The Islamification Of Europe

[jbg]

They don't have to. They got the other non-jewish ones doing the same sort of thing. Why would they want to investigate themselves?

Jews are part of the mainstream community, loyal to it, and enforce its laws.

You think that the Jews are to blame for the financial situation, and you are a Jew. Thats kinda sad. Are you ashamed of your Jewish-ness? There is a psychological profile for someone like you, called Woody Allen

I don't think the Jews as a group per se are responsible for the financial situation. My point is that when Jews go bad it's usually to commit financial crimes, not crimes of violence. And no, I'm not a Woody Allen. I'm someone who calls a spade a spade. I do not deny that Jews are normally at the center of financial frauds; I do not deny that Muslims are usually at the center of nihilistic, unfocused violence.

[Black Dog]

Me and my ilk?

Peddlers of the new yellow peril, yeah.

I don't feel under any special onus to prove that their behaviour is not due to some other factor,

So your content to ignore anything that doesn't fit your pet theory which, I should point out, is lacking in any actual evidence. Cool.

and there are no U.S. cities that have the same problems, so I feel under no obligation to "explain" that either.

There's no U.S. cities where there's violence and "no go zones" for cops? Or riots?

France has been experiencing a backlash the last couple of years in large measure due to the behaviour pattern of its immigrant Muslim population.

Here's a notion: why don't you list off some of these policies responsible for making these immigrants all uppity?

Yeah, but not likely, or they'd have come out in the fifties or sixties.

Yeah, they mostly came out in the 21st century. Hey wait: isn't that also around the same time as the civil unrest in the banlieues and the backlash you spoke of earlier? How does that fit?

Oh, so you're saying all those bureacratic regulations are pointless and ineffective? So you're against such things here, I take it?

No. I'm saying they aren't as all-powerful and as you say they are.

More importantly, if you "went on" you might have to address why 10% of Canadian Muslims felt terrorist acts against Canada were justified, or why half of them wanted Sharia law. Fortunately since you had to "dash" you could just erase that part and ignore it.

Don't flatter yourself. FWIW, here's the response:

However, that's not to say things are all peaches and cream as evidenced by the Toronto 18, and as evidenced by the fact that a survey taken of Canadian Muslims by the government showed 53% of Muslims wanted Sharia law, at least for Family law (how many wanted it for all law wasn't stated). The preference was highest among the youngest - the ones most likely to have grown up here. Furthermore, 10% of Muslims felt the actions planned by the Toronto 18 - bombings of CSIS and military bases, and attack on Parliament - were justified.

How about linking to this poll and its results? Google's silent on the subject.

[jbg]

Black Dog, good to see you back.

[weareone]

So Islam isn't a 'problem' in Europe?

Only because the immigrants do not want to blend into the European society. You have to understand Europeans before you can understand the Muslims that live there.

[DogOnPorch]

Only because the immigrants do not want to blend into the European society. You have to understand Europeans before you can understand the Muslims that live there.

The UK isn't Europe, afterall.

[kimmy]

How many Canadians die per year from Islamic terrorism?

How many Canadians die per year at the hands of a person who is mentally unbalanced and not receiving treatment?

How many Canadians die per year from traffic accidents?

If you're scared about terrorism, you should be petrified of driving.

Why are you pissing your pants about one and not the other?

Would you jump into a thread where people are talking about domestic violence and say "why are you pissing your pants about domestic violence when you're more likely to die from traffic accidents?"

-k

Edited October 17, 2009 by kimmy

[DogOnPorch]

Yes he would.

:lol:

[JerrySeinfeld]

The #1 name for newborn boys in London, England is Mohammed/Muhamed/Mohamed(etc.).

But I digress.

The key question relating to europe or Canada is not whether Islamic peoples will be a majority by this date or that date. It is whether or not these people choose to embrace certain basic values in western democracies or try to impose their values upon said democracy.

Whether or not an Islamic minority becomes a majority is not the issue. It's how noisey, demanding they get and whether our bend-over-backwards multiculti sensitivity is willing to alter fundamental principals of democracy in aqcuiescance.

