• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The EU and new parties on the rise in Europe[W:67]

I thought about replying you that large cities were the exception rather than the rule, but it was stingier and more relevant to my core statement to point out the harsh reality of Cordoba that your Muslim propaganda prefers to lie about.
 
Hey @Auvergnat, I'm still waiting for you to elaborate (as requested by me earlier today) on "Canada, where secessionism has been on the rise for decades".

Thanks in advance!
 
I thought about replying you that large cities were the exception rather than the rule, but it was stingier and more relevant to my core statement to point out the harsh reality of Cordoba that your Muslim propaganda prefers to lie about.
Well, that combobulated statement hardly gets around the facts of your quite apparent lack of focus.

Not to mention your ignorance of Muslim Spain (to name just one item) being demonstrated yet once again.

But even if we were to give your non-sequiturs some undeserved attention, why don't you tell us all about the harsh realities of life in Cordoba, say around the 8th, 9th and 10th century?
 
@Nono
It was a paper article from Quebec I did read a few months ago but it was in French and I would not be able to find the source back. It was providing a historical perspective of its average but fluctuating rise by region since the introduction of multiculturalism. If you search for Canada separatism, I am sure you will find articles mentioning this rise.

@Chagos
We already went through this a few weeks ago, when I provided you a lengthy article about dhimmitude from a researcher of a renowned university, who insisted that it was far to be rosy and mentioned the importance of the Islamic revisionism and propaganda on those questions, that you are obviously victim of.

There is no reason to believe that dhimmitude in Cordoba at the same time was any different.

Btw, the fact that you mention Cordoba as a superior civilization to what it is today is another proof of your intoxication by Islamic propaganda. Cordoba was more central than it is today, but I am pretty sure that the modern Cordoba is a far greater civilization than it ever was, far more educated, far more advanced, far more tolerant, far richer, far cleaner, far bigger, etc, than the medieval ****hole it was under the fist of fanatic Islamic feudal warlords.

But once again I am not surprised that you deem the Islamic civilization as so superior.
 
Last edited:
~............snipped for brevity (to take the Gish out of gallop and vice versa)...........~
.............but since another demonstration of your ignorance of history, even where unnecessary is always instructive to the reader, Cordoba is a lot smaller today than it was at the height of being the caliphate centre. Conservative figures for around the time of 1,000 A.D. show a population of 500,000, more generous estimates going up to 1 million (it has around 330,000 today).

Your point of it being more central then (to what??) appears so nonsensical that I won't even address it
....................than the medieval ****hole it was under the fist of fanatic Islamic feudal warlords.
In its time the medieval piles of manure (of ignorance, superstition, backwardness, total lack of any education worth mentioning etc. and people stinking to high heaven on account of holding bathing to be unhealthy) lay more to the North.

Like round about where you live today.
But once again I am not surprised that you deem the Islamic civilization as so superior.
In the time we're speaking of here it was, certainly in Cordoba. And where tolerance was concerned, Cordoba was certainly at a more more advanced level than you appear to show any chance of ever reaching even today.

Should I mention learning?

Oh, never mind.:roll:
 
Last edited:
Still waiting LOL.
And I'm still waiting for You or Chagos to Reply to my #36/#37 elaborating Auvergnat's basic ideas: even if he didn't get them All right.
Dead Silence.
 
The original premise of the thread is what direction next for the EU and somehow we have ended up with yet another muslims-is-evil-and-going-to-take-over thread.

Anyone ready to discuss the events in European politics?
 
He has no idea what he is talking about. Best to ignore him. Turkey has been in a customs union with the EU since 1995, which is basically defacto free trade (not totally, since certain areas are not covered). Also there is defacto free movement of people, since getting a visa is simple and only 4% get rejected.

http://www.avrupa.info.tr/fileadmin/Content/Downloads/PDF/Custom_Union_des_ENG.pdf

It is a problem you continuously demonstrate to ignore the present problems and try to deflect questions with platitudes. That is quite typical of EU habits and partially the cause of today's challenges like the forming autocracy in Turkey. The EU was highly negligent and to a certain extent wilfully so.
 
The original premise of the thread is what direction next for the EU and somehow we have ended up with yet another muslims-is-evil-and-going-to-take-over thread.

Anyone ready to discuss the events in European politics?

