Pim Fortuyn (or: Dutch racism revealed)

[Phreakmeister]

Austria has Haider, France has Le Pen, Belgium has De Winter. And now The Netherlands have Pim Fortuyn.
Pim Fortuyn is the leader of the opposition party Leefbaar Nederland (Livable Netherlands). On May 15th they will for the first time join the elections. In the polls they are on 22 out of 150 seats in the parliament. This would make them the fourth biggest party.

Now what is so horrible about this man?
For a long time he managed to hide his true nature. Until this weekend.
In an interview with a leading newspaper, he stated the following things:

1) He wants to get rid of the First Amendment of the Dutch Constitution

Anyone within the Kingdom of the Netherlands is equal, and will in equal cases be treated equally. It is not allowed to discriminate on gender, skin colour, sexuality, religion, political preference, or anything else

In other words: this man wants to make discrimination legal

2) He wants to close the borders for refugees, "especially muslims". No refugee will be able to enter the country anymore, if it's up to him. No matter how much they are in danger where they come from, "full is full"

3) He told the interviewer that the islam "is an ignorant and stupid culture".

But okay, he could be misinterpreted by the interviewer. But when he was asked on television about this, he clearly stated that "this is exactly what I said, and this is what I feel".

And during previous interviews, he already said it, before he entered politics. When he entered politics, he managed to keep his racist opinions covered. He hid his true nature for a while, and it got him somewhere, but now he has been revealed.

Now if we look at the past of this man, Pim Fortuyn:
During the Gulf War he was a dedicated communist. He stated that the Gulf War would be the beginning of the "glorious revolution of the working class". After that, he became far-right, stating that "islam is a threat to our country and our culture" and that "islam is at the root of crime and evil". After that he became a devoted christian. After that, he went back to far-right.

Before joining Leefbaar Nederland (Livable Netherlands), he flirted with several other political parties. He flirted with the Labour Party, he flirted with the Democrats, he flirted with the christian-democrats, all in order to become prime minister.

This sick man is a threat, not just to The Netherlands, but also to European stability. I'm warning all of you. Be aware. Never fall asleep. Fight back whenever racism is looming. I'm warning Europe and the world for similar situations in other countries. Don't let yourself be fooled.




------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[ogb]

The basic question is how the Dutch constitution can be changed (or in such an important article even: can it be changed?). One man himself can do nothing, I'd wonder if not minimum 2/3 of the votes would be neccessary - and I'd wonder if he'll get this majority. I also don't know how popular this guy is. It is understandable that a kind of contra-liberal movement would come to exist in the Netherlands if some major incidents happen that can have its reason in the liberalism of the state - but currently I don't know about anything like that.

[Phreakmeister]

His party kicked him off of the list for the elections. Which takes a lot of courage, getting rid of the leader, with the best polls for a new party ever, with elections in 3 months (May 15th). According to the chairman and co-founder of the party: "Either we get a lot of seats in parliament, or we get a lot of credibility. We unanimously chose credibility"

Mr. Pim Fortuyn will now run with an own list, consisting of friends of his. In yesterday's polls he managed to get between 13 and 23 seats in the parliament. Which is quite a lot, in a multi-partisan state, with 150 seats available. It would right away make his party the 4th biggest party in the country, and it might make him leader of the opposition.

But just the thought, that someone wants to erase equality before the law and the ban on discrimination and racism from the constitution is what makes me sick.

If he manages to get into power one day, I'll migrate to North Korea and hand over my passport to a desperate refugee.

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[This message has been edited by Phreakmeister (edited February 12, 2002).]

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.
I think about 50% of the dutch people think the same about racism as Pim Fortuyn.
Why are all these parasites coming to our country.
See it as a hotelguest who destroys the room, rapes the maid, robs the guests and leave the hotel without paying.
Throw all this parasites in a 1000 planes and shoot them out of the sky above their own country.
Criminality has never been so high, our prison are full of these !%!%!%!%!%!%!%s.
Pim Fortuyn is right, throw them out.


[This message has been edited by Idnew (edited February 21, 2002).]

[~wildangel~]

Welcome Firebird, BTW I love the 68 firebirds, bad a$$ cars http://www.dumblaws.com/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
~Wildest lil angel~
~The MOD Squad~ (http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/serendipity/MSPoster/ModSquad.html)
The Coffee shop (http://pub83.ezboard.com/bcosmiccoffeeshop)
*Nathans page* (http://www.geocities.com/jssejmsgrl/Nathanspage.html)~Chianas~ (http://pub12.ezboard.com/bchianassoapworld)

Hi wildangel


Tnx
It beats almost everything on 4 wheels, wouldn't trade it for any other car. It's so heavenly to see my Firebird parked between European and Japanese trash cars like B.M.W., Mercedes, Subaru and Suzuki's.
And the sound of the engine makes me shiver.

Grtz Rob

[Phreakmeister]

Holy ****. Isn't there a ban against racism on this site??

Well my dear firebird, there is no difference in crime rates between now and 30 years ago. Sure, there's more crime, but that's because in 30 years we jumped from 10 to 16 million people. And 16 million people can commit more crime than 10 million.

