In Several Decades, "Europe Will Become a Single Islamic State"

Large parts of Europe became 'Christian' long after the Roman Empire itself had fallen, and the religion was spread by various methods other than the Roman Empire's own conversion. Some were peaceful, some not so much - Charlemagne was known to use 'the sword' to spread his religion now and again, for example!

The fact remains that the entire continent was 'Pagan' (of various local types) for thousands of years, until the Christians took over (initially through the conversion of Rome and its Empire, and subsequently by other methods). That, of course, was a process that took many centuries - it certainly didn't happen in 'several decades'!

Except that there is no 'war with Islam'. It doesn't actually exist.

 

Wrong on all counts. I like some elements of Israel and I read and hear about Muslims in Europe. I'm just unconvinced that Israel really benefits from all of this Muslim-hatred expressed on its behalf.

 

That's all gravy, but liberals are scared to hurt people's feelings, while, Muslims are not. Liberals will give up their rights to make it 'fair' for Muslims. Essentially their liberal values will make them concede their liberal rights.

 

Hmm, how does one go about making it clear that Sharia is a muslim thing?

 

I am saying that there is absolutely no justification in fact or reality for any assertion that Islam is in any way likely to 'conquer Europe' or 'dominate Europe' (or the UK) within the next century, let alone the next 'several decades', yes.

 

That's a pretty difficult thing to imagine, considering the Muslims we already have aren't remotely united behind one party or policy, but vote for, and are Members of Parliament (both houses) for, all of the major political parties. None of those are trying to make the UK 'Islamic', of course, nor are they ever likely to - they are representing different views and opinions about the best way to govern the country so that people can get on with living their lives, and UK Muslims are no different in supporting that basic aim.

 

Not arguing Christianity didn't use swords also. I'm just saying you are aware of the persecution they faced from Pagans initially? If it weren't for Constantine, Pagans would have quelled any Christian proselytizers with a sword or a lion's den.

 

Yup. I don't see that as a reasonable justification for Christians to persecute others, though, but they (or some of them, at least) have a long and glorious history of doing exactly that. Now some of them seem to be turning their attention back to the Muslims again (they've been there before, of course!), declaring a religious 'War', with an attempted 'justification' of an impending 'invasion' and 'takeover' of which there is actually no real danger whatsoever in the foreseeable future.

 

Don't be absurd. This is simply another example of American hysteria.

 

The latest WikiLeaks revelation: 1 in 3 British Muslim students back killing for Islam and 40% want Sharia law

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...g-Islam-40-want-Sharia-law.html#ixzz18rZMHseU

 

The population isn't at critical mass yet. Wait a few years. The UK will get a major Muslim political party.

 

Are these people any less scary-America's own religious right-wing nutters?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s6JFoIVnTw"]The truth about the lunatic religious right in America. - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPY_xWci9AA&feature=related"]Religious nut job - YouTube[/ame]

 

Don, I live in the Greenbelt around Antwerp.

Houses here start at $350,000, and then you have a crappy one that needs a lot of work -- most immigrants that do live here, live in what could be called "social housing", although it hasn't have the same stigma as in the States. A lot of normal, good-earning middle-class people rent a social house...

Anyways, I actually know these "urban Muslims" -- trust me, they don't hold secret meetings in their basement to plan their take-over of the world. They just want to live a peaceful and quit life: a good-earning job, a nice car, a lot of them like gardening so they grown their own tomatoes, lettuce, carrots, mint (for tea) etc,...

 

The Kings with 'divine' rights used religion to control their kingdoms, and the Pope used his 'divine' right to control the kings. It was all about social control and wealth in my opinion. Just an opinion.

The Crusades were to stop the Muslim invasion into Europe. It was a very real threat. Muslims are no longer coming at the borders with armies. They are taking a new approach to taking over society. From within that is. It's a very intricate strategy involving many different strategies. To put it in a nutshell, they are trying to do it politically. That's not an implausible goal given that time has proven minorities can and have taken over a country through a single united political party.

 

Careful, you'll be asked to provide proof, cites and links to substantiate that...

 

...

I'd think it would be better for everyone, for Americans to try to fix their political system first before making predictions about that of others of which they clearly know very little about.

It's quite remarkable though, but a lot of Muslims here vote "atheist", namely for the Socialists. Others, who care about relgion and values, vote for the Christian-Democratic parties.

 

I don't think it would take a hugely talented statistician to point out the potential flaws in that survey!

 

Just out of curiosity, how many of these Christian nutters are going around suicide bombing people?

 

Great, out a small sample size, only 192 of them support killing in the name of religion.

That's more than the 25 radicals on the first page already.

 

Cenydd -- what on Earth are you talking about, my friend?!

Didn't you know that Americans are far more knowledgable than Europeans, for example:

​

 

Does this mean that Christians would rather destroy their religion than to kill to defend it? How odd....

 

No, they weren't. They were 'officially' primarily about 'liberating' the 'holy land' from Islamic control, although there has been much speculation about the breadth of Urban II's real motives for kicking the whole thing off, of course. There was never a real threat of the Muslims taking control of the entire continent -even if they had that ultimate aim (which is debatable, to say the least) they didn't really have that kind of power (even though they were probably more advanced in many ways than the Christians of their day, of course).

 

Exactly my point, thank you. A tiny minority of nutters exists within any society, cult or sub-set. Christians, Jews or Muslims, Tamils, Hindu or whoever.

 

Yep, and obviously enormously significant given the population of the UK is around 60 million...so yes, I can see how a whole 192 people must appear truly terrifying.

 

It's not only the tiny sample size that's an issue, but the particular demographic make-up of the sample - I'm sure it's no surprise to anyone that young students are about most radicalised and poltically active (in terms of 'protests' and the like) portion of the population, and are often the group which shout loudest about issues that they soon abandon when they get out into the real world. It's not exactly a representative sample of the population to draw and inferences from - it's very well known that if you want to 'prove' that a 'significant' portion of any population are raging anarchists, or raging marxists, or raging anything else, you survey students (and do so in a way that they can chose whether to respond or not, since a significantly higher proportion of the 'radicals' is always likely to respond, with the rest of the students being mostly too busy watching Spongebob, or something similar, to actually care!)

Even if some inference could be drawn from that sample across the whole student population (which is certainly far from certain), it means nothing at all in relation to the population as a whole.