Lastly the new parties are a backlash to poor policies within the EU that had been argued, reasoned and justified with untenable promises, simplifying populism and falsehoods. When the Germans were hurt in the 1990s most did not realise that it was due to an EU dysfunction. As more and more populations were hurt badly dissatisfaction spread across the continent. The traditional parties had no answers, because it would have meant admitting to their own misdeeds that the UK and others had visibly warned of.
 
And I'm still waiting for You or Chagos to Reply to my #36/#37 elaborating Auvergnat's basic ideas: even if he didn't get them All right.
Dead Silence.

OK, m, here's the sum total of what you wrote in those posts:

Great post that will necessarily (or at least substantially) go Unanswered.
I've commented on this Many times in 7+ years here.
So might add other conflicts: Armenia-Azerbijan; Ethiopea-Eritrea; the (abu-sayyef/Moro) secessionists in the Philippines; a similar Muslim separatist movement in Thailand that has killed more than in the Israel-Palestine conflict in the last decade.
In Indonesia we've had Jemaah Islamiyah and Lasker Jihad, (the Bali Bombers) and a virtual separate state/province in Aceh; the Lebanese Civil War/1970 and ongoing.

They've finally separated Sudan into North and South after decades of GENOCIDE by the more Arabo-Muslim North against the Christian/Animist South.
And we see see other problems in North Africa have lingered for more than a Thousand years since the the Muslim Conquest there. Groups like the Copts/original Christian inhabitants persecuted both officially and unofficially.

Lee Kuan Yew, former leader and Shaper of the Singapore Miracle, had mentioned the 'Muslim Problem' in his book before having to apologize for it subsequently.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/europe...post1059272967 (UK PM: Multiculturalism has failed)

I view Horror of Slavery as 'Original Sin' for which we are/will be paying for generations/centuries.

You can find all of the stats in my recent string:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gun-co...n-problem.html ('Gun Problem'?)
Just the OP

'Diversity' only works if it's not so Diverse.
Americas Immigrant success is mainly "integrating" Euros: Irish, Italian, German, Ashkenazi Jew, etc.
The happy exception being with NE Asians, because of their [innately/Genetically] higher IQs and more civilized/less aggressive cultural behavior. (another, but related topic)

I have examined it with a very powerful magnifying glass and fail to find anything to respond to. (Whereas I repeatedly put a very clear QUESTION to Auvergnat.)

So --- sorry --- but you're going to wait for a mighty long time LOL.
 
@Nono
It was a paper article from Quebec I did read a few months ago but it was in French and I would not be able to find the source back. It was providing a historical perspective of its average but fluctuating rise by region since the introduction of multiculturalism. If you search for Canada separatism, I am sure you will find articles mentioning this rise.

Inadequate, A.
If you make a claim, you have to back it up.

There were independence referendums in Quebec in 1980 and again in 1985. Both failed.

Apart from Quebec (where I think the independence movement is now dead), I know of no serious independence endeavour in the world's second largest country.

So I think your claim can be safely described as bollocks.
 
When the Germans were hurt in the 1990s most did not realise that it was due to an EU dysfunction.

Could you elaborate?

If there is dysfuction in the EU, that can only be because of dysfunction on the part of the member states, since they --- and they only --- decide what happens in the EU. This is because there has never been any significant transfer of sovereignty from national to EU level. Which is the whole point of the EU.

And who would transfer sovereignty to a body run by your and other governments acting only in their national-political interests? For example by setting up a Truly Representative Parliament with True Powers. For example.

So it's a chicken-and-egg thing.

I'm hoping the Brits will leave pronto, since they have consistently bitched, moaned and generally played the role of spoiler. The UK's departure obviously won't solve the EU's problems, but getting rid of a Trojan Horse ought to at least help.

The traditional parties had no answers, because it would have meant admitting to their own misdeeds that the UK and others had visibly warned of.
 
Sorry for using your post as a transport, Nono................
~-----------------------~

Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
And I'm still waiting for You or Chagos to Reply to my #36/#37 elaborating Auvergnat's basic ideas: even if he didn't get them All right.
Dead Silence.
How does one (as far as I am concerned) expect a reply to posts when one knows that they don't get read?

Outside, that is, their appearing in the quotes of others, like here?:confused:
 
OK, m, here's the sum total of what you wrote in those posts:
I have examined it with a very powerful magnifying glass and fail to find anything to respond to. (Whereas I repeatedly put a very clear QUESTION to Auvergnat.)
So --- sorry --- but you're going to wait for a mighty long time LOL.
IOW, you eagerly responded to his Correct Basic point because it had alot of assailable technical errors, but NO answer to my same point which did not have those errors. I made the Same Basic point he did, but with all Correct Examples so you have NOTHING for me. I showed his issue shown correct. Silence.


Chagos said:
How does one (as far as I am concerned) expect a reply to posts when one knows that they don't get read?
Outside, that is, their appearing in the quotes of others, like here?
After being Shredded by me Numerous times, including recently, you made the Only decision you could: to not even try.
But it's niggardly to try and make a virtue out of a permanent shortcoming.
You could not/cannot debate me. Ever.
Many examples of 100%/180° refutations which left you speechless. So WTH, you perverted losing into a moral stand.
And/so you just did what has become your mainstay here, 'Whoring." That is what many boards call Third Party Gossiping about a poster instead of direct answer. This despicable tactic makes up a good portion of your posts about many here. Even more, when your main partner for it is around.

If you (ostensibly) have someone on Ignore, have the Decency to honor it, not use another third party quote to make an amoral glancing third party response/cheap shot... since you see ALL my posts anyway, as the timing of your posts/sign-offs, shows you see the board not always signed in.
I imagine if I ever made any you COULD rebut, you might actually say something. No matter.
 
Last edited:
Sorry for USING your post as a transport, Nono................
How does one (as far as I am concerned) expect a Reply to posts when one Knows that they Don't get Read?


Outside, that is, their appearing in the quotes of others, like here?:confused:
I just watched you in this string while 'Reporting' (in your activity/profile page) a/my post that ostensibly "Didn't get read!" (starting 12:28 EST)
How do you explain that/another contradiction/fib?
edit:
And now reading it again, signed on, since only my posting has been added, and it again, ostensibly "doesn't get read."
Abusing the claim/smear of 'Ignore' is a reprehensible tactic, especially while taking third party cheap shots at the 'ignor-ee.'
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
Sorry for USING your post as a transport, Nono................How does one (as far as I am concerned) expect a Reply to posts when one Knows that they Don't get Read?


Outside, that is, their appearing in the quotes of others, like here?:confused:

mbig said:
I just watched you in this string while 'Reporting' (in your activity/profile page) a/my post that ostensibly "Didn't get read!" (starting 12:28 EST)
How do you explain that/another contradiction/fib?
edit:
And now reading it again, signed on, since only my posting has been added, and it again, ostensibly "doesn't get read."
Abusing the claim/smear of 'Ignore' is a reprehensible tactic, especially while taking third party cheap shots at the 'ignor-ee.'

Cut it out, both of you. The topic of this thread has nothing to do with your feud or ignore lists. I'll additionally warn you that this kind of thing is often addressed with points upstairs. I would highly recommend discussing the topic and not each other going forward.
 
I made the Same Basic point he did, but with all Correct Examples so you have NOTHING for me. I showed his issue shown correct. Silence.

I enjoyed no success in my endeavour to make head or tail of it. Does that maybe explain my silence?
 
Could you elaborate?

If there is dysfuction in the EU, that can only be because of dysfunction on the part of the member states, since they --- and they only --- decide what happens in the EU. This is because there has never been any significant transfer of sovereignty from national to EU level. Which is the whole point of the EU.

And who would transfer sovereignty to a body run by your and other governments acting only in their national-political interests? For example by setting up a Truly Representative Parliament with True Powers. For example.

So it's a chicken-and-egg thing.

I'm hoping the Brits will leave pronto, since they have consistently bitched, moaned and generally played the role of spoiler. The UK's departure obviously won't solve the EU's problems, but getting rid of a Trojan Horse ought to at least help.

When Germany entered the Euro it did so at a too high DM exchange rate that made labour expensive relative to other membees. This slowed the economy letting unemploymen climb. Having lost sovereignty over interest rates the rates were much too high than the domestic economy required leading to all sorts of growth problems like too little residential building in tje decade.

You should check out the transfer of sovereignty to the EU. Though, the German supreme court ruled the Maastricht, Lisbon etc treaties legal under the hypothesis that it is supreme over the European courts, this theses is being whittled away. At this moment both the European court and the Bundesverfassungsgericht seem to be in a long kabuki dance avoiding direct confrontation before the public can be relied accepting German lose of its sovereignty.
 
This is because there has never been any significant transfer of sovereignty from national to EU level.
Nothing significant you say?!


We surrendered our monetary powers.

We surrendered the right to filter our borders.

We surrendered the right to refuse European immigrants and we now share our sovereignty with them on local issues.