Well, if you wanne throw the immigrants out, what will you pay the pensions from in 10 years from now? Remember: the population keeps ageing, and if we throw out all the immigrants we won't be able to pay the pensions. And then what will you do?
And where do we have to go to for chinese food then? http://www.dumblaws.com/ubb/frown.gif http://www.dumblaws.com/ubb/frown.gif http://www.dumblaws.com/ubb/frown.gif
And if we throw out all the immigrants, we have to get rid of our royal family as well. 'Coz remember: they are all German. Every single one of them. We are ALL immigrants.
And who was it, who made our economy strong again after the Second World War? It was the Turkish and Moroccon employees. They didn't come here, we took them here.

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[Sjax]

I agree with Phreakmeister. It makes no sence that we cant use dirty words here, but we can suggest that we kill thousands of people for no reason, other than that they come from another culture than our. Thats just plain stupid.

Unfortunately it seems to be the way many europeans are thinking these days. As i have stated before, the danish peoples party (an extremely right wing party) gained more than 15% of the votes last election.

It really makes me sad that we arent any smarter than that in Europe.

------------------
Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past. (George Orwell)

[ogb]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister:

And if we throw out all the immigrants, we have to get rid of our royal family as well. 'Coz remember: they are all German.


That's good, we want monarchy http://www.dumblaws.com/ubb/smile.gif

I agree with you on firebird's statement. If you give reasons for your opinion, then it'll be okay. But that way it's just racism.

I agree that refugees are a problem, I don't agree with them responsible for high crime and full prisons (a lame and spineless dept. of Justice is a more likely cause in my opinion)...I think that the problem is more complex and that the Dutch are contributing to the problem as well (especially with an attitude like Fortuyn's)...So I think that you don't know what you're talking about either...And blowing someone out of the sky can NEVER be a solution (I mean, you're kidding, right???)...

Another thing to bear in mind is that people like Fortuyn don't know where to draw the line. Today it's Muslims, What's it gonna be tomorrow???Disabled people?Elderly people??Gays??People who are not bald???

[Phreakmeister]

Well, Pim Fortuyn won't attack gays, because he is one himself.

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

What a sad and pathetic level of discussion. How old are you guys???? really.

If you have read the newspapers a little closer, you would know that Fortuyn doesn't "want to get rid of the First Amendment of the Dutch constitution". Fortuyn meant that freedom of speech for him is more important than this first amendment. This opinion is not new or radical; in fact it is based on the contradictionarry of constitutional laws. No constitution places constitutional amendments in order of importance.
People like Preakmeister are attracted by relative powerfull movements that have the opinion that the non-discrimatory principle is more important than the freedom of speech principle. These movements are often as strict in defending their opinion as religious fundamentalists are in defending their interpretations of the holy book(s).
Due to this there has not been enough discussion about the problems around immigration, foreigners and people who ask for asylum. Anyone who wanted to discuss about it was (and often still is) easily called racist. As if there are no problems with immigrants, foreigners etc.
The statement that freedom of speech is the true nature of the democratic state deserves more that just to be associated with racism, and by some of you, mass-murder.

Second. Is it realy so silly to call islam a "retarded religion" (cause that is what Fortuyn said). Retarded in this context means: conflicting with fundamental modern principles. In many ways islam IS conflicting with modern (western) principles (f.i. women's rights).
There are lots of people in all European countries who think all religions are retarded. Are they all dangerous racists? i don't think so. But if someone says something about islam, off course in the eyes of the far-left, non-thinking nitwits like Phreakmeister that person is a racist.


Thank you all for reading this, 'hope you've learned something today.

[ogb]

Originally posted by jazz:

People like Preakmeister are attracted by relative powerfull movements that have the opinion that the non-discrimatory principle is more important than the freedom of speech principle. These movements are often as strict in defending their opinion as religious fundamentalists are in defending their interpretations of the holy book(s).
Due to this there has not been enough discussion about the problems around immigration, foreigners and people who ask for asylum. Anyone who wanted to discuss about it was (and often still is) easily called racist. As if there are no problems with immigrants, foreigners etc.

Second. Is it realy so silly to call islam a "retarded religion" (cause that is what Fortuyn said). Retarded in this context means: conflicting with fundamental modern principles. In many ways islam IS conflicting with modern (western) principles (f.i. women's rights).

There are lots of people in all European countries who think all religions are retarded. Are they all dangerous racists? i don't think so. But if someone says something about islam, off course in the eyes of the far-left, non-thinking nitwits like Phreakmeister that person is a racist.



Now that's a valid, healthy stated opinion unlike Firebird's. And I completely agree with you on the general terms. As for what you said on this Fortuyn guy - I don't anything about him and can't argue with that.

All the aspects you mentioned are also a big problem in Germany. Before Sep 11 you were called a Nazi if you dared to say something negative on asylum matters. That's why it never appeared in political discussion - the other parties could have easily used it to win their election by just stating that the others are radicals and may not be voted. With Sep 11 this all changed, especially when the people realised that lots of the background activities happened in Germany. Then for a moment, the parties did some activities - even the social democratic minister for inner security ahead of all others. Finally they see that there are problems - what of course doesn't mean that nobody may enter the country, but it has to be controlled. In Germany it was even forbidden in asylum matters to ask the security offices whether there are known police records. That way it is nothing but artifcially imported criminality.

