Immigration Cold blooded murder of the very worst kind

[Gwyllgi]

Let’s start by saying that I for one feel dreadful sadness for the families who have been bereaved by what has taken place as well as the many left dreadfully mutilated crippled and otherwise injured .

And I really mean that. When I first heard the news my thoughts ran to how unimaginably awful it must have been for those caught up in the horror of a massive explosion in an underground train, especially one packed with decent people just going about their normal business.

The news?

Yet ANOTHER example of the “Religion of peace” in action.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ro-blasts-female-suicide-bombers-kill-35.html

So far 35 people are known to have died in the latest homicide bombing by Mohammedans who use their horrid ideology to justify killing those who don’t think in the same warped and twisted way that they do themselves.



I just hope that when the Russians start to root out the activists and their supporters there’s not the howls from The West about Russian atrocities taking place.

Every indication is that the attack was once again from Chechnya where the Mohammedans want to do a land-grab of a part of Russia in order to establish an Islamic Caliphate or some such rubbish. Just imagine what would result if they succeeded, how the infection would spread.

Criticise Russia?

Not in my name.

 

[Michael Folkesson]

I think you should read more about Chechnya, history and the war. This is Chechnyan land, and they happen to be Muslims for the most part. This is no religious clash of civilizations. They have every right to be independent. It's about oil and the cohesion of the Russian Federation. What happened to you? Did a Muslim bite you when you were a child?

 

[Shasta]

Very sad to see what happened. I just watched a grim video on You Tube made by a Russian subway traveler.

http://www.advicegoddess.com/goddessblog.html

 

[LeBrok]

I'm looking forward to big protests of peace loving Muslims against extremists killing innocent people in name of their religion.

PS. For my logic they should bigger than protests against stupid cartoons.

 

[Gwyllgi]

I think you should read more about Chechnya, history and the war. This is Chechnyan land, and they happen to be Muslims for the most part. This is no religious clash of civilizations. They have every right to be independent. It's about oil and the cohesion of the Russian Federation. What happened to you? Did a Muslim bite you when you were a child?

Look, no matter what, be it oil, independence, which end to open an egg, to set of a bomb on a crowded Metro is unforgivable and simply wrong in every possible way.

To do so in the attempt to establish a Caliphate is double so.

Michel, you, not I, really should learn about Islam and all it brings.

I know, you evidently don’t. However, watching the shenanigans now taking place in Sweden and seeing the time line between Sweden’s Mohammedans and the British contingent, you and a lot more Swedes very soon will.

 

[Michael Folkesson]

You really must stop seeing Muslims as one single people and movement. What shenanigans in Sweden would that be, Tommy Atkins? What head lines are you thinking of?

Amuse me.

We have quite a large amount of Muslims in this country. Not a single one of them has tried to kill Lars Vilks, the artist. No, it takes an American and some people in Ireland apparently.

You really seem to have no idea what the Russians have done and do in Chechnya. The systematic violence, rape, abuse and torture by Russian soldiers. Anything they do in retaliation is quite understandable, not justifiable, but with evident reasons. That you want to tie and use the hatred of Russian oppression to your crusade against Islam extremism is stomach turning. I guess the Kosovo war was Muslim extremism in your eyes too.

The people in Moscow were innocent, and didn't deserve what happened. There are bad people in Chechnya, there are wahabbists as well. But don't make it that Russia is innocent and that this is unprovoked. The situation in the Caucasus in more complex than simply Muslim extremism.

The Chechen people has undergone two following wars, where the second ended last year. This was never really news in the Western media, and the public knowledge of it is lacking. The country is still in shambles. All this has attracted foreign fighters and influence, as did the Yugoslavian wars, and both sides in a war pushes to the extreme. Extremism has to be fought wherever it pops up, but this can only be done by the people. People were not fundamentalist in Chechnya before the wars. This is a pillaged nation, and a suffering people. You are sitting there in Whales with your Celtic nationalism praising your devolution, judging people who looked for independence and got hammered. There are groups in Chechnya that should be rooted out, but they are not the people. The people are just like everyone else. They want peace and a future.

 

[Gwyllgi]

You really must stop seeing Muslims as one single people and movement. What shenanigans in Sweden would that be, Tommy Atkins? What head lines are you thinking of?

(Who is Tommy Atkins???)

Michael, YOU must try to grasp that Islam isn’t just another religion. Instead it’s a Theocracy, a thing that is in a different order of magnitude than simple religion, and incidentally a thing that runs counter to Democracy as WE know and value it.

Islam has a religion at its core. Much as we have Judeo-Christianity at the core of our democracies.

But in the case of Islam it’s a warped and plagiarised religion, a mish mash of misunderstood twisted and even deliberately distorted things that provide the stick and the carrot to impose and excuse discipline on those caught up in the Theocracy.

That there are differing sects in Islam is of little real matter although the use of the word ‘sect’ is at least unfortunate and actually misleading.

This is because people try to think of these different sects in the same way as the word applies in Christianity and Judaism. Closer would be to describe the Islamic sects as political movements within the Theocracy.

As for headlines, let’s start with recent events in Malmo and go on from there.

Amuse me.

We have quite a large amount of Muslims in this country. Not a single one of them has tried to kill Lars Vilks, the artist. No, it takes an American and some people in Ireland apparently.

Maybe if the Swedish government had been inclined to stand their ground regarding freedom of the press and freedom of people to express themselves openly, and not be so ready to grovel to those who took offense at what was produced to highlight what was offensive, things would have been different.

Maybe if the Swedish government had, like others, supported those who produced the satirical portrayal of Mohammed, mostly based on the antics of people being so offensive in OUR nations there would have been a damm sight more ‘difficulties’ than there were.

You really seem to have no idea what the Russians have done and do in Chechnya. The systematic violence, rape, abuse and torture by Russian soldiers. Anything they do in retaliation is quite understandable, not justifiable, but with evident reasons.

There is NOTHING that justifies an attack on a crowded Metro during rush hour.

But yes, it is understandable. At least it is if you adopt the morality of a Mohammedan activist or a supporter of one.

That you want to tie and use the hatred of Russian oppression to your crusade against Islam extremism is stomach turning.

Then some antacid, because the really gut wrenching thing is that the innocent would be deliberately targeted in the way that the Islamic activists continue to do so.

Not extremists, the very concept of extremism in Islam is a classic non sequitur. A Mohammedan must accept The Koran in its totality and all that with it goes.

That being so (and undeniable) what then follows is that there are no extremists as found in other real religions such as Christianity and Judaism .

Instead some Mohammedans do little to support the activists, some do a great deal to support the activists, and the activists engage in terrorism and other attacks against the rest of us as suits their needs and circumstances.

The issue isn’t the people. The issue is the thing that compels then to do what they do. The Theocracy that has no place being allowed to take root in a Democracy.

 

[Michael Folkesson]

Malmo? I guessed as much. I live there. There is no jihadist movement there. Do you know who openly met up and opposed the vandals? Local Muslims. Why? Because the punks were trashing their neighborhood.

I don't know about the UK, but in Sweden there is no Judeo-Christianity in the core of the democracy. We have a Christian cultural heritage, but 80 % of the people is considered atheist. Christians are unusual here. Don't assign democracy to be a religious trait of Christianity. It has absolutely nothing to do with that, quite the contrary. It is democracy that affects religion, not the other way around. They have to be forced against their dogmas to comply with secular law. That we have female priests conducting gay weddings in churches now is a part of that.

Your rhetoric sounds very similar to that of extremist Mullahs or even what people used to say about the Jews. Hell, you even sound like some British EuSceptics do about the "conspiracy" to steal their sovereignty and destroy their culture. It could be turned and used in the other direction as well, "proving" Christian fundamentalist conspiracy to oppress the world and the Muslims. US soldiers shooting people with sniper scopes with scripture passages on them is not very diplomatic, American evangelists prowling around proselytizing in every country, and the common references to God in their speeches making the US look very much like a theocracy sometimes. That the most Christan country in the world exercises hegemony in the world backed by it's powerful military, can very easily be turned to be viewed as Christan world domination instead of just being a super power among nations.

Not every aspect of them, but all religion is hogwash. I agree that there are many things that are appalling when it comes to customs in different countries, and many of them are expressions of religion, many are not. Honor killings, the deaths of Chinese girls, decapitation of hands, lip plates, female and male circumcisions in the east and the west.

With 1.7 billion Muslims in the world there would be much more wars and terror attacks than there are, if "the Muslim people" would be rising as one and look for world domination. I am sure there is a bunch of people thinking like that. They are called extremists for a reason. They are few.

Our values of freedom and equality must apply to all, not just Europeans. When it comes to the Chechen conflict, Europe has been silent. Our hands are very much tied because of the problematic situation that an internal conflict always present in a world where the national state is the highest authority. We didn't have to be silent. One problem is that we are very much dependent on Russia for energy reasons. Oil and gas. Caucasus energy will be very important and Europe's dealings with the region is opposed by Russia. There were several reasons behind Russia's power show in Georgia. This and the expansion of NATO are among them. It is also connected to the accession of Turkey into the EU, and it's future as a energy hub in the region.

If you look past the religious conspiracies you will see that the Muslim countries have very different agendas and needs, not to mention different cultures. People all over the world need higher living standards and education. There is movement in China, and with a higher standard for all, there will in time be demands of more influence. If China will become a democracy or not is hard to say. They formed their own version of communism, they will likely form a chinese brand version of democracy as well. The problems in Xianjiang and Tibet can't solely be attributed to differences in religion as well.

It sounds to me that all you listen to when it comes to Islam are the fundamentalists. You are not helping by painting Islam as evil. One can share European values and still be Muslim. It happens all the time. But those people don't stick out.

It used to be similar in Europe under Christianity. If you have read the bible, you know that Christianity has turned to picking and choosing from the scriptures. Save sects in the US, modern Christians don't believe literally anymore, and are more Sola Fidelis than Scriptura. Making blanket statements about Muslims are bound to go wrong, since there are fundamentalists, moderate and the secular Muslims from different cultures and different classes and educational level.

I think you can find extremist Muslims in every country you look. Holding them up as an example to say "This is how they are!", doesn't prove the moderate Muslims to be fundamentalist. But I think the heart of the problem is that there are no Muslim organisations that openly oppose fundamentalism. This is what is needed the most. But I guess you take that as a sign that there are no moderate Muslims.

If you are attacked, you defend yourself. Don't make pre-emptive attacks. If you treat a person as a thief long enough, it will be true. You are responsible for what you say and how you affect people. Don't spread hatred where it's undue.

 

[^ lynx ^]

I'm looking forward to big protests of peace loving Muslims against extremists killing innocent people in name of their religion.

PS. For my logic they should bigger than protests against stupid cartoons.

Don't count on it. I don't remember any protest of that kind after the Madrid train attacks... that basically means that we are hosting almost 1 million of ungrateful muslims immigrants.

 

[Mycernius]

Michael, YOU must try to grasp that Islam isn’t just another religion. Instead it’s a Theocracy, a thing that is in a different order of magnitude than simple religion, and incidentally a thing that runs counter to Democracy as WE know and value it.

Islam is merely a religion and those who follow it are muslims. It is not a theocracy. I do not know where you get that idea from. A theocracy is a country that is run along religious ideals and if Tibet was free it would be a buddhist theocracy. Iran is a theocracy, the Vatican state is a theocracy, but Iraq, Turkey, Kuwait, Egypt, Libya are not. They might use islamic laws in some of their politics, but they are not theocracies by a long way. There are even nutters in the US that want the US to be a christian theocracy

Islam has a religion at its core.

Well, dud, after all it is a religion. I suppose that christianity doesn't have religion at its core?

Much as we have Judeo-Christianity at the core of our democracies.

I call bollocks on this. The US is a secular country and the founder even went out of their way to aviod the church getting involved. Do you suggest that our laws are based on old and new testament ideals? Okay when was they last time you stoned a woman to death for adultry, or a child for dishonouring its parents, or killed a witch? All in the bible, all part of christian morals.

But in the case of Islam it’s a warped and plagiarised religion, a mish mash of misunderstood twisted and even deliberately distorted things that provide the stick and the carrot to impose and excuse discipline on those caught up in the Theocracy.

Sounds very similar to christianity

That there are differing sects in Islam is of little real matter although the use of the word ‘sect’ is at least unfortunate and actually misleading.

Pray tell, why?

This is because people try to think of these different sects in the same way as the word applies in Christianity and Judaism. Closer would be to describe the Islamic sects as political movements within the Theocracy.

Yor're not a christian are you by any chance? Let us look at the evangelical movement in the US. They virtually control the republican party. Policies in some states are governed by the religious idealogies of the politicians. Hell, even George W. thought his war against Iraq was ordained by god. If that isn't christianity in politics I don't know what is?

There is NOTHING that justifies an attack on a crowded Metro during rush hour.

That I agree on.

Not extremists, the very concept of extremism in Islam is a classic non sequitur. A Mohammedan must accept The Koran in its totality and all that with it goes.

Again the same can be said of any extremist. Muslims are just as good a christians at cherry picking what they want from their dusty old book of myths. They accept what their morals tell them to accept, same as christians that do not go around stoning adulters, bashing in babies heads, etc.

That being so (and undeniable) what then follows is that there are no extremists as found in other real religions such as Christianity and Judaism .