We surrendered the possibility to instigate custom taxes on European products, the right to favor national enterprises and interests, and the right to maintain public monopolies.

We surrendered the right to depart from the European rules (not technically but it's the same since we have to pay fines) on all trade issues (and everything pertains to trade), now voted by an extremely corrupted foreign parliament.

We surrendered our judicial supremacy since the EUCJ is now the highest judicial instance and uses the first article of the treaties (mentioning human rights) to interfere in all sorts of problems such as the right to wear religious clothes at work or not.

And many other things.


And don't answer me with technicalities regarding the difference between the EZ, Schengen Area and the EU, those are bull****s: they are simply here to allow countries to converge at different speeds towards their submission to the Reich.
 
Both the European court and the Bundesverfassungsgericht seem to be in a long kabuki dance avoiding direct confrontation before the public can be relied accepting German lose of its sovereignty.

The whole point of the European Project is to yield sovereignty. How quickly we forget the events of the 20th century.
 
Nothing significant you say?!Don't answer me with technicalities regarding the difference between the EZ, Schengen Area and the EU, those are bull****s: they are simply here to allow countries to converge at different speeds towards their submission to the Reich.

Have no fear. i wouldn't dream of it.

We surrendered our monetary powers.

We surrendered the right to filter our borders.

We surrendered the right to refuse European immigrants and we now share our sovereignty with them on local issues.

We surrendered the possibility to instigate custom taxes on European products, the right to favor national enterprises and interests, and the right to maintain public monopolies.

We surrendered the right to depart from the European rules (not technically but it's the same since we have to pay fines) on all trade issues (and everything pertains to trade), now voted by an extremely corrupted foreign parliament.

We surrendered our judicial supremacy since the EUCJ is now the highest judicial instance and uses the first article of the treaties (mentioning human rights) to interfere in all sorts of problems such as the right to wear religious clothes at work or not.

And many other things.

As I said to joG, that's the whole point of the European Project, ever since the Coal and Steel Treaty.

What Europe needs in fact is a loose, Swiss-like federation that nevertheless makes civil war impossible. But for that it needs a responsible parliament. Which requires a huge leap in sovereignty-yielding.
 
The whole point of the European Project is to yield sovereignty. How quickly we forget the events of the 20th century.

That is certainly what the politicians wanted. But the thing is, that to be legal it needed confirmation by the voters in a number of member countries. The Dutch and French voted against the Constitution of Europe that was supposed to seal the deal. From there on the story has been populist sleaze, fraud and bumble all the way.
 
.............but since another demonstration of your ignorance of history, even where unnecessary is always instructive to the reader, Cordoba is a lot smaller today than it was at the height of being the caliphate centre. Conservative figures for around the time of 1,000 A.D. show a population of 500,000, more generous estimates going up to 1 million (it has around 330,000 today).

Your point of it being more central then (to what??) appears so nonsensical that I won't even address itIn its time the medieval piles of manure (of ignorance, superstition, backwardness, total lack of any education worth mentioning etc. and people stinking to high heaven on account of holding bathing to be unhealthy) lay more to the North.

Like round about where you live today. In the time we're speaking of here it was, certainly in Cordoba. And where tolerance was concerned, Cordoba was certainly at a more more advanced level than you appear to show any chance of ever reaching even today.

Should I mention learning?

Oh, never mind.:roll:

Maybe you should, try to read real history not whitewashed bull****.
Apologists for Islam never tire of referring to the “Golden Age” of tolerance that supposedly characterized seven centuries of Muslim dominated Spain. This fundamentally flawed assessment draws the wrong conclusion based on fragmentary evidence and distorts the larger picture. It ignores the reality of enormous destruction wrought by the three Arab-Berber Muslim invasions that repeatedly sought to hold on to control and rule over the indigenous peoples of Spain who had been reduced to second class citizens in their own homeland.

The Myth of the Golden Age of Tolerance in Medieval Muslim Spain > Norman Berdichevsky
 
That is certainly what the politicians wanted. But the thing is, that to be legal it needed confirmation by the voters in a number of member countries. The Dutch and French voted against the Constitution of Europe that was supposed to seal the deal. From there on the story has been populist sleaze, fraud and bumble all the way.

Yeah ... politicians like Jean Monnet and Konrad Adenauer who actually remembered the ruins that Europe was in 1945.

Unfortunately the greedheads helped Giscard write that constitution. I would have voted against it too.

Unfortunately, the need for a United States of Europe has not gone away. On the contrary.
 
Back
Top Bottom