In the anti-US hype the people also forget about the conflicts of the Islam with the western civilisation. Odd that the same people who fought for women's rights before, are now the ones who are arguing pro Islam...

Originally posted by jazz:
What a sad and pathetic level of discussion. How old are you guys???? really.

If you have read the newspapers a little closer, you would know that Fortuyn doesn't "want to get rid of the First Amendment of the Dutch constitution". Fortuyn meant that freedom of speech for him is more important than this first amendment. This opinion is not new or radical; in fact it is based on the contradictionarry of constitutional laws. No constitution places constitutional amendments in order of importance.
People like Preakmeister are attracted by relative powerfull movements that have the opinion that the non-discrimatory principle is more important than the freedom of speech principle. These movements are often as strict in defending their opinion as religious fundamentalists are in defending their interpretations of the holy book(s).
Due to this there has not been enough discussion about the problems around immigration, foreigners and people who ask for asylum. Anyone who wanted to discuss about it was (and often still is) easily called racist. As if there are no problems with immigrants, foreigners etc.
The statement that freedom of speech is the true nature of the democratic state deserves more that just to be associated with racism, and by some of you, mass-murder.

Second. Is it realy so silly to call islam a "retarded religion" (cause that is what Fortuyn said). Retarded in this context means: conflicting with fundamental modern principles. In many ways islam IS conflicting with modern (western) principles (f.i. women's rights).
There are lots of people in all European countries who think all religions are retarded. Are they all dangerous racists? i don't think so. But if someone says something about islam, off course in the eyes of the far-left, non-thinking nitwits like Phreakmeister that person is a racist.


Thank you all for reading this, 'hope you've learned something today.

OK, touche, Perhaps Pim is not a racist, but he is (or at least aspires to be) a political figure, and he should realize that the things political figures say in public can have serious consequences...For example, he states islam is a retarded religion. So, now it's probably OK to state such things for certain people, which could result in serious conflicts between Islamic and non-Islamic people. Besides that, why can't we just live and let live (I'm saying stop bashing religions (Islam, Christianity,Whichever).

[Phreakmeister]

Well, actually I'm not part of the "relative powerfull movements". I do think however, that if what you feel is insulting to any part of the population, that you just have to shut up, and keep your opinion to yourself. This includes Mr. Falwell's "causes for September 11th", Pim Fortuyn's opinions on islam, and the opinion of several imams (including Khalil el Moumni) on homosexuality.

And I do think, that people like Khalil el Moumni (who called the Western lifestyle "inferior to islam" and "the ways of satan", and who called gay people "less than dogs and pigs") have to be put out of the country. I think, that people who obviously do not want to live here, have to leave, to make place for those who need to be here, because their lives are in danger. So I'm not a "blind-eyed lefty".

Well, some muslims may be retarded, but does that immediately make the islam retarded? Islam has a lot of respect for women, because women are the forthbringers of life. And also a lot of muslims (for instance at my work) are wonderful people, who respect women even more than men. So it's unislamic and un-muslim-like to disrespect women, there are just too many fools who don't know that.
Fundamentalists are retarded and ignorant, true, but isn't it sickening to judge an entire religion by a few crazy fools?

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[This message has been edited by Phreakmeister (edited February 15, 2002).]

[ogb]

You cannot see the Islam as a whole. There are hundreds of groups of it, some more radical, some more liberal. The Koran is very vague, so it gives lots of ways of interpreting it. The ones who force their kids to wear a coat, a skirt and a veil (?) violate the constitution; if they wanna live in the west, then they also have to respect the western culture. What they are doing at home is their problem. But you cannot tell me that the young people want to run around like that. Often the girls don't have an own opinion, are dominated by the father. Later on, when they start thinking on their own - you can see it in the second and third generation of Turks living in Germany - nobody cares for the tradition and religion anymore. I don't have a problem with muslims at all, some of them are my friends, but I have a problem if they live in their own world and expect everybody to live like they want to nd see all others as inferior.

My problem with immigration is that most immigration is to white western nations. Nobody is immigrating to Saudi Arabia and non-Muslims wouldn't be allowed to immigrate to Saudi Arabia if they wanted to. Why should western nations be forced to accept all of these immigrants of a different races and cultures when westerners would not be acepted in these countries? Why should western nations have their culture destroyed by these invaders? What would the Muslims think if suddenly a huge amount of white Europeans started moving itno their countries and changing their nation and culture? Why should western nations have their historic populations changed by massive immigration? Give me one good reason why we should accept the destruction of our historic culture and way of life? Whites will become a minority in most European nations within 100 years and in the US within 35 years. Why should we accept this? Why should we "tolerate" it! It is insanity! We will be the only people in history to voluntarily surrender their native countries to foreign invaders! We are taught to celebrate "tolerance" and "diversity". This is pure doublethink! This is celebrating the destruction of our culture! IT IS TOTAL INSANITY! Think about it.

