T
Theo van Gogh Martyrs Brigade
Guest
In a thread where I was posting about the TV series "24" and wondering why there aren't more television and cinematic dramas dealing with Islamic terrorists rather than cowering away from it in the face of the politically correct, "Seriously Flawed" stated:
"You are obviously Jewish."
No. I am not Jewish.
A week later, in an entirely unrelated thread, a so-called "Vince Everett" (who's either Seriously Flawed's ditto-head bitch boy or is Seriously Flawed under another name) stated:
"So 'theo' is Jewish. That explains a few things. It certainly explains why he hates seriously flawed, who has never disguised how she feels about Israels treatment of the Palestinians. It's probably why he gets so worked up about "Nazis" and immigrants too. And why he got so hot under the collar about Codreanu's "Holocaust hoax" suggestion etc. etc. I suspect it fuels his enthusiasm for the US policies in the Gulf too. Isn't it odd how being Jewish is such a full time occupation?"
The only ones "worked up" about immigration are in the Seriously Flawed corner. Makes one worry that she's a bit too easily influenced and manipulated by politicians in the campaign heating up in Britain.
And since I'm not Jewish, I guess you know where you can shove your moronic little speculations.
In another thread, Seriously Flawed brought up my screen name:
"Yes, what's with his name?
Maybe he doesn't know who Theo was."
It's cute how Seriously Flawed is suddenly the authority on Theo van Gogh. It was only a few weeks ago she was asking who Theo van Gogh was, in a thread titled "Sorry to sound completely ignorant, but is Theo Van Gogh the Dutch right winger who was assassinated." http://www.morrissey-solo.com/discuss/index.cgi?noframes;read=248117
Seriously Flawed should apologize for sounding completely ignorant more often.
I chose this screenname in the aftermath of the barbaric murder of Theo van Gogh over a film he made attacking Islam's treatment of women. It's intended to both mock the name of an infamous Palestinian terror group and declare that I am someone who will stand and fight for the values of liberal democracy in the face of the forces of Islamic fascism. Theo van Gogh was a provocateur on many an issue, but the reason for my screenname is because, unlike so many idiotic and politically correct left-wing multiculturalists who tell us we are not allowed to attack another religious tradition, I will not tolerate the intolerance of fundamentalist Islam. In Holland, Theo van Gogh was one of the few brave enough to speak basic truths about Islam, its opression of women and fundamentalist hatred. If the the few brave folks can be silenced with violence, democracy cannot survive. The Islamic-fascist mentality must be marginalized and people in Western liberal democracies should quit being ashamed to stand up for their values.
In a thread on immigration, someone called "concerned citizen" said to me:
"Do you also like extremist "religious clerics" whipping up hatred of the West and their hosts, and creating new generations of fanatical murderers?
Do you like bombs being planted and planes flying into buildings?"
First of all, none of the 9/11 terrorists were immigrants. They were here on non-immigrant visas, and I certainly do support heightened scrutiny on visa applications from certain Muslim countries where there is a terrorism problem.
Such scrutiny before 9/11 would've prevented 9/11, but reducing immigration to ZERO would not have. I also certainly do NOT support those long-time anti-immigration forces who are trying to exploit 9/11 in order to stain all legal, hard-working, peaceful immigrants (particularly Mexicans) with the label "potential terrorists."
Even before 9/11, and certainly after, I've supported responding to terrorism on offense. That is, fighting and winning overseas and not undermining the free, democratic, open society we enjoy at home. The democratic revolution taking place in the Middle East thanks to America's response to 9/11 is the long-term solution to Islamic-fascism.
Now to immigration.
I've already stated some of the benefits of immigration, and I know of no economist of any merit who would disagree. Indeed, what they find is that it is not only good, but NEEDED. I won't go over all that again. Instead I'll add two important points.
As a libertarian it should be obvious I don't support people living off the taxpayer's expense. I support people being able to move freely and to be able to come to my country and live here on their own. I don't support socialism, the welfare state, or a heavily regulated labor market.
Immigration works best when you remove barriers to entering the labor market, move away from welfare and taxes that make it harder to earn a living, get rid of the red tape that's an obstacle to starting a business, etc. If someone of low education and a language barrier moves to Europe and finds he's not allowed to compete with lower wages, or that it is so difficult to fire someone that people are afraid to hire, his chances are poor. These are some of the reasons an immigrant might end up on welfare for life. This type of system also increases racism against immigrants, causing them to be viewed as "parasites," as we've seen on this very forum. Rather than being forced into a parasitic life, a person should be able to start at a low wage and work his way up while the rest of the country enjoys the benefits of lower prices on goods and services.
An interesting thing I once read: The gap between the employment rate of those born in America and those foreign-born in America is much smaller than the gap in countries such as France and Sweden, and this is because America has a much more deregulated labor market. You see the same when you compare Canada with the most heavily regulated European countries as well.
My advice to Western Europe to make immigration work is to reform their systems away from their socialist bullshit. You certainly won't help yourselves by slamming the door on immigrants, as that will only send your countries into stagnation (potentially even economic collapse).
My second point hooks in with much of what I've fought people about on this board over for a long time, as well as with my screenname.
Healthy immigration requires successfully integrating and assimilating people. The question raised in Holland recently, and across the Western world, is what happens when people immigrate and have severely different values than those of liberal democracies? This concern is legimate and not racist, and it applies in particular with fundamentalist Muslims who abhor the values of the West.
The proper way to deal with this problem is to emulate Theo van Gogh and NOT those pathetic asswhipes in his country who find themselves unwilling to stand up for the values of their society, a society they ought to be proud of given its freedom, tolerance, secularism, modernism, etc.
Similarly, Great Britain should ask itself why some of their legislators are seeking to criminalize attacking Islam thru speech. Great Britain should ask itself why that one-eyed sheik or mullah, or whatever, was ranting and raving and calling for violence and was given far more respect and tolerance than a neo-Nazi would've enjoyed. No, it is not me who is a victim of political correctness. I am attacking the political correctness which has led so many in the West to tolerate the intolerance of dark-aged Islam. What I've been calling for is for Western democracies to get some f***ing self-respect and confidence in themselves again, stand up for our values, be proud of what they've built, and point a finger at those who despise and want to destroy freedom. Call them what they are. Marginalize them. Force the fundamentalist wing of Islam to reform and modernize just like the rest of us have done.
The problem is, our values are being undermined by certain elements within our own societies. In America this is happening in the universities, with professors such as the lunatic terrorist-apologist Ward Churchill taking over entire departments and filling students' heads with deranged thinking. Many of our citizens have been hoodwinked into shame about the values of the West and convinced it is wrong to impose our values on others. We absolutely should impose our values on others. Our values have built the best countries the world has ever seen.
On the brighter side, many Muslims residing in the West are in fact modernizing their belief system more so than in the Middle East. This indicates that Muslim immigration may help Islam go thru the same modernization that Christianity once had to go through. I know that most Muslims living in America are not fundamentalist bin Laden lovers (despite the fact that the head of the largest mosque in my state was found to have been funding terrorism), so I know that Islam is not incompatible with secular democracy. That's a good thing to know, because the fact is, if the Europeans on this board are against Muslims living in their countries they are far too late, given the tens of millions who've already moved there. I've read about the Muslim housing projects outside Paris where it is the law of the dark ages, with honor killings, forced marriages, etc. France needs to integrate those populations. All of Europe needs to do the same.
With all this said about the need for those in the West to stand up for their values, I must say I haven't found Seriously Flawed to be one of those willing or able to do so. Seriously Flawed is an admirer of Arafat, Castro, and Che Guevera. Seriously Flawed was not happy when Iraqis voted in defiance of the so-called insurgency. Seriously Flawed has typed countless postings condemning the evil and greed of capitalism. Indeed, she stated quite upfront one day that in her opinion "communism has the better values". http://www.morrissey-solo.com/discuss/index.cgi?noframes;read=249849
Seriously Flawed gets worked up against immigrants in a racist, not an intelligent, manner, because she is an impressionable person and is easily manipulated by the popular rags she reads during a heated election campaign. People like her will not help immigrants integrate into society. People like her will alienate them and only escalate the problems of clashing cultures. Moreover, Seriously Flawed does not demonstrate she shares the values of her society. Instead she is gullible enough to think there's something to admire in Fidel Castro's totalitarian hell. Seriously Flawed offers no helpful solutions to anything. Seriously Flawed is, sadly, part of the problem.
