Spite

Islam is just Christianity and Judaism through the mind of someone with no formal education in either. As for all that bullocks Abu rambles on about, I'd take it with a pinch of salt. Most people are extremist when they're his age. I remember I had pictures of Che and Lenin and stuff when I was 13/14, but I grew up into a functional member of society. I guess for a Muslim the temptation is to go all hardcore muslim, especially when you have an identity crisis. I'm guessing by the time he gets to 18/19 he'll be looking back on these posts and cringing a bit. As a srs response to what was said, the locked house argument doesn't relate to the rape argument at all. A woman isn't something that needs to be locked up (like property). A woman is a person. If you switch the word woman for person the difference becomes clear (it's sad that you have to do this, but due to objectification and so on you do). A person walking through a busy city should not fear rape or attack. A person wearing shorts and a t-shirt or other "revealing" clothes should not fear rape. People walking around on their own should not fear assault or rape. In civilised Western countries we have the rule of law, human decency, and equality of the sexes. The solution to a problem with rape is not to remove women from danger by taking away their equality and humanity, it is to remove the rapists, and eradicate the culture that breeds them. Namely the culture where the woman is somehow at fault.

No it's not. "Women should be allowed to have an education" - I've never heard something so misogynist. Such a child-like attitude.

You say that like it's something special and not just the base line for all civilised societies.

No you're not. You believe men own women, gays should be stoned, the death penalty and a whole bunch of shit. Anyone who interprets the quran literally is by definition extremely authoritarian and illiberal.

You're as bad as he is. The far right islamo-fascism that you have been brainwashed into following is just as anti-British. I hope that you'll grow out of it before you end up on a PREVENT watch list.

Let's look at the things you've mentioned in your first paragraph: 1. liberalism - you want to restrict the freedom of anyone not of your culture group - this is incredibly illiberal 2. democracy - presumably you will also deny them the vote - you are undemocratic 3. arts and literature - presumably except stuff produced by foreign-born or non-"british" people 4. solidarity in WW2 - where we fought against people with your views- a desire to imprison and punish a minority who were "subverting" german society and twisting their superior culture Apart from those 4 things- all of which you are against - you still haven't done a very good job at defining british culture. Basically your views are utterly abhorent to me and to most British people. They're even more extreme than the likes of the BNP, who don't suggest forceable relocation or forcing people to attend churches that aren't theirs. Your views are more in line with the national front. It isn't slander to call you a national socialist, because that's exactly the sort of behaviour you advocate. Sure you're targeting a group based on their religion rather than their race, but that's the only difference. Your views are absolutely against all western values and if you ever voiced them anywhere in public you'd run a serious risk of being arrested for hate crimes.

You can't answer the question that's why. Your whole argument is based on something you can't define.

There's a moral and legal difference between killing an animal for food, and (for example) ripping off it's skin whilst it's still alive. Just because something is your property, doesn't mean you can torture it or be cruel to it. Whether that's beating your dog savagely, or raping it, it's still animal cruelty.

You fit a little englander stereotype, but it's hardly something prevalent. You still can't even define a uniform British culture. I'd say brick lane or chinatown is as much part of the culture of london as mayfair or baker street.

Possibly because most people grow out of stuff like satanism by the time they're 28 and have proper jobs instead of slumming it as bar staff or music shop clerks.

>Democratic You already said you don't want to work within the existing "system", as it's what "they" want. I presume this means you're not democratic. >Isolationist We've been involved in every major conflict in the last five hundred years and had the largest global empire in history. Pray tell how we're isolationist >Football and rugby Clutching at straws You can't even identify the culture that you're claiming to be defending. Weak! weak! weak!

Still haven't answered any of the questions.

When you don't answer any questions, it is because you can't. What you're talking about (foreign born and non-British culture groups) represents about a sixth of the population You can't even define the culture you see as being the native culture And you believe in operating "outside the system" aka undemocratically and against the majority wishes. I think this is case closed

My partner is (European) non-British and although you would probably not realise she's not British unless she actually spoke to her, she's not. Her culture isn't "British" and she lives here. I understand you have a particular beef with Islam for some reason, but if your argument is that muslims do not adopt British culture, then that argument can be applied to everyone who is not British. Also as previously discussed - and you have not responded to this satisfactorily yet - What is "British Culture"? I mean it can include a huge number of different things, depending on your region and background. I'm sure that (for example) a strongly conservative area of the South East would have a different opinion on what their culture was to someone living in Aberdeen. There is no homogeneous culture, although I will grant you that someone in Wales has more in common with someone in Norwich than someone in Berlin or Tehran. The reason I asked about your political activity is that you have very strong beliefs (or appear to have them) and I wondered if you expressed them anywhere other than on internet forums. I myself have strong political beliefs and have been a political party member my whole adult life. I don't agree with everything they do, but I feel it is the best way to help bring the change I'd like to see, and to improve the lives of the people around me etc etc.

I always find the "guilt is a burden" arguments are adopted by people with low moral character. I don't strictly follow any particular set of hard-and-fast rules, but I do follow a general judeo-christian ethical code. I don't find it particularly restrictive, and breaking the cardinal laws - by killing, raping, etc - isn't what I'd call enlightened. Also, though it isn't particularly an argument against so much as an observation, I find there is a strong link between satanists and pot-smoking, dreadlocked, artsy, studenty, smarter-than-thou types who tend to be narcissistic and self-satisfying.

Jolly trot

You could make it so you need a minimum of 2 ships per city to enact a blockade. After that, each ship increases the negative effect on income up to a maximum of 5 ships per city.

Hey Rozalia, how's it going?

There are 7.2m foreign born UK residents, plus at least a couple million non-white residents who will be not of our "culture" whatever that is. You're just a crazy dude. I assume you don't actually partake in any political activity other than posting on forums under a false name?

You ever done anything with an animal Rozalia?

Bestiality isn't illegal for religious reasons. It's because it's sick.

What you're suggesting is forced relocation to camps (I'm assuming you wouldn't be turfing natives out of their homes, so that means building new homes for the displaced population) of around 9 million people. You then advocate forcing them to believe something which they don't believe in, punishing any disagreement. I don't think it's me who is making a nazi comparison here, it's you. You argue that national identities within the UK should be broken down- Irish, Scottish and Welsh. You think liberal ideology should be removed. I assume you think the dominant culture and ideology in Britain should be yours. I think you'll find your views are held by a tiny tiny minority- probably a lot less than the number of people who practice islam. Forcing your bizarre right wing views on everyone is hardly democratic or in line with our values, so fortunately will never happen. I wonder whether you post this stuff just because you like attention. 75% of terrorist attacks in Europe since 2000 have been committed by separatist groups. Of the remaining 25%, it's a mixture of right wing terrorism, left wing terrorism, and religious fundamentalism. Of the religious fundamentalists, not all are muslim. Of the muslim terrorists, most of them are home grown, i.e. "native". So basically your argument is bullshit. You just don't like muslims, and since your "muslims cause terrorism" argument is in tatters, you're clutching at any straws you can to be hateful. Don't like their attitudes on sex? I take it you want to deport all christian fundamentalists in the US then? Or maybe put them in camps like Rozalia would like? It's just stupid double standards, and guess where it comes from? Xenophobia Think about what xenophobia is. It is fear of the other- that's where the comparison to gay rights comes from. Or the Jews in WW2. It's not a direct comparison - but in all cases it is fear of the other. You identify an enemy who are a minority group. You assign blame to them for the problems of the day. Then you whip up fear and hatred against them. It happens all over the world every year, and it's really sad when it's perpetuated by people in the wealthiest, most privileged countries. You can at least understand it in Rwanda or Pakistan or somewhere. But in the West? It's sad.

Your views are becoming more insane every day.

I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say. The Irish didn't attack the USA because it was the country funding them and it would serve them no benefit. Their goal was to liberate Northern Ireland, bombing America would have the opposite result. My point is simple. The Irish committed terrorism against Britain, but we don't treat them like shit just because a minority of people committed terrorism. If you don't like the Irish issue, go look at ETA in Spain instead. It's the same point. You don't persecute a group of people because of the actions of a tiny handful of people. The number of British Muslims who have killed British civilians in terror attacks can be counted on your fingers. Punishing 2.7m people as a result of those six people is utterly retarded.

American Irish people funded the IRA you goon. The IRA fought for Northern Ireland to become part of the Republic of Ireland, why would they have a problem with the USA? The eventually end of funding for IRA cells from the USA was one of the biggest factors in the end of the troubles. Anyway you seem to completely miss the point which is 1. The IRA killed far more people in the UK than Islamic terrorists ever did - at least 1800 people 2. The Irish still live among us! (shudder) Should we then treat Irish people in the same way you're proposing muslims be treat? Simply because a minority used terrorism as a form of political expression?