[ogb]

Christians in Islamic countries are often persecuted or at least forbidden to practise their religion - but just because this is wrong we may not do the same thing in return. I also think that it's a problem that many in the west give up their identity and tolerate others, but a general asylum or immigration stop may not even be discussed. It just has to happen in a controlled way depending on economcial needs (lots need foreigners for qualified work), size and population. And for immigrants it must be condition to learn the language and respect culture and constitution - what doesn't mean that they can't live as they want to in their own private sphere, but not in the public.

Two weird German cases:

More and more people complain about the church bells on Sunday mornings (though they don't succeed). There is much less trouble on the Imam yelling his public prayer over microphones in German cities (which is allowed).

A recent case in Cologne. There was a religious islamic leader, who called himself "Kalif of Cologne". There are some of these kalifs in Germany and the one from Cologne started to have trouble with another one. So the Kalif of Cologne demanded in the public to kill his rival, which was done a few days later. He was sentenced to a four year (!) prison term and the court demanded that he doesn't have a right to stay in Germany any longer, which means that he has to go back to Turkey after he's coming out of prison. Now our nice social activists are coming and saying "this poor guy is prosecuted in Turkey, we may not send him back. He might face the death penalty". This is going to the courts now, and that way it could be that we even may not send a foreigner away who publically demanded to kill another person (though I'd rather ask the question why he is allowed to stay here anyhow after he is prosecuted in Turkey).

[Phreakmeister]

We had kinda like the same here, but completely different.
There was this one guy, who was taken here by his parents from Morocco when he was 1 years old. He is now 25, so for the past 24 years he has been living here. He only speaks Dutch and English, but not Moroccan or Arab. He acts like a Dutchman. So all in all, he's a Dutchman, he's just not born here, that's all.
Well, he is a petty thief. He's not mr. good guy, but the worst thing he has done in his life was to steal wallets. Nothing admireable, but nothing world shocking about it either. Now the Dutch department of Justice is about to expel him from the country. They told the Moroccan ambassador that one of his citizens was being a menace to society, and that they were forced to expel him, but that they needed his (the ambassador's) permission to do that. The ambassador didn't know what exactly was going on, but he trusted the Dutch Department of Justice, and gave his permission.
So now a petty thief, who is only a small criminal, and who is in fact a Dutch criminal, will be expelled from the country. And there's nothing he can do about it. He doesn't have a life nor a future nor anywhere to go in Morocco, he doesn't know the language, he hardly knows anything about the Moroccan way of life, he's just not able to live there, and he will be expelled. And at the same time the Department of (in)justice refuse to expel an imam who says it's ok to kill gay people..................

Same story for another refugee:
He has been tortured severely by Iranian police, his life is really in danger there. He managed to get away from there, and went here. He has every ground to stay here. But one thing went wrong:
In Iran, they live in a different year than we do (I think somewhere in 6025). So he had to convert his date of birth to his date of birth in the christian calendar. He was born in early january. However, he didn't know about February 29th. So instead of writing down January 5th, 1969 for instance, he wrote down December 20th, 1968. Which it would have been without February 29th. So he has got every reason to be here, but because of one mistake, the easiest mistake to make, he will have to be expelled.......... Sickening.....

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[weldordave]

Cyrax=RIGHT ON!!! To Freak and others: do you think that when the islam hoardes get done "invading" your country they will be so tolerant of "diversity" and "culture"? Just look at the islamic countries now! Even when we were in Saudi defending their sorry asses our chaplains could not wear the cross insignia on their battle uniforms! I have NO religion at all(well, I do lean toward Odin and Vallhalla) but thought this was chicken ****. And our Rabbis-- forget about it! You, in EU, should treat the !%!%!%!%!%!%!%s just like they treat Westerners in their little piss-ant countries. To quote the great Thomas Jefferson "Religion is a wonderful thing, it is too bad churches have to get involved in it." Don't worry though Phreak, with your views on independence, revolution and the will of 99% of the people I know you'll be the first one to defend your GERMAN royalty and your constitution when the islam majority outlaws it in favor of five towelheads reading from the koran. Better start stocking up those cruise missiles now.

[Serendipity]

Boy oh boy! I think everyone here should take a few deep breaths! http://www.dumblaws.com/ubb/wink.gif

Phreakmeister: Holy ****. Isn't there a ban against racism on this site? Racist views are certainly not encouraged here, but I don't see Firebird coming back. As long as the discussion is on-topic and there's minimal flaming, it's OK with me.

Cyrax9482: ...Whites will become a minority in most European nations within 100 years and in the US within 35 years. Why should we accept this? Why should we "tolerate" it! It is insanity! We will be the only people in history to voluntarily surrender their native countries to foreign invaders! We are taught to celebrate "tolerance" and "diversity". This is pure doublethink! This is celebrating the destruction of our culture! IT IS TOTAL INSANITY! Think about it.

I have several problems with this. Who do you mean by "we"? The readership and membership of this forum is not limited to white Europeans, or white people wherever they may be. I don't understand why whites becoming a minority is such a tragedy, or "insanity" as you put it. Please explain the what is wrong with this. As for "celebrating the destruction of our culture", I find this rather hysterical. I don't want to get anti-American here, but I am much more alarmed by the culture of American corporate hegemony, which is destroying and misrepresenting MY culture far more effectively than any immigrants could. On the other hand, I have many friends who are immigrants - some of them American - and I do indeed celebrate the diversity of cultures with them.

[Phreakmeister]

Sure, and Bangladesh is really oppressing non-Muslims. And so is Morocco. And so is Turkey. And so is Jordan. Man, think again.
The only place where Jews were really safe before Israel was founded, was Morocco, an islamic country. Turkey is the most liberal muslim country in the world.

Islam can be tolerant. Islam is not the problem, the fundamentalists are. Don't blame an entire religion for the work of a few fools.

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[Sjax]

I agree with that. Fundamentalism is always a problem, no matter if it christian, islam or any other kind.

I also dont see the problem in the fact that white people might be a minority in Europe some day. You shouldnt divide people in races, I dont...

[Phreakmeister]

And besides that, mass migrations have always happened in Europe. Last example was the wave of Jews leaving Europe and heading for Israel. It's naive to think that this is what Europe has always been like. Europe has always changed, and will always change.
The Burgundians (southern France), originally come from Denmark, the Bulgarians originally come from Siberia, the Vandals (northern Africa) originally come from Poland, the Turks originally come from Mongolia. A lot of English people are originally from Denmark. The Lombardians (northern Italy) originally come from Germany and Hungary.
And for the Goths it's an entirely different story. The Goths went from Poland to Ukraine. There they kinda like split up. The Ostrogoths went to Yugoslavia. The Visigoths went thru Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Greece and Croatia to Italy. From Italy they went on to southwestern France and central Spain. Their direct descendants are the Catalans.

And as far as the US is concerned: Immigrants have formed the country. The only Americans not to have descended from immigrants, are the Native Americans.

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[This message has been edited by Phreakmeister (edited February 19, 2002).]

[weldordave]

Along the lines of your post, Phreak, the "natives" are immigrants also. And if you're going to use the "they were here first" argument that would mean that the moon belongs to the US, which is silly. Also reference Kenniwick man from the NW US. He appears to be a scandinavian that was here about 1000 years or so(?) before the "natives".

[Phreakmeister]

I wasn't using the "they were here first" argument. I was just stating that mass migrations have always happened. It is nothing new to have immigrants. For no country at all, including the US. I was showing that it is ignorant to despise immigration, knowing that we all descend from immigrants.

And yes, the Native Americans migrated to the US too. They came from Siberia. When the Bering Strait was dry, they moved from Kamchatka to Alaska.

And indeed. Columbus wasn't the first European to come to America. (He never went to the US, but nevermind that) The Vikings were in America as well. Canada and New England. They were led by a certain Leif Eriksson. But not even the Vikings were the first Europeans in America. Recently, Roman remains have been found in Mexico.......

All I wanted to show, is that migration is of all ages. It has always occurred, and it will always occur.

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[weldordave]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Phreakmeister:
[B]Holy ****. Isn't there a ban against racism on this site??

Does this include your consistant negative posts against the French in other areas of this board?

[Phreakmeister]

I have too much dignity to respond to this, weldordave, sry

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

A lot is wrong with whites becoming a minority in their own homeland. White culture will be destroyed but no other culture will be destroyed. Why do you care so little about your own culture and people? I really do not understand this at all! Eventually they won't just be a minority, they won't exist. There will not be 1 full-blooded white person on the earth in about 300 years I would say. And this is just OK to you? You must really hate your own race and culture and fell guilty about the history of your people like the media has taught you. This is just very sad to me. I recommend Pat Buchanan's book "The Death of the West" to all of you.

[Serendipity]

I don't have the time or patience to read Pat Buchannan's book, so please go over the main points. I understand very little of your post. I don't see how white culture will be destroyed - I don't even know exactly what you mean by "white culture". I don't feel guilty about my race's past - I take responsibility for MY actions. I don't let the media influence me on such matters.

What is the problem with there being no pure-bred white people left in 300 years? I don't believe that for a moment, BTW, it sounds like White Supremacist hysteria to me. Of course, neither you nor I will be around to see, so if you just make sure that you only have all-white children, you'll be doing your bit.

I don't think you know a d*mn thing about my culture.

Hey I thought this discussion was supposed to be about Pim Fortuyn. You guys have drifted off the topic so much that you seem to end up saying lots of emotional things without arguments.
So get back to the topic. Fortuyn is a scary man that should never have any formal power, but it is great that he stirs up the boring politics that has become of the purple coalition over the last 8 years.
So I say, listen to Pim. Discuss the issues that need discussing but please do not vote for this creep.


------------------
It is to die or to lie...

[Idnew]

I know know a thing about this Pim person so just been reading this.

BTW welcome to all you newbies.

Seems to be getting a little hot in here though so everybody go take a cold shower and come back in a better mood and no more name calling. Just state your own opinions and don't put down anybody about their opinions except to respond to them with your own.