"You are obviously Jewish."
No. I am not Jewish.
A week later, in an entirely unrelated thread, a so-called "Vince Everett" (who's either Seriously Flawed's ditto-head bitch boy or is Seriously Flawed under another name) stated:
"So 'theo' is Jewish. That explains a few things. It certainly explains why he hates seriously flawed, who has never disguised how she feels about Israels treatment of the Palestinians. It's probably why he gets so worked up about "Nazis" and immigrants too. And why he got so hot under the collar about Codreanu's "Holocaust hoax" suggestion etc. etc. I suspect it fuels his enthusiasm for the US policies in the Gulf too. Isn't it odd how being Jewish is such a full time occupation?"
The only ones "worked up" about immigration are in the Seriously Flawed corner. Makes one worry that she's a bit too easily influenced and manipulated by politicians in the campaign heating up in Britain.
And since I'm not Jewish, I guess you know where you can shove your moronic little speculations.
In another thread, Seriously Flawed brought up my screen name:
"Yes, what's with his name?
Maybe he doesn't know who Theo was."
It's cute how Seriously Flawed is suddenly the authority on Theo van Gogh. It was only a few weeks ago she was asking who Theo van Gogh was, in a thread titled "Sorry to sound completely ignorant, but is Theo Van Gogh the Dutch right winger who was assassinated." http://www.morrissey-solo.com/discuss/index.cgi?noframes;read=248117
Seriously Flawed should apologize for sounding completely ignorant more often.
I chose this screenname in the aftermath of the barbaric murder of Theo van Gogh over a film he made attacking Islam's treatment of women. It's intended to both mock the name of an infamous Palestinian terror group and declare that I am someone who will stand and fight for the values of liberal democracy in the face of the forces of Islamic fascism. Theo van Gogh was a provocateur on many an issue, but the reason for my screenname is because, unlike so many idiotic and politically correct left-wing multiculturalists who tell us we are not allowed to attack another religious tradition, I will not tolerate the intolerance of fundamentalist Islam. In Holland, Theo van Gogh was one of the few brave enough to speak basic truths about Islam, its opression of women and fundamentalist hatred. If the the few brave folks can be silenced with violence, democracy cannot survive. The Islamic-fascist mentality must be marginalized and people in Western liberal democracies should quit being ashamed to stand up for their values.
In a thread on immigration, someone called "concerned citizen" said to me:
"Do you also like extremist "religious clerics" whipping up hatred of the West and their hosts, and creating new generations of fanatical murderers?
Do you like bombs being planted and planes flying into buildings?"
First of all, none of the 9/11 terrorists were immigrants. They were here on non-immigrant visas, and I certainly do support heightened scrutiny on visa applications from certain Muslim countries where there is a terrorism problem.
Such scrutiny before 9/11 would've prevented 9/11, but reducing immigration to ZERO would not have. I also certainly do NOT support those long-time anti-immigration forces who are trying to exploit 9/11 in order to stain all legal, hard-working, peaceful immigrants (particularly Mexicans) with the label "potential terrorists."
Even before 9/11, and certainly after, I've supported responding to terrorism on offense. That is, fighting and winning overseas and not undermining the free, democratic, open society we enjoy at home. The democratic revolution taking place in the Middle East thanks to America's response to 9/11 is the long-term solution to Islamic-fascism.
Now to immigration.
I've already stated some of the benefits of immigration, and I know of no economist of any merit who would disagree. Indeed, what they find is that it is not only good, but NEEDED. I won't go over all that again. Instead I'll add two important points.
As a libertarian it should be obvious I don't support people living off the taxpayer's expense. I support people being able to move freely and to be able to come to my country and live here on their own. I don't support socialism, the welfare state, or a heavily regulated labor market.
Immigration works best when you remove barriers to entering the labor market, move away from welfare and taxes that make it harder to earn a living, get rid of the red tape that's an obstacle to starting a business, etc. If someone of low education and a language barrier moves to Europe and finds he's not allowed to compete with lower wages, or that it is so difficult to fire someone that people are afraid to hire, his chances are poor. These are some of the reasons an immigrant might end up on welfare for life. This type of system also increases racism against immigrants, causing them to be viewed as "parasites," as we've seen on this very forum. Rather than being forced into a parasitic life, a person should be able to start at a low wage and work his way up while the rest of the country enjoys the benefits of lower prices on goods and services.
An interesting thing I once read: The gap between the employment rate of those born in America and those foreign-born in America is much smaller than the gap in countries such as France and Sweden, and this is because America has a much more deregulated labor market. You see the same when you compare Canada with the most heavily regulated European countries as well.
My advice to Western Europe to make immigration work is to reform their systems away from their socialist bullshit. You certainly won't help yourselves by slamming the door on immigrants, as that will only send your countries into stagnation (potentially even economic collapse).
My second point hooks in with much of what I've fought people about on this board over for a long time, as well as with my screenname.
Healthy immigration requires successfully integrating and assimilating people. The question raised in Holland recently, and across the Western world, is what happens when people immigrate and have severely different values than those of liberal democracies? This concern is legimate and not racist, and it applies in particular with fundamentalist Muslims who abhor the values of the West.
The proper way to deal with this problem is to emulate Theo van Gogh and NOT those pathetic asswhipes in his country who find themselves unwilling to stand up for the values of their society, a society they ought to be proud of given its freedom, tolerance, secularism, modernism, etc.
Similarly, Great Britain should ask itself why some of their legislators are seeking to criminalize attacking Islam thru speech. Great Britain should ask itself why that one-eyed sheik or mullah, or whatever, was ranting and raving and calling for violence and was given far more respect and tolerance than a neo-Nazi would've enjoyed. No, it is not me who is a victim of political correctness. I am attacking the political correctness which has led so many in the West to tolerate the intolerance of dark-aged Islam. What I've been calling for is for Western democracies to get some f***ing self-respect and confidence in themselves again, stand up for our values, be proud of what they've built, and point a finger at those who despise and want to destroy freedom. Call them what they are. Marginalize them. Force the fundamentalist wing of Islam to reform and modernize just like the rest of us have done.
The problem is, our values are being undermined by certain elements within our own societies. In America this is happening in the universities, with professors such as the lunatic terrorist-apologist Ward Churchill taking over entire departments and filling students' heads with deranged thinking. Many of our citizens have been hoodwinked into shame about the values of the West and convinced it is wrong to impose our values on others. We absolutely should impose our values on others. Our values have built the best countries the world has ever seen.
On the brighter side, many Muslims residing in the West are in fact modernizing their belief system more so than in the Middle East. This indicates that Muslim immigration may help Islam go thru the same modernization that Christianity once had to go through. I know that most Muslims living in America are not fundamentalist bin Laden lovers (despite the fact that the head of the largest mosque in my state was found to have been funding terrorism), so I know that Islam is not incompatible with secular democracy. That's a good thing to know, because the fact is, if the Europeans on this board are against Muslims living in their countries they are far too late, given the tens of millions who've already moved there. I've read about the Muslim housing projects outside Paris where it is the law of the dark ages, with honor killings, forced marriages, etc. France needs to integrate those populations. All of Europe needs to do the same.
With all this said about the need for those in the West to stand up for their values, I must say I haven't found Seriously Flawed to be one of those willing or able to do so. Seriously Flawed is an admirer of Arafat, Castro, and Che Guevera. Seriously Flawed was not happy when Iraqis voted in defiance of the so-called insurgency. Seriously Flawed has typed countless postings condemning the evil and greed of capitalism. Indeed, she stated quite upfront one day that in her opinion "communism has the better values". http://www.morrissey-solo.com/discuss/index.cgi?noframes;read=249849
Seriously Flawed gets worked up against immigrants in a racist, not an intelligent, manner, because she is an impressionable person and is easily manipulated by the popular rags she reads during a heated election campaign. People like her will not help immigrants integrate into society. People like her will alienate them and only escalate the problems of clashing cultures. Moreover, Seriously Flawed does not demonstrate she shares the values of her society. Instead she is gullible enough to think there's something to admire in Fidel Castro's totalitarian hell. Seriously Flawed offers no helpful solutions to anything. Seriously Flawed is, sadly, part of the problem.