I think former UN secretary general Kofi Anna wrapped the issue up pretty well in addressing the Danish Cartoon worldwide muslim violence:

"The offensive caricatures were first published in a European country which has recently acquired a significant Muslim population and is not yet sure how to adjust to it."

Which is at the crux of it. Aren't immigrants suposed to be the ones doing the adjusting?

Apparently freedom of expression is just another one of those things the unwashed western democracies haven't yet learned to eliminate in the interest of serving our new minority muslim populations.

So cultural sensitivy trumps the fundamental freedoms? wow.

"We will use your Democracy to destroy your Democracy." - Muslim Cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed

They don't need majorities.

Edited October 17, 2009 by JerrySeinfeld

[Michael Hardner]

Jerry,

Seriously what is the DEAL with your posts ?

The #1 name for newborn boys in London, England is Mohammed/Muhamed/Mohamed(etc.).

But I digress.

As usual, no cite, no reference. Will you provide one this time ?

The key question relating to europe or Canada is not whether Islamic peoples will be a majority by this date or that date. It is whether or not these people choose to embrace certain basic values in western democracies or try to impose their values upon said democracy.

Whether or not an Islamic minority becomes a majority is not the issue. It's how noisey, demanding they get and whether our bend-over-backwards multiculti sensitivity is willing to alter fundamental principals of democracy in aqcuiescance.

I think former UN secretary general Kofi Anna wrapped the issue up pretty well in addressing the Danish Cartoon worldwide muslim violence:

"The offensive caricatures were first published in a European country which has recently acquired a significant Muslim population and is not yet sure how to adjust to it."

Which is at the crux of it. Aren't immigrants suposed to be the ones doing the adjusting?

Apparently freedom of expression is just another one of those things the unwashed western democracies haven't yet learned to eliminate in the interest of serving our new minority muslim populations.

Hmmm... the Muslims in our countries have acted no differently than Catholics who objected to Mapplethorpe photos, or unflattering depictions of Mary.

So what is your point ? Should they shut up because you want them to ? Why are you holding them to a different standard ?

So cultural sensitivy trumps the fundamental freedoms? wow.

"We will use your Democracy to destroy your Democracy." - Muslim Cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed

They don't need majorities.

This is another haphazard link you're making between extreme Muslims in other countries and Muslims here.

After years of posting about Muslim immigration, we have yet to have any opponents of Muslim immigration (which is what they are) provide any evidence that Muslim immigration is a threat to our democracy. Jerry's post here is another example of that gap.

But keep trying...

[DogOnPorch]

Jerry,

Seriously what is the DEAL with your posts ?

As usual, no cite, no reference. Will you provide one this time ?

Hmmm... the Muslims in our countries have acted no differently than Catholics who objected to Mapplethorpe photos, or unflattering depictions of Mary.

So what is your point ? Should they shut up because you want them to ? Why are you holding them to a different standard ?

This is another haphazard link you're making between extreme Muslims in other countries and Muslims here.

After years of posting about Muslim immigration, we have yet to have any opponents of Muslim immigration (which is what they are) provide any evidence that Muslim immigration is a threat to our democracy. Jerry's post here is another example of that gap.

But keep trying...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Toronto_terrorism_case

[JerrySeinfeld]

As usual, no cite, no reference. Will you provide one this time ?

Here you go. You can also look it up in UK statistics sites, but be sure to add up all the variations: Muhammed, Mohamed Mohammed etc.

Hmmm... the Muslims in our countries have acted no differently than Catholics who objected to Mapplethorpe photos, or unflattering depictions of Mary.

So what is your point ? Should they shut up because you want them to ? Why are you holding them to a different standard ?

Um, should who shut up? You seem confused. If you look at our country, it is Muslims who tried to hijack Canada's Human rights commissions to get others to "shut up: as you put it.

Western Standard was basically put out of business for publishing the Danish Cartoons and MacLeans Magazine was hauled out on the carpet in a long drawn out HRC case for printing an article about Islam.

Speaking of shutting up, I guess if you make an unflattering film about Islam in Europe, you're expected to "shut up"

But I guess someone did that for him:

A Dutch filmmaker who outraged members of the Muslim community with his attacks on the treatment of women in Islamic society was gunned down and stabbed to death on an Amsterdam street Tuesday morning.

And you're waiting for an Islamic majority? Why wait when you can scare those blasted euro filmakers into silence right now?

And heigh ho, since we're all hot for the topic of "shutting up", let's not forrget poor old Danish Cartoonist himself. How's his life going?

Several months after the cartoons were published, a Pakistani cleric reportedly offered 1.5 million rupee — roughly $16,700 — and a car to anyone who killed Westergaard. Mohammed Yousaf Qureshi, prayer leader at the Mohabat Khan mosque in the northwestern city of Peshawar, announced the bounty in February 2006 at the mosque and the Jamia Ashrafia religious school that he leads.

In June 2008, Westergaard and ten newspaper editors were reportedly summoned by Jordan’s public prosecutor on charges of “blasphemy” for reprinting the cartoons. Three men were arrested last year in Denmark for allegedly plotting to assassinate him.

I guess Islam has no sovereignty to it's host country's laws and values of freedom of expression.

This is another haphazard link you're making between extreme Muslims in other countries and Muslims here.

Michael, instead of knee-jerk accusations and race baiting, why don't you examine the facts on the ground. The only reason Islamics in this country were not allowed to trample on the basic fundamental right of freedom of expression in this country, which they clearly and on record attempted to do, is because two brave journalists recognized the attempt and fought tooth and nail to expose it.

It is clear as day that complaints to the CHRC, backed by major Canadian Islamic groups in this country, attempted to subvert the fundamental human right of freedom of expression (and by default, freedom of discourse).

That is a fact, Michael. You can throw around accusations all you want, but you can't dispute basic facts.

After years of posting about Muslim immigration, we have yet to have any opponents of Muslim immigration (which is what they are) provide any evidence that Muslim immigration is a threat to our democracy.

I'm not against Muslim immigration. Rather I favour Muslim INTEGRATION.

Kofi Anna was wrong: the host country ought not to be the one doing the "adjusting".

[DogOnPorch]

JS: It is clear as day that complaints to the CHRC, backed by major Canadian Islamic groups in this country, attempted to subvert the fundamental human right of freedom of expression (and by default, freedom of discourse).

Yes it sure was. If they were so upset about the cartoons being reprinted and Mark Steyn stating the bleeding obvious, they should have started their own magazine. But their plan was to stifle all the others instead. Allah Akbar.

The only good thing that came out of it was watching Mark Steyn make the various offended Muslims involved look like the stupid idiots in favor of censorship that they are

. Edited October 17, 2009 by DogOnPorch

[JerrySeinfeld]

Yes it sure was. If they were so upset about the cartoons being reprinted and Mark Steyn stating the bleeding obvious, they should have started their own magazine. But their plan was to stifle all the others instead. Allah Akbar.

The only good thing that came out of it was watching Mark Steyn make the various offended Muslims involved look like the stupid idiots in favor of censorship that they are

.

Wow - you know it's been a whilee since I watched that video. It rings even clearer today than it did back then; a blatant attempt to remove the fundamental right of freedom of expression from a western democracy: Canada.

Just look at those three. I kind of feel for them, because as law students, they still don't see the complete riduculousness of what they want and how incompatible it is with a free society.

[Dreamer]

I'd say, belief's not so important. Culture's important. It's hard to expect no tensions within highly multicultural Europe.

[weareone]

Wow - you know it's been a whilee since I watched that video. It rings even clearer today than it did back then; a blatant attempt to remove the fundamental right of freedom of expression from a western democracy: Canada.

Just look at those three. I kind of feel for them, because as law students, they still don't see the complete riduculousness of what they want and how incompatible it is with a free society.

No one has ever said that lawyers believe in a free society. They don't. They believe in their paying client, right or wrong. And the only way to make money as a lawyer, primarily because there is an obscene overabundance of them, is to make ridiculous statements. This gets them press, pressbrings on paying clients. Lawyers are capitalism at its best.

[jbg]

And the only way to make money as a lawyer, primarily because there is an obscene overabundance of them, is to make ridiculous statements. This gets them press, pressbrings on paying clients. Lawyers are capitalism at its best.

I am a lawyer. That is not the way it is.

We have a responsibility to make the best meritorious arguments we can for our clients. Sometimes we win and sometimes we lose.

[weareone]

There is no need for them to say, the exercise wasn't to provide alternate numbers but to show what was fudged. It is enough to that not all immigrants in Europe are muslims, especially when you consider a great number of immigrants are European (ie a begian moves to france, a german moves to Holand ...etc)

Clearly it is worthless and I am very sorry for you that such powerful anti immigration propaganda was merely a wet dream.

The immigration of Europeans from Belgian to France or from France to Belgium or a Belgian to Germany is LEGAL. Anyone outside the EU is illegal. Easy squeeze.

[Michael Hardner]

DogOnPorch,

Thanks for the link. I appreciate it when these debates have some facts to discuss. As you've shown, there's no question that we're targeted by Muslim terrorist organizations.

Some questions:

Are any American (Canadian) Muslims involved in terrorism ? Yes, they are and no amount of politically correct propaganda can change the fact that there are Canadian Muslims who will sign up with such organizations. Your link has shown that.

Do Muslims as a group in Canada support such acts to any significant degree ? I haven't seen evidence of that. If you have some, post it and the facts may change my position.

Are these threats so serious as to threaten our democracy ? I don't think so. Even 9/11 didn't threaten the democracy of the US. Do these act convince Western Muslims to support terrorism ? Again, we didn't see significant support for terrorism from American Muslims after 9/11.

Will reducing Muslim immigration eliminate or significantly reduce the threat of attacks ? I don't see how it will. A complete quarantine of Muslim visitors, with a mass exile would probably achieve this though. Would you suggest that as an approach ?

[Oleg Bach]

Found a nice old prayer run laying in a vacant lot while walking the dog. Seem that these precious artifacts are being tossed aside by westernized Muslims - give it time they will all fall into the soul destroying hole of westernization..seeing no one seems to have a soul these days I am not worried about the Muslims or us..people just want to eat and have peace..Those who want power and control in the east or the west should simply drop dead and stop causing so much trouble..

[Oleg Bach]

Found a nice old prayer run laying in a vacant lot while walking the dog. Seem that these precious artifacts are being tossed aside by westernized Muslims - give it time they will all fall into the soul destroying hole of westernization..seeing no one seems to have a soul these days I am not worried about the Muslims or us..people just want to eat and have peace..Those who want power and control in the east or the west should simply drop dead and stop causing so much trouble..

CORRECTION..Prayer Rug ....cleaned it up nicely and might just use it to cover my red dresser..Being a paranoid old idiot I really don't want to show the mini-carpet to much respect or ever be caught with it ---near my Koran...Yes I have the book and some nice translations of New and Old testimonial writing - don't pay much attention to those things these days having discovered in my old mature years that there is a God and all religion is evil... Maybe once I am totally senile I will lay out the run facing the west and reverse time and get young again...or maybe I will tack it to the wall and admire the running red dye caused by me using bleach in the wash...?

[Michael Hardner]

Jerry S,

QUOTE

As usual, no cite, no reference. Will you provide one this time ?

Here you go. You can also look it up in UK statistics sites, but be sure to add up all the variations: Muhammed, Mohamed Mohammed etc.

Well done. You are indeed right.

QUOTE

Hmmm... the Muslims in our countries have acted no differently than Catholics who objected to Mapplethorpe photos, or unflattering depictions of Mary.

So what is your point ? Should they shut up because you want them to ? Why are you holding them to a different standard ?

Um, should who shut up? You seem confused. If you look at our country, it is Muslims who tried to hijack Canada's Human rights commissions to get others to "shut up: as you put it.

Western Standard was basically put out of business for publishing the Danish Cartoons and MacLeans Magazine was hauled out on the carpet in a long drawn out HRC case for printing an article about Islam.

Speaking of shutting up, I guess if you make an unflattering film about Islam in Europe, you're expected to "shut up"

But I guess someone did that for him:

A Dutch filmmaker who outraged members of the Muslim community with his attacks on the treatment of women in Islamic society was gunned down and stabbed to death on an Amsterdam street Tuesday morning.

You were doing so much better up until that point.

You missed what I said: Catholics and Christians ALSO tell people to shut up when their deities are depicted in an unflattering way. Why do you hold Muslims to a different standard, hmmm ?

As for the act of violence, the onus is on you to explain why this person's religion caused this violence, why this violence reflects on the religion on the whole. I don't think it does.

And you're waiting for an Islamic majority? Why wait when you can scare those blasted euro filmakers into silence right now?

And heigh ho, since we're all hot for the topic of "shutting up", let's not forrget poor old Danish Cartoonist himself. How's his life going?

QUOTE

Several months after the cartoons were published, a Pakistani cleric reportedly offered 1.5 million rupee — roughly $16,700 — and a car to anyone who killed Westergaard. Mohammed Yousaf Qureshi, prayer leader at the Mohabat Khan mosque in the northwestern city of Peshawar, announced the bounty in February 2006 at the mosque and the Jamia Ashrafia religious school that he leads.

In June 2008, Westergaard and ten newspaper editors were reportedly summoned by Jordan’s public prosecutor on charges of “blasphemy” for reprinting the cartoons. Three men were arrested last year in Denmark for allegedly plotting to assassinate him.

I guess Islam has no sovereignty to it's host country's laws and values of freedom of expression.

All of this is anecdotal. I could cut and paste examples of other religious people who have committed violence, but why should it be attributed to their religion ? Again, it's on you to explain that.

QUOTE

This is another haphazard link you're making between extreme Muslims in other countries and Muslims here.

Michael, instead of knee-jerk accusations and race baiting, why don't you examine the facts on the ground. The only reason Islamics in this country were not allowed to trample on the basic fundamental right of freedom of expression in this country, which they clearly and on record attempted to do, is because two brave journalists recognized the attempt and fought tooth and nail to expose it.

No knee-jerk accusations here - I'm just asking you to provide real facts - not just news articles about random actions of clerics. Respond to my points above, please.

It is clear as day that complaints to the CHRC, backed by major Canadian Islamic groups in this country, attempted to subvert the fundamental human right of freedom of expression (and by default, freedom of discourse).

That is a fact, Michael. You can throw around accusations all you want, but you can't dispute basic facts.

I didn't accuse you - I provided you an example of other religions that do this and you didn't respond.

QUOTE

After years of posting about Muslim immigration, we have yet to have any opponents of Muslim immigration (which is what they are) provide any evidence that Muslim immigration is a threat to our democracy.

I'm not against Muslim immigration. Rather I favour Muslim INTEGRATION.

Kofi Anna was wrong: the host country ought not to be the one doing the "adjusting".

How do you propose to advance Muslim integration ? I had a beer with a nice Muslim lady a few years back and she had some suggestions for integration, but I had to tell her I was married. My point isn't only that I'm pleasing to the ladies (I am) but that integration happens to all who come here, and it happens because they want to be part of our society.

[Argus]

You missed what I said: Catholics and Christians ALSO tell people to shut up when their deities are depicted in an unflattering way. Why do you hold Muslims to a different standard, hmmm ?

As for the act of violence, the onus is on you to explain why this person's religion caused this violence, why this violence reflects on the religion on the whole. I don't think it does.

Are you suggesting it is uncommon for Muslim religious figures to issue edicts calling for the death of those they consider have profaned or desparaged Allah or Islam? It seems to me that it happens with disturbing regularity.

How many people are receiving police protection right now because they wrote something or said something which offended Christians? I've heard of a number of European filmmakers, writers and politicians - and cartoonists - under such protection, sometimes for years.

I don't think Christians are particularly happy to be mocked, but there seems more of an acceptance of the rights of freedom of speech in the West, at least among Christians, than among Muslims.

There are 1.6 million Muslims living in Britain and, according to the most extensive survey so far conducted, 45% of them believe that 9/11 was an American or Israeli conspiracy. Almost 25% argue that the 7/7 attacks in London were justified because of the British government's involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The same number, around a quarter, believe Britain is not their country and 30% would rather live under shariah law. Twenty-eight percent hope that Britain will eventually become a Muslim fundamentalist nation and a massive 78% advocate punishment for anybody who displays cartoons offensive to Islam, such as those of Muhammad published in Denmark.

Similar numbers are reflected in other surveys and what is particularly obvious and repeated is how little support there is within the Muslim community for notions of free speech when Islam is allegedly mocked or even critiqued

National Post

And then there was that world wide effort made by Muslim nations at the UN to make it illegal for anyone to criticise Islam, a succesful effort, as it turned out. Muslims in general seem much more intent on physically punishing anyone who disrespects their religion than anyone else in the world.

[Oleg Bach]

You should be free to make fun or Islam - Judaism..Christianity - or gay people - or blacks - You should be able to say anything you want - acting out in a violent manner is what should always be prohibited. The UN is NOT a world wide governent - we did not vote them in - nor do they represent us in any manner. Why do people assume that the UN has power.... I have seen Canadians stand up in a public forum and say that certain things must be done in Canada "because the UN said so" _ the United Nations (families) are NOT my relatives nor are they my keepers..they can butt out!

[JerrySeinfeld]

Are you suggesting it is uncommon for Muslim religious figures to issue edicts calling for the death of those they consider have profaned or desparaged Allah or Islam? It seems to me that it happens with disturbing regularity.

How many people are receiving police protection right now because they wrote something or said something which offended Christians? I've heard of a number of European filmmakers, writers and politicians - and cartoonists - under such protection, sometimes for years.

I don't think Christians are particularly happy to be mocked, but there seems more of an acceptance of the rights of freedom of speech in the West, at least among Christians, than among Muslims.

There are 1.6 million Muslims living in Britain and, according to the most extensive survey so far conducted, 45% of them believe that 9/11 was an American or Israeli conspiracy. Almost 25% argue that the 7/7 attacks in London were justified because of the British government's involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The same number, around a quarter, believe Britain is not their country and 30% would rather live under shariah law. Twenty-eight percent hope that Britain will eventually become a Muslim fundamentalist nation and a massive 78% advocate punishment for anybody who displays cartoons offensive to Islam, such as those of Muhammad published in Denmark.

Similar numbers are reflected in other surveys and what is particularly obvious and repeated is how little support there is within the Muslim community for notions of free speech when Islam is allegedly mocked or even critiqued

National Post

And then there was that world wide effort made by Muslim nations at the UN to make it illegal for anyone to criticise Islam, a succesful effort, as it turned out. Muslims in general seem much more intent on physically punishing anyone who disrespects their religion than anyone else in the world.

Good post, Argus. Really, the litmus test is freedom to criticize, freedom from fear.

As I recall, the last temptation of christ and some other provocative films caused some uproar amidst catholics. There were some signs and demonstrations and articles.

But I don't recall the kind of worldwide violence against innocents that occurs when someone makes an unflattering film/cartoon/article/book about Islam.

Some examples:

Worldwide rampages of killing and violence from Danish cartoons including setting fire to the Danish embassy in Lebanon Syria, a nun being shot in the back (and killed), and a worldwide bountry put on the head of the cartoonist who to this day lives under protection and fear.

Did this same thing happen to Mel Gibson?

The demanding that the chocolate swirl on the top of the burger king ice cream cone be pulled because it resembled the arabic symbol for Allah.

The demanding of the removal from stores of a blow up sex doll called "Mustafa Shag" (shouldn't Islam be more concerned about eliminating REAL blow up mohameds?)

The murder of Danish filmaker Theo Van Gogh who made an unflatteering film about Islam.

Mohammed Bouyeri murdered Van Gogh in the early morning of 2 November 2004, in Amsterdam, in front of the Amsterdam East borough office (stadsdeelkantoor) on the corner of the Linnaeusstraat and Tweede Oosterparkstraat , while he was bicycling to work. Bouyeri shot van Gogh eight times with an HS 2000 handgun, and Van Gogh died on the spot. Bouyeri then cut Van Gogh's throat, nearly decapitating him, and stabbed him in the chest. Two knives were left implanted in his torso, one attaching a five-page note to his body. The note (Text) threatened Western governments, Jews.

Has this happened to Mel Gibson?

Certainly all religions have zealots who don't like their religion being criticized. But in the modern day the followers of Islam take the cake for being by far the most murderous and violent.

What confuses me is why so many peoplee in the west are hell bent on apologizing to Islam every time some nutter jihadist blows something up.

We think it shows an attempt of understanding. But very few have considered that they don't see it that way. They see it as weakness.

As the leader of Hezbollah once said:

"We are not fighting to win something from you in negotiation. We are fighting to destroy you." - an attitude about which President Obama appears sadly ignorant.

Edited October 19, 2009 by JerrySeinfeld

[Michael Hardner]

Argus,

Are you suggesting it is uncommon for Muslim religious figures to issue edicts calling for the death of those they consider have profaned or desparaged Allah or Islam? It seems to me that it happens with disturbing regularity.

I have no idea how often that happens. My question is why is it relevant ? What specifically does the fact that that happens mean to the discussion ?

It bothers me because it seems too often that the point is to tar all members of that religion with the same brush, or to make people feel self-satisfaction, i.e. that they're Christian or some other religion.

How many people are receiving police protection right now because they wrote something or said something which offended Christians? I've heard of a number of European filmmakers, writers and politicians - and cartoonists - under such protection, sometimes for years.

I don't think Christians are particularly happy to be mocked, but there seems more of an acceptance of the rights of freedom of speech in the West, at least among Christians, than among Muslims.

There are 1.6 million Muslims living in Britain and, according to the most extensive survey so far conducted, 45% of them believe that 9/11 was an American or Israeli conspiracy. Almost 25% argue that the 7/7 attacks in London were justified because of the British government's involvement in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The same number, around a quarter, believe Britain is not their country and 30% would rather live under shariah law. Twenty-eight percent hope that Britain will eventually become a Muslim fundamentalist nation and a massive 78% advocate punishment for anybody who displays cartoons offensive to Islam, such as those of Muhammad published in Denmark.

Similar numbers are reflected in other surveys and what is particularly obvious and repeated is how little support there is within the Muslim community for notions of free speech when Islam is allegedly mocked or even critiqued

I would say that the statistic indicates that 45% of them are stupid/paranoid, which compares favourably with the 53% of Americans who thought Bush was lying about 911.

I'll admit, though, that I was surprised by the other stats you published - especially the 78%. The situation in Britain with Muslim immigration always seems to be worse than other countries. Why is that ?

And then there was that world wide effort made by Muslim nations at the UN to make it illegal for anyone to criticise Islam, a succesful effort, as it turned out. Muslims in general seem much more intent on physically punishing anyone who disrespects their religion than anyone else in the world.

Yes, that was an embarrassment and we have Egypt, Pakistan and Iran to thank for it.

If "Islamification" is something that people don't want to happen, then they need to understand what's happening and deal with it rationally. Posts that cast blame on all Muslims and make people feel better about them selves are the antithesis of the rational non-emotional arguments that can look at the problem.

If there is going to be a real discussion around religion, race, and culture, then it has to be done right. That means looking at the problem rationally, not emotionally.