Kevin11+2 - Rudd's revenge | RIP JuLIAR

[itch]

Something I've never understood, and maybe you guys could explain it to me...

Why do left wing supposedly 'liberal' people defend the right for muslims to illegally immigrate into Australia?


Muslims are the most conservative people on the planet.


These are people who hate gays, subjugate women and even frown on alcohol consumption. They aggregate in ghettos and if left to their own devices, seem to be unable to resist the prospect of 'sharia law' a conservative ultra religious ideology that is so conservative it would make Ronald Regan blush.

But to do anything but welcome these fascists into our country is apparently an affront to a liberal progressive way of life instead of defending it?

Go figure.

[Cletus]

Terrorists need love too.

[unfnknblvbl]

That, and the above view of Muslims is very generalised and based on the conservative stereotype of them. I used to manage about a hundred or so people of middle eastern origin (so Muslim, Baha'i, etc), and not one of them conformed to that stereotype. Even the most conservative ones that do the whole 6am prayers and fasting for Ramadan were still some of the nicest people I've ever met.

The thing about Islam is that it's just like Christianity; you get the liberals, the moderates and the nutcases. Just because the Crusades happened, and the Westboro Baptist Church exists doesn't mean all Christians are gay-hating xenophobes.

[itch]

Did you ever press them for how they feel on the issue of gay marriage?

If you even say the word gay around muslims they blush and will if pressed confess to being vehemently anti-gay.




Also, IMO the WBC is the most accurately christian group I've ever witnessed. They've actually read the bible and know how to stand by the tenants therein. Unlike 'moderate christians' who have wishy-washy fanciful interpretations that gloss over all the hateful verses.

I'd wager that the progress of muslim integration in other countries would be a prediction of what the arc would be like in Australia.

It's been widely noted that once France reached 5% muslim, the ghettos reached critical mass and they started practicing sharia law. A small L liberals worst nightmare.



Then there's the recent example of Sweden.

Muslim riots. Calls for sharia law. And the media? Notoriously hush hush as they trip over themselves in attempts to 'out politically correct each other' and dismiss the rioting as simply non-descript youths.

The nightly rioting in Stockholm that establishment media ascribes merely to “youths,” is being carried out by Muslim immigrants.

Muslim immigrants in Sweden now total slightly more than 6 percent of the population, providing additional support for the maxim that a Muslim population of 5 percent is a tipping point for political turmoil. In other countries, Muslim immigrants at that point have begun to seek concessions, including, typically, the right to govern themselves by Shariah, or Islamic law.

In Sweden, the Muslim population has doubled in the last 14 years, with Muslims now accounting for over 41 percent of Sweden’s total population growth. The growth reflects not only increasing Islamic immigration but also a disproportionately high birth rate in a nation in which the native birth rate is trending toward zero-growth.

According to European Union statistics, an estimated 574,000 Muslims lived in Sweden in 2012, making up 6.05 percent of the population, compared to 1998, when there were 284,000 Muslims, or 3.21 percent of the total population.

The EU currently estimates that at current rates of growth, the Muslim population will reach 40 percent of the total population in Sweden by 2030.

...

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/youth-riotin ... cgY9p86.99" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It seems to happen everywhere there is 5+% of the population practicing Islam.



Reilgion. Is bad. Christian or otherwise. But Muslims are clearly the worst. And I'm constantly agog at the left's insistence of being so tolerant of intolerance. Welcoming it even, as some kind of badge of honour. 'Look how liberal I am.' I'm convinced that Muslims actually laugh at us for being so accepting, in their minds we're stupid for letting them boss us around.

[Cletus]

That, and the above view of Muslims is very generalised and based on the conservative stereotype of them. I used to manage about a hundred or so people of middle eastern origin (so Muslim, Baha'i, etc), and not one of them conformed to that stereotype. Even the most conservative ones that do the whole 6am prayers and fasting for Ramadan were still some of the nicest people I've ever met.

The thing about Islam is that it's just like Christianity; you get the liberals, the moderates and the nutcases. Just because the Crusades happened, and the Westboro Baptist Church exists doesn't mean all Christians are gay-hating xenophobes.

Even if you're right (and I wouldn't know because my experience with Muslims is minimal) it's still the stereotype Muslims getting the negative attention. Of course they are. They're the ones displaying enough of their own intolerance to draw the attention and ire of the rest of the world. Saying there are Muslims who sit well outside of the stereotype is irrelevant. That they share the same religion naturally makes most people question their motives or if they even share similar principles. Those stereotypes exist. They aren't imaginary. When a local pool is forced to make times available only for women to cater to Muslims people are right to question the value of it. It's a small thing. But a lot of small things add up. Even moderate Muslims require alterations to our way of living. And then that raises the question "who is pushing for these changes?". If it's the moderates that still require changes then that doesn't comfort anyone outside of the religion. If it's the hardliners pushing for changes, then that's a problem. If it's do good non Muslims trying to make everyone feel welcome, well they aren't helping moderates either.

Christianity would have been seen similarly centuries ago as the religion was forced on so many civilisations and cultures. In the modern age no group of Catholics or section of the church is going to try to condone or explain the actions of a militant Christian. They might exist, but the religion itself would openly abhor an act of violence in the name of god or Christ. Even the WBC are extreme only in their interpretation and delivery of the bible. I doubt they're supported by the Vatican. They're considered evil but it bares no comparison to modern acts of terror. They haven't bombed anything that I know of though they might applaud it. The modern exception might be the Catholics and Protestants. It's like football for them though. Deadly football. Odd thing is they share the same god but wear different colours.

The thing about Islam is that it's just like Christianity

So we're at this odd point in time where it's perfectly fine to nick pick, spit on, criticise or insult Christianity but you're ignorant to distrust or stereotype Muslims (who also seem to dislike everyone AND Christianity too). It's progressive to be tolerant of intolerance. Just a small test for you. Criticise Allah in a public way and put your name to it. I wonder how many moderate Muslims turn up to protect you from the Muslims on their way to cut out your everything. Do the same with Jesus. I wonder how many Christians even bother to feel offended. It's not like Christianity. It might have been centuries ago...maybe. But the hardline Muslim interpretation is in no way similar to modern Christianity.

[BruceCamblzChin]

Good post.

[Froggy]

People haven't even been quiet. There's a protest in Melbourne right now about it, despite the shitty, shitty weather:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

All completely missing the last 6 years when people were drowning and being locked up. It's not about refugees to these people it's about barracking for a team, they have proven that with their complete silence on the same issues they railed against the previous government about.

[itch]

Yeah. It's all the left-wing media zombies.

Did anyone else find it amusing that 'The Age' writes one article about how Rudd would be a better leader and within the week the petition is drafted it gets a huge amount of signatures and within the week we've got a new PM without an election.


That is an obedient mob of hive-minding zombies.

There's no way Murdoch zombies are that lock and step.

[itch]

So I just read an article about the guy who is the lead author for the IPCC, the International Panel on Climate Change.

He's the lead author for the IPCC, surely he has some dire things to say about the effect CO2 and human activity on climate?

Actually no, he suggests the whole thing will probably have to be re-written.

A warmist scientist admits there’s been no warming for 15 years, and another five will be critical:


United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change lead author Hans von Storch told Der Spiegel that climate models are having a difficult time replicating the lack of global warming during the past 15 years.

“So far, no one has been able to provide a compelling answer to why climate change seems to be taking a break,” said Storch…

“According to most climate models, we should have seen temperatures rise by around 0.25 degrees Celsius (0.45 degrees Fahrenheit) over the past 10 years. That hasn’t happened. In fact, the increase over the last 15 years was just 0.06 degrees Celsius (0.11 degrees Fahrenheit)—a value very close to zero,” Storch told Der Spiegel. “This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.

IPCC may have to revise its climate models to reflect real-world climate conditions, Storch noted.

“At my institute, we analyzed how often such a 15-year stagnation in global warming occurred in the simulations. The answer was: in under 2 percent of all the times we ran the simulation…

“If things continue as they have been, in five years, at the latest, we will need to acknowledge that something is fundamentally wrong with our climate models...”

From the interview:


SPIEGEL: What could be wrong with the models?

Storch: There are two conceivable explanations—and neither is very pleasant for us. The first possibility is that less global warming is occurring than expected because greenhouse gases, especially CO2, have less of an effect than we have assumed. This wouldn’t mean that there is no man-made greenhouse effect, but simply that our effect on climate events is not as great as we have believed. The other possibility is that, in our simulations, we have underestimated how much the climate fluctuates owing to natural causes.

The worry for Storch - Britain’s warmist Met recently tipped no further warming for another four years:

Global average temperature is expected to remain between 0.28 °C and 0.59 °C (90% confidence range) above the long-term (1971-2000) average during the period 2013-2017...

Oh, hmm. The IPCC is the leading authority on climate change, and as it turns out they have very little confidence left in the what is currently being bandied as consensus. In fact, barring unforseen circumstances, the whole theory will have been proven, scientifically, to be wrong.

Now, where did I have to turn before I was privvy to this development?

Andrew Bolt. He's that guy who's always lying to us. I had to turn to a guy who always lies before I got any info about the leading authority on climate change being on the verge of scrapping the theory as it exists today.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andr ... 7pBQ.email" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Funny that.


Usually rebuttals to Bolts arguments centre on assassinating the validy and character of Bolts sources. But the source for this article is the IPCC.


There are some other people who have some interesting things to say about climate science and the supposed consensus.

Dr. Roy Warren Spencer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_(scientist" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)


This guy is a climatologist and the Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA's Aqua satellite. You know about the AMSR-E because it is the satellite that detects levels of sea ice and analyses them in the context of climate change. It's his findings on the loss of sea ice that are almost always used as 'proof' of the effects of human activity.

But what does he think about his findings?

Oh... okay...


So... these guys must be part of the '3%' of denialists, right? Because we all know there is a 97% consensus and that the remaining three percent are all on par with evolution deniers right?

Wrong. Strangely, these two guys, the lead author for the IPCC who suggests the models are on the verge of being scrapped, and the team leader for NASAs sea ice analysis who says the current image of climate science is deceptive and misleading... are included in the 97% of scientists who apparently concur with the alarmist viewpoint.

Isn't that strange?



Here's another guy, a well respected scientist (also included in the '97%' of scientists who concur with the climate change 'consensus') who completely disagrees with the alarmist viewpoint. Interesting watch.

[selfish]

People haven't even been quiet. There's a protest in Melbourne right now about it, despite the shitty, shitty weather:

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

All completely missing the last 6 years when people were drowning and being locked up. It's not about refugees to these people it's about barracking for a team, they have proven that with their complete silence on the same issues they railed against the previous government about.

I...actually agree with Froggy. POLITICS IS BROKEN

Thankfully, I didn't bother reading the GameHED post above mine.

[Cletus]

Smart move. It's some crazy shit akin to telling us the world isn't flat at all but shaped like a ball. Obvious nonsense.

[itch]

Selfish is standing in for the catholic church.

Cletus and I are happy to represent Galileo.

[itch]

If anyone ever mentions this incident again, you're officially going on ignore:

Treasury finds 'black hole' in Coalition costings
Sarah Collerton
Updated Thu Sep 2, 2010 10:17am AEST

Andrew Robb, flanked by Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey


A key independent MP says Opposition Leader Tony Abbott needs to explain why Treasury analysis has identified a hole of up to $11 billion in the Coalition's election promise costings.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-09-01/t ... gs/2245360" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In just a few weeks, Labor has had to reassess the surplus shortfall to 30 billion dollars from 18 billion dollars in May. Rudd will have to raise the debt ceiling yet again beyond 300 billion dollars closer to 400 billion, fast approaching half a trillion dollars in debt.




The quality of left-wing journalism earlier this year has appallingly focused on trying to discredit, assassinate and degrade Joe Hockey's level of commentary -

Stuff like this:
http://www.independentaustralia.net/201 ... -furphies/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Personally, I prefer 'The Australian'. You know, it's that little rag that saw all this coming nearly seven years ago even though they are constantly ridiculed by 'those in the know' on the left. Unbelievable.

[Froggy]

testify Itch