------------------
(ô¿ô)Proud member of the Dumb Laws Mod Squad so watch it!*smile*

Attitude Ajustments Gladly Performed(ö¿ö)

My Home Spot (http://members.tripod.com/~freeatlast_3/Doing_Whatever.htm)

Brain Mania (http://www.brainmania.com)

Cosmic Coffee Shop (http://pub83.ezboard.com/bcosmiccoffeeshop)
Meet The Squad (http://www.geocities.com/idnew52/Mod_Squad_Poster.htm)

[Phreakmeister]

Originally posted by Serendipity
What is the problem with there being no pure-bred white people left in 300 years?

For every non-purely white (i.e. halfblood) child being born, there's also a non-purely non-white child being born, as two parties are involved in procreation. If a child is half-Japanese half-Swedish, the child may not be completely Swedish, but it also won't be completely Japanese (ethnically speaking).

[nacho cheese]

A lot is wrong with whites becoming a minority in their own homeland.
And what is this land of whites? The USA? Read your history...

[AWPrime]

How would everybody think about this if we were speaking about animals?

Many ecologists try to preserve genetic diversity and almost everybody agrees with them. Why should it not be the same thing with human culture and diversity.

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister
[B]Sure, and Bangladesh is really oppressing non-Muslims. And so is Morocco. And so is Turkey. And so is Jordan. Man, think again.
The only place where Jews were really safe before Israel was founded, was Morocco, an islamic country. Turkey is the most liberal muslim country in the world.

Islam can be tolerant. Islam is not the problem, the fundamentalists are. Don't blame an entire religion for the work of a few fools.


Actually phreak,they do.Every one you mentioned includding turkey does supress christianity and other religions to a point.Not as bad as saudi arabia or syria but they do .I have had many friends go to those places on a church mission trip and have to hide it as a sports tour or something because they would be prohibeted entry or arrested if they openly practiced or admited it. Includding turkey.

Worked with a suffi muslim who was suprised they were not imprisoned or kicked out.He was jailed in iraq back in the 80`s for not following their standard and it was a secular state.

[Phreakmeister]

I know a few things about freedom in Morocco. The father of a friend of mine is a Moroccan journalist, who was intimated because he exposed widespread corruption in Morocco. But that is out of the question, because it has nothing to do with freedom of religion, but with freedom of the press.

I've been looking at the homepage of several sources, including Writers, politicians, religious leaders, human rights defenders and many others were tried and imprisoned for exercising their right to freedom of expression, particularly when they expressed opinions on the Kurdish question or the role of Islam.
(...)
Some 2,000 suspected members of the militant Islamist organization Hizbullah were arrested; some were held in prolonged police detention. The bodies of dozens of people were exhumed; the killings were attributed to Hizbullah.
(...)
Some 2,000 alleged members of Hizbullah were arrested following the launch of an extensive operation against the organization by the security forces in January. Subsequently, the bodies of some 67 people were exhumed; their abduction and murder were attributed to Hizbullah. Some observers claimed that Hizbullah had been acting in collusion with parts of the Turkish security forces during the armed conflict. Some of those detained in the raid against Hizbullah were held in police detention for prolonged periods during which they were at risk of torture and ill-treatment. The maximum period for police and gendarmerie detention is seven days and, in the provinces under State of Emergency, 10 days. However, several of these detainees were held for much longer periods.

Fahrettin Özdemir was detained in February and later indicted in the main Hizbullah trial in which he and 14 others were charged with some 150 murders and in which the death sentence was sought. On 10 July, in the first trial session, he stated that he had been held in police custody for a total of 59 days and that he was given electric shocks and suspended by the arms, and his testicles were squeezed and beaten at the Police Headquarters in Gaziantep.[/quote]

It tells of gross misconduct, but not of serious and systematic persecution and repression of religious minorities.

Morocco:

One long-term prisoner of conscience was released, but four prisoners of conscience were sentenced to prison terms in 2000.
'Abdessalam Yassine, spiritual leader of the banned Islamist association al-'Adl wa'l-Ihsan (Justice and Charity) who had been held under administratively imposed house arrest since December 1989, was released on 15 May 2000.

Jordan:

At the end of 1999 and beginning of 2000, 15 members of the outlawed Islamist Hizb al-Tahrir fi'l-Urdun, Liberation Party in Jordan, were arrested. They were charged with membership of an illegal party and distribution of seditious leaflets, and sentenced to up to 18 months' imprisonment. They were prisoners of conscience.
Sixteen people from Irbid who were arrested at the end of 1999 by the GID, apparently suspected of links with Islamist groups, were held for between 35 and 50 days with no access to lawyers or family before being released without charge.
Around 700 people were arrested between October and December after demonstrations in support of the Palestinian intifada. Most were released after a few days or weeks of incommunicado detention. Others were brought before the State Security Court and charged with offences such as inciting riots.
(...)
Sixteen people arrested in connection with the group al-Qa'eda (the base) were held in prolonged incommunicado detention of up to three months at the GID detention centre and reportedly beaten. At least three were moved into solitary confinement for up to two months, apparently as a punishment. Relatives and lawyers reported that they saw marks of torture on the prisoners' bodies when they were finally allowed to visit them. During their trials, the defendants stated they had been subjected to torture, including shabeh (suspending the victim by the feet with arms tied behind the back) and beatings which included falaqa (beatings on the soles of the feet). They alleged that confessions were extracted from them under duress. No investigation of their allegations was apparently carried out.
(...)
In September, 16 people were convicted for alleged involvement with al-Qa'eda. They were found guilty of, among other things, plotting to carry out bomb attacks in Jordan, manufacturing explosives and recruiting people to carry out attacks on Jewish and American targets. Death sentences were passed on Khader Abu Hosher and Usama Husni Kamel Sammar. They claimed that their confessions had been extracted under duress. Throughout the trial period serious restrictions were imposed on communication between the defendants and their lawyers, allowing them to meet only in the presence of the security forces.
(Same group as before)
(...)
Four leaders of Hamas who were forcibly exiled by Jordan to Qatar during 1999 remained in exile.

There is a difference between law enforcement, misconduct, intimidation and repression.

A few other sources are:

Bangla Desh
[url=http://www.sdnbd.org/sdi/international_day/human_rights/Proposed%20standards%20for%20a%20national%20human% 20rights.html]Sustainable Development Network Bangla Desh (Amnesty International, a widely respected authority when it comes to human rights and the violations thereof.

In the report of human rights in Bangladesh I've found many cases of persecution of political dissidents, but none whatsoever of religious persecution.

In the Turkey-report, I found this:

[quote)
Religious Freedom World Report: Bangla Desh (http://www.religiousfreedom.com/wrpt/asiapac/bangladesh.htm)
US State Dept. (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2001/5556.htm)

Turkey
Religious Freedom World Report: Turkey (http://www.religiousfreedom.com/wrpt/Europe/turkey.htm)
US State Dept. (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13986.htm)

Morocco
Religious Freedom World Report: Morocco (http://www.religiousfreedom.com/wrpt/mideast/morocco.htm)
US State Dept. (http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/irf_morocco.html)

Jordan
Religious Freedom World Report: Jordan (http://www.religiousfreedom.com/wrpt/mideast/jordan.htm)
US State Dept. (http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/irf_jordan.html)

(Admittedly, the latter two have less religious freedom than the former two)

I do not want to downplay the experiences of the people you mentioned, but their experiences do not make complete religious repression.

[sinecure]

Originally posted by nacho cheese

And what is this land of whites? The USA? Read your history...

Start with:

http://www.mnh.si.edu/arctic/html/kennewick_man.html

and

http://www.kennewick-man.com/

Now... you tell me-- Where IS "the land of the whites?"
:p :D :D

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister
I know a few things about freedom in Morocco. The father of a friend of mine is a Moroccan journalist, who was intimated because he exposed widespread corruption in Morocco. But that is out of the question, because it has nothing to do with freedom of religion, but with freedom of the press.

I've been looking at the homepage of several sources, including Bangla Desh
[url=http://www.sdnbd.org/sdi/international_day/human_rights/Proposed%20standards%20for%20a%20national%20human% 20rights.html]Sustainable Development Network Bangla Desh (Amnesty International, a widely respected authority when it comes to human rights and the violations thereof.

In the report of human rights in Bangladesh I've found many cases of persecution of political dissidents, but none whatsoever of religious persecution.

In the Turkey-report, I found this:



It tells of gross misconduct, but not of serious and systematic persecution and repression of religious minorities.

Morocco:



Jordan:



There is a difference between law enforcement, misconduct, intimidation and repression.

A few other sources are:

Turkey
Religious Freedom World Report: Turkey (http://www.religiousfreedom.com/wrpt/Europe/turkey.htm)
US State Dept. (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2002/13986.htm)

Morocco
Religious Freedom World Report: Morocco (http://www.religiousfreedom.com/wrpt/mideast/morocco.htm)
US State Dept. (http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/irf_morocco.html)

Jordan
Religious Freedom World Report: Jordan (http://www.religiousfreedom.com/wrpt/mideast/jordan.htm)
US State Dept. (http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/irf_jordan.html)

(Admittedly, the latter two have less religious freedom than the former two)

I do not want to downplay the experiences of the people you mentioned, but their experiences do not make complete religious repression. [/B]

thats nice phreak but amnesty has an agenda and non of this takes away a single thing i said.I am talking lef experiences here.Not just one or two instancess.The facts remain that you will be persecuted in those areas.
Been there doe that so to speak.

i never said complete religious repression either.Any is to much.

[Phreakmeister]

Amnesty has an agenda, sure, any human rights organization has that, but it can't be denied that Amnesty International is an authority when it comes to human rights, recognized by all colours of the political spectrum, and that it is not biased towards any specific government.

I personally have never been to any of these countries, but I know people who have. Enough to know that the cases you mentioned, regardless of their number, do not reflect systematic persecution and oppression, which was the issue here. And I hope you will agree with me, that the countries I mentioned are paradises compared to the 'ocean' they are encircled by.

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister
Amnesty has an agenda, sure, any human rights organization has that, but it can't be denied that Amnesty International is an authority when it comes to human rights, recognized by all colours of the political spectrum, and that it is not biased towards any specific government.

I personally have never been to any of these countries, but I know people who have. Enough to know that the cases you mentioned, regardless of their number, do not reflect systematic persecution and oppression, which was the issue here. And I hope you will agree with me, that the countries I mentioned are paradises compared to the 'ocean' they are encircled by. I deny it.
take their ratings with a grain of salt.

They are not AS bad but they are no paradises either.

[Phreakmeister]

Originally posted by DEAD ZONE
They are not AS bad but they are no paradises either.

I completely agree, but I didn't call them paradises. I call them paradises in comparison. Which they are, compared to countries in the region.

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister


I completely agree, but I didn't call them paradises. I call them paradises in comparison. Which they are, compared to countries in the region.

I guess we define "TOLERANT" differently.
I see the glass as Half full,you as half empty.

Tolerant does not mean imprisonment or punishment for preaching or "spreadding by words" any idea.

They are not tollerant.

[Phreakmeister]

You want to tell a Dutchman, of all people, the meaning of tolerance??????????????????

What you said, was that those countries are repressive regimes concerning freedom of religion (not talking about political freedom here). I don't deny the fact that there is a lot left to be desired in the countries mentioned, but they are not repressive either. As I said, there is a difference between law enforcement, misconduct, intimidation and repression. When the police arrests muslims or christians (or followers of whatever other religion) in order to protect public order, safety and security, they do not repress the followers of that specific religion. When the police misbehave on suspects, it does not mean repression. When followers of a certain religion are intimidated, even by state officials, it does not mean that they are repression. Repression requires a clearly defined (or defineable), organized, consistent and specific oppression of the exercise of a belief.

Coffee with sugar, cream or both is still coffee.

[DEAD ZONE]

Originally posted by Phreakmeister
You want to tell a Dutchman, of all people, the meaning of tolerance??????????????????

What you said, was that those countries are repressive regimes concerning freedom of religion (not talking about political freedom here). I don't deny the fact that there is a lot left to be desired in the countries mentioned, but they are not repressive either. As I said, there is a difference between law enforcement, misconduct, intimidation and repression. When the police arrests muslims or christians (or followers of whatever other religion) in order to protect public order, safety and security, they do not repress the followers of that specific religion. When the police misbehave on suspects, it does not mean repression. When followers of a certain religion are intimidated, even by state officials, it does not mean that they are repression. Repression requires a clearly defined (or defineable), organized, consistent and specific oppression of the exercise of a belief.

Coffee with sugar, cream or both is still coffee.

No it does not.I see we we do define it differently.

the state is the organization.It passes the laws and inforces the repression.

And as a dutchy,you should know better.

[Phreakmeister]

Originally posted by DEAD ZONE
the state is the organization.It passes the laws and inforces the repression.

Exactly. And what is the position of these states towards minority religions in their countries?

Jordan
Islam is the state religion. The Constitution prohibits discrimination based on religion. According to the constitution, the State safeguards the free exercise of all forms of worship and religious rites in accordance with the customs observed in the Kingdom, unless such exercise is inconsistent with public order or decorum. Congregations have the right to establish and maintain their own schools for the education of their own members provided that they comply with the general provisions of the law and submit to the control of government in matters relating to their curricula and tendency.

Morocco
The Constitution provides for freedom of worship. All islamist political activity is banned.

Turkey
The constitution of 1982 reaffirms the secular nature of the Turkish state, which had been established by Kemal Atatürk in the 1920’s. The constitution empowers the Department of Religious Affairs to handle affairs between the government and religious communities, but specifies that it shall do so in accordance with the principles of secularism "removed from all political views and ideas" seeking national solidarity and integrity (Article 136). The constitution guarantees the right of freedom of conscience, religious belief and conviction and stipulates that acts of worship may be conducted freely. It is forbidden to use religious doctrine for political purposes or "for even partially basing the fundamental social, economic, political, and legal order of the state on religious tenets."

Bangla Desh
The Constitution declares that Islam is the state religion but also guarantees that other religions may be practiced. Discrimination on the basis of religion by the state is forbidden and government positions are open to people of all faiths. Freedom of thought and conscience is guaranteed and, subject to law, public order and morality, citizens have the right to profess, practice or promulgate any religion. Religious communities are allowed to open schools, but no person in any educational institution may be forced to take religious instruction.

I wouldn't call that repression. Would you?

And as a dutchy,you should know better.

Or as an American you should listen to someone who knows from experience what tolerance is, someone from the country famous for its tolerance. Makes just as much sense.

[weldordave]

Of the many things I think you are, tolerant is not one of them.

[Phreakmeister]

Originally posted by weldordave
Of the many things I think you are, tolerant is not one of them.

Run out of words to say, dear?

[weldordave]

What paper from 1703???????????????????????????????????????

[Phreakmeister]

Originally posted by weldordave
What paper from 1703???????????????????????????????????????

Yupp, run out of words