Islamofascist ideas just as the Germans were receptive to Nazi ideas in the 1930s.
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=lYB4pG3kHIY
Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer
True, initially it was the CDU. SPD merely really kickstarted it in the late sixties. Both are guilty of treason. Even Helmut Schmidt has realized it was a mistake of epic proportions.
The relations were always good in the past 200 years, that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to export 3 million people from one country to another.
I think there is a big difference betwenn three groups of people:
-
Plain supporters, who might turn up at a demonstarion and shout slogans, but not actually undergoing a physical risk for themselves (except maybe getting hit by a police baton)
-
Those willing to commit crimes of violence for the cause, but without intentionally sacrificing themselves getting shot while e.g. trying to get away from a bank robbery committed to gain funds for the organisation is bad luck, but not intentional). This would e.g. include somebody who deposits a bomb in some populated place and then walks away.
and
3) Those sacrificing themselves fully concious of what they are doing.
While I think that 1) is the typical “Mitlaeufer” and supporter, who might provide infrastructure, hide explosives or propaganda material, I think 2) probably and 3) definitely ARE brainwashed.
The instinct to stay alive is one of the most powerfull ones in any animal. If people loose this instinct and willfully give up their physical existence, then there must be something wrong in their heads.
I read some material about the Japanese Kamikaze pilots. There similar psychological tricks were used to get them to kill themselves.
Another example would be Hannah Reitsch, a German test pilot and Nazi supporter. After her fiancee, another pilot, was killed by British fighters, she pushed on having a squadron of manned V1 missiles set up (she actually flew a prototype) to carry out suicide attacks against the Allied bombers. She actually wanted to go herself.
Jan
You hit the nail on the head.
Hi Jan, I don’t want to get in to the issue of the Japanese Pilots because it is a totally different culture. As for Hannah Reitsch, I don’t know very much about the lady. As for those involved in 9/11 for the majority of them, I would be confident that there was psychologically condtioning involved, in that there was such a long period between when the attack would have been carried out and when they would have needed to have been told that they would be engaging in a suicide mission. But for other suicide bombers they really do not need this psychological condtioning, because it does not require much training to get on a bus or train with an explosive and detonate it, and therefor it is possible to get them to blow themselves up, before they have had a lot of time to think about it. All that said, your 3 definitions are good and I agree with your analysis and whilst the number 3s will always be a tiny minority, the politically correct policies of Western Governments are an encouragement to the 1s and 2s to think they can overthrow the Western European Nation States and establish an Islamofascist ruleing regime in Europe.
Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer
I doubt that it will work.
first, Muslims are less than ten percent of the population of ANY European country (with the exception of Albania, Kosovo and Bosnia (and Turkey, if you include them into Europe), where the Muslims are native and not imported.
Secondly, the radicals themselves are a minority within this minority.
Then you’ll have sectarian differences, e.g. the Wahabis and Salafists see the Shi’ites as dangerous heretics, who need to be killed (similar to the fights between the Catholics and Protestants in Europe 400 years ago).
I also suspect that groups like the Alevits would join the forces of those who’ll defend secularism, not to speak about the many Turkish Kemalists.
And then, most people here would not accept enforced religious convertion.
They’d rebel first (me for instance and, with the training I had, could be quite dangerous if I wanted to).
The danger are the minority of the No.3 group. While they can’t really change the country (unless we let ourselves to be scared), they still can cause damage.
Concerning the Japanese Kamikaze pilots (and sailors), I’d suggest that you read the following book: Japan at War, an oral history by Haruko Taya Cook and Theodore F. Cook, ISBN 184212238 X
The authors interviewed several surviving kamikaze pilots and relatives of others.
Also, the Austrian TV had an extensive documentary about them a few years ago.
The pattern is very similar: the young guys get coaxed into a situation where they cannozt pull back without giving themselves up completely and loosing all support they have within their community (like feeling that they are letting down their comrades, religion or nation).
One thing which is ALWAYS present, is an older guy in the background, who doesn’t risk his own life, but gives the orders.
the few, who kill themselves without any connections, I compare them to the nutters, who commit school massacres because they feel slighted.
Jan
Hi Jan, it goes further than the Number 3s, because Muslims or more specifically Islamofascists are allready censoring what people can say in Europe and really whilst certain Muslims no doubt believe that they can overthrow Western European Nation States and replace them with a pan European Islamist State through military action that is not a practical possibility with the population numbers Muslims currently have in Europe. What they do have the power to do is to establish a special position for themselves, so that the non-Muslim majority essentially become second class citizens in their own countries in respect of any area were the asperations of the majority community and Islamofascist activists would conflict and once they have achieved that, if they open the door to unlimited immigration, then Europe is finished.
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=9DMHBKSPG9g
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=ImdNLRqZ8SU
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=pxQZm2zyMfY
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=xR-J8cXYVIo
Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer