Ridiculous! Show me the Richness, which i earn by multi-cultural contacts?

Name me any advantages, which i got by mass-immigration!
Do you mean´this ones?
1. crime
2. poorness
3. unemployment
4. financial desaster by social transfers

Nobody needs 15 Mio. immigrants, only in germany, to get contact to some innovations of culture, science or something else. The best example is japan, where are lieving no foreigners, and which is one of the modernest states in the world.
The only one, which profit by Immigration is the capital.

By the way, you must learn the history of facism. The parties which i enumerated are not fascist.

Here are some examples of the 'richness' multiculturalism brings to Europe!

BBC NEWS | Europe | Russia moves to control immigration

Oslo rape statistics shock - Aftenposten.no

Denmark: Immigrants are rape champions

Denmark: Muslim rape concern

The Local - Immigrants behind 25% of Swedish crime

Foreign-born prisoners outnumber Dutch, Dutch News, The Netherlands, Holland, Expatica

People's Daily Online -- Four in 10 detainees in Belgium are immigrants

Denmark: 82 percent of youngsters who were brought before a judge in Copenhagen last year were of foreign descent.

American Renaissance News: Pisanu: Some Regions, 50 Pct Crimes of Illegal Immigrants

Muslims are waging civil war against us, claims police union | International News | News | Telegraph

How could you not view the above as a form of 'enrichment' ya 'racist!?'

I admit I got tired of reading through 5 pages of flame wars, but I have a few points to make about this debate from what I have read. First let me say that as an American I have no problem with multiculturalism. I have had a Russain and Mexican girlfriend in the past and I am white. I also have a good friend who is Arab. However, when a cultural group moves into another country that has a radically different culture, it is unreasonable for the immigrants to expect the host culture to conform to their ways of doing things. Historically that is what has happened everywhere Muslims have settled.

Even though I have had a Mexican and Russian girlfriend, I will likely never have a Muslim girlfirend because I would have to convert to Islam first, which I am not about to to, ever. However, this is one example of making the host culture conform to their culture, if you want to marry one of them, you have to become one of them. So either they never integrate, or, more likely, the host culture eventually "integrates" into the Muslim culture through intermarriage because the immigrant culture refuses to allow this to happen otherwise, so who is the racist here really?

Actually, the Muslims are not being racist because Islam is not a race, it is a Religion. IMHO religions are like ideologies and have nothing to do with your genetics, so if someone is being critical or even hates Islam they are not being racist at all. It is no different than hating any other ideology whether it be Communism or Fascism or Fundamentalist Christianity.

As I mentioned I have a good friend who is Arab, but you would hardly even notice he is Arab at all. As much as I am disqusted with the radicalism in Islam, when I hang out with him I forget that he is even Arab. This is because his family is Christian and his parents are Lebanese immigrants. He is just as American as anyone else, he was born here, he is partiotic about being an American and even served in the Army. No problems there, just problems with radical anti-Western ideology.

I don't know the numbers but I would think that there wouldn't be enough Muslims in Britain to achieve much politically, such as the introduction of Sharia for example.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

Oh no, not many at all, but because Muslims are a minority this ridiculous governing elite of ours decides they should be given whatever the hell they want. The courts and a certain small section of the white population are bending over backwards to give extremist lunatics anything they want. The likes of Galloway and Livingstone illustrate this perfectly.

Ah, methinks Galloway is a champion of self-interest as well as having an ego bigger than Regents Park. He's got a seat in Parliament because he toadied up for it, still it won't make a difference, he's serving a very small minority and doesn't really matter. Livingstone won't ever get into the Parliament because of his form as Red Ken but I suppose he's nice and comfy as Lord Mayor.

On the governing elite - they're all like that when they get into power. The Tories will be the same when they get back there, it's just that they'll be serving different interests.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

You're new here. You'll come to understand the treatment some posters get.

Given your balanced writing, I'm surprised you don't see the obvious analogy here. Shall we have a look at what the emigrants from Europe have done in the past ? Are you conveniently overlooking the entire colonialist era? Thousands of destroyed cultures, enslavement, usurpation of resources, genocides,...
And one region that has suffered this fate is the region from whence the current immigrants come. Can you really be surprised that when you take away the natural resources from a region, that the inhabitants of said region migrate towards where the returns from these resources are enjoyed ?

This is not true. It's the case in some archaic-traditionalist sections of the muslim community but it's in no way general.

Cf. supra.

You're making quite a few unsupported presuppositions here. First, that marriage is instrumental in defining culture. In Europe, it's not. It's a dwindling institution. Secondly that the sole interaction between communities is through marriage. It's not. The youngest generation of immigrants have livestyles all but indiscernible from that of the other youngsters, and including premarital sex, consumerism, cohabitating without official ties,etc. Thirdly, that there exists a monochrome muslim culture within the immigrant community. The fallacy here would become immediately obvious if you were to visit any European town with a high number of immigrants.

While you're technically right, the term is generally applied in this context because the motivations of the racists and Islamophobes are indistinguishable.

What is this Western ideology you speak off ? Consumerism ? American patriottism ? Why would it apply to Europe ?

__________________
"Say not, 'When I have free time I shall study'; for you may perhaps never have any free time"
Hillel the Elder

you deb my an answer, waron ignorance!

Or got you no arguments?

THOUSANDS of enslaved cultures, come on, we were not that bad. In the past, both Islam and the West have been imperialist, and they both have strong cultures they believe are superior to others. As far as enslavement and genocide are concerned, Islamic society is just as guilty as European Christians were. Look up the Armenian massacre for reference, as just one example of this. The humiliation and subjigation of Dhimmi communities in Muslim lands wasn't exactly what I would call embracing multicultural values either. In fact, many Dhimmi communities were treated about the same way that the Jews were treated in 1930's era Nazi Germany(Destruction of Places of Worshiop, extra taxes, being required to wear distinctive clothing to identify them, different treatment under the law, etc.
Oh, really? This is what Wikepedia has to say about it, you can of course change the entry if you like-

In fairness, you did say only some traditional sects, which I interpret to mean something like orthodox Islam. But that is what we are talking about there, the radical (by Western standards) orthodox version of Islam that many young British Muslims apparently adhere to.

Glad to hear that, it means that those individual are successfully integrating and adopting Western values. It is the ones that are not that I am concerned about.
The Western Ideology I speak of is that of various thinkers including John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, and too many others to name here. The West also developed modern science and the scientific method which reaches conclusions about how the universe works based on observation and not blind faith in a fictional being. It is also why we can now treat diseases that were once considered deadly with pill or vaccine, and why we will soon be able to conquer most other forms of natural death.

In a nutshell, it is ideas like freedom of religion, separation of Church and state, the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness free from government oppression (like telling you what to wear) and religious persecution, the idea of equality under the law, that kind of thing. I believe these are noble values that are worth defending.

You have the right to your religon as long as it doesn't infringe upon my right to believe what I want to belive, or my freedom of speech. This includes making fun of religious figures in a cartoon if I so choose to do so. If the Muslim radicals had their way we would all be Dhimmi.

You answer enumerates a number of prejudices you have towards immigrants. I don't know what you base them on but every academic study has shown that immigrants are victims of povery, rather than the cause, that in case there is a discrepancy in employment figures between 'locals' and 'immigrants' it is due to racism and discrimination, that crime is directly related to poverty and that social transfers exist in all directions.
What do you want me to reply to if you -presumably- base your ideas on nonsensical sensationalist bagger, or worse ?

__________________
"Say not, 'When I have free time I shall study'; for you may perhaps never have any free time"
Hillel the Elder

Yes, thousands. I'm assuming you might think of e.g. Native Americans as a single culture, but that would be equivalent to throwing the Berber culture of the Atlas mountains in Morocco in the same bag as secular Turkey or to amalgamate the Ionians and the Dorians. There were hundreds of distcint cultures in the northern continent alone. In Africa there were probably even more though some were exterminated to such a degree that hardly a trace is left.

North-, meso- and South America, Australia, all but the whole of Africa, the Philippines, Indonesia, Poly- and Micronesia, the trans-Ural, the Middle east vs. what exactly ?

The Armenian genocide was, according to the majority of historians, orchestrated by the group that called themselves the Young Turks. One of their goals was : Thus in no way can this genocide be attributed to muslims, quite the contrary.

We were talking about the immigrated muslims in Western society. Reprehensible as the treatment of dhimmis may be, there are none in the context of which we were speaking.

The source for these numbers is worthless because of the political motivation behind it and the entire lack of published methodology.

Let's not refer to the latter as 'muslims' then but as 'Islamists' or 'extremist muslims'.

Those are realizations of secularism. Any extremist ideology is a danger to that, not just extremist muslims.

I agree. There is a much bigger threat to these values present in Europe though. A handful of Islamists do not have the power to overthrow them. But as we have seen in the epoch 1933-1945, others might well achieve that.

The status of 'dhimmi' all but disappeared in the mid-19th century. In the present context of Shari'a I believe we would be kaffirs.

__________________
"Say not, 'When I have free time I shall study'; for you may perhaps never have any free time"
Hillel the Elder

war on ignorance, some cultures might deserve to be destroyed, although despite the beautifull architecture, artwork, and wisdom they may bring. for instance, the spanish ended human sacrifice when it destroyed the azteck, and the americans/europeans ended inter tribal warfare in northamerica by conquering the native americans. Thier way of life was meant to be destroyed unfortuantely to pave the way for progress. I don't mean to diminish the lives lost, just offer that maybe it was worth it.

Destruction of cultures is a by-product of colonialism and imperialism, it's a sort of collateral damage.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

yes i am not claiming that the spanish intended to destroy azteck empire in order to end human sacrifice, obviously they did it to establish a colony and obtain wealth. i am just suggesting, that perhaps we as westerners, are better off because of it. I would not enjoy my high standard of living in america if it werent for the colonists ending native american culture, and niether would you as an australian Diuretic.

MarcoPolo, in all honesty I think you are having a bit of a kneejerk reaction because its Islam - a lot of people do.

I grew up in a world where there were many post war Southern Euopean migrants who never mixed with us anglo celtic types. Italian girls certainly didn't marry non italian boys in my generation - I had one workmate whose father dropped her off at work and picked her up - took her pay and gave her an allowance after what was left. I knew another young Italian woman (in her mid twenties) who was not allowed out unless accompanied by her brother or married female cousins. And LOL - having an Italian boyfriend meant his family thought he was going out with a total whore. I knew Yugoslav (Croatian) women whose husbands would 'approve' their non Yugo friends, and if you didn't pass muster - that was it. I also remember pre school/kindergarten teachers complaining about how 'these people' didn't speak English at home, so their children couldn't learn anything.

In recent years I have worled with immigrants and international students. I find Chinese and some other east Asians are far less likely to mi