Oh really, ever been to the Stormfront website? How about those christians lunatics that kill abortion doctors? The Waco seige, Heavens Gate, Aum Shinrikyo, the Manson Family are just a few I can think of.

You seem to have a particular unease with islam, yet other religions are just as bad. Ask the children who have been abused by catholic priests and the way the church covered it up.

 

[LeBrok]

Michael, don't you think you're on course for cultural and maybe even a religious war in your country? And soon I must say. Don't you think that your freedom and independence loving culture and lack of religious believes is in strong conflict with Muslim's understanding and way of life?
Unless you don't care and could happily live in Egypt or Syria, I don't understand your exuberant optimism.

 

[Michael Folkesson]

Sweden is no Shangri-la, and there are problems here and there. We have problems with criminal gangs from Hells Angels to Albanians, Yugoslavs and organised crime. But religious violence no. The heavy grievances and tensions are just not there.

 

[LeBrok]

See, that's a very good point. You have already problems even with some Europeans. So now your trying new and more problems with other races, right? Never enough problems, ha? The life would be boring.

Did you do calculations, with current emigration policy and birth rate of emigrants, when Swedish people become minority? Do you think it wont change the cultural, political, religious character of your country? Do you still hoping that you can change next generation of emigrants children, into libertarian, atheistic, and whatever Sweden currently stands for?
Do you like your country the way it is right now? If yes, you'd better watch out, or one day it'll be too late.
The way things are going right now, at age of 70, you'll start getting up in the morning to the tune of first minaret prayer. The ruling party will be the Muslim National party, and you would need to listen to parliament speeches through translator, because second national language will be Arabic.
I have to say, that by itself it's not a bad thing. Just different country, different people, life goes on, just in a little different way.
But I'm pretty sure you're not going to like it. You are freedom and people loving guy, very open and well wishing to all, the citizen of the world. You won't like your new country.

 

[Michael Folkesson]

LeBrok

Countries never stay the same. I wouldn't want to live in Sweden 100 years ago or even 50. I don't think you do either. With or without immigrants Sweden will change. As for the Swedes becoming the minority, that seems very unlikely, not to mention that the immigrants do integrate and themselves become Swedish with the next generation. My son is one of them.

If Muslims want to build mosques they are welcome to do so. There is a very nice one in the heart of Stockholm. The Jews have their synagogues. There will be no morning prayer calls, there is no need for them. I am sure modern Muslims have an alarm clock.

We have had regular influxes of other population groups. The large amount of Walloons that immigrated into Sweden in the 1600 are an integral part of the population. We have the indigenous Sami people. Greeks, Turks, Polish and others came in the 70's. A large amount of Chileans. We have the wretched Germans as well.

The immigrants into this country can't be viewed as one single group. They are of multiple nationalities and cultures. Just because they are immigrants don't mean that they have everything in common. The language will always be Swedish. We will keep the customs we want and add those we like. Kind of like the German Christmas tree.

To achieve the future dystopia that you paint up, we have to be subjected to a form of genocide North America put the First Nation through. They live in the country you speak of. You are the immigrant you speak out against. I don't see that coming here.

 

[LeBrok]

Beautiful words Michael, and I wish too they were true description of the world you live in.
How is the integration going?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BugIu_QsvlQ

Michael, don't judge your personal situation, as indication of a success of next generation fitting and integrating into Swedish society. One doesn't make the rule, or even few. Look at general situation of recent third world emigrants. This is an indication how things are going now and will in the future.

 

[Gwyllgi]

Michael, Rather than a torturous cut and paste I’ll simply make a series of statements relating to your offering.

I wrote let’s START with Malmo simply because that’s breaking news with regard to the outflow of Jewish people because of appalling (and unaddressed) anti-Semitism that’s taking place there.

Our democracy is founded on Judio-Christian principles. As is our European culture.

The inescapable fact remains, come what may and irrespective to the degree that The Religious had to be dragged kicking and screaming to accept things that ran counter to their religious teaching, OUR democracy lets that happen, and both Judaism and Christianity can cope with it. Islam does not and can not.

The Islamic Theocracy demands that any distance between Islam and society must be corrected by society changing, never the Theocracy.

To try to extrapolate the number of Islamic activists as a percentage of the total Islamic population is misleading. We mostly only see those who are at the (b)leading eadge edge, the interface between Dar ul-Islam and Dar ul-Haarb.

And they are NOT extremists. They are activists, and they do not represent the percentage of those who would immediately become activists if the circumstances in the regions and populations in which the reside changed.


Our values of freedom MUST be constrained to those who recognise and accept the same values. To extend our freedoms to those who do not have the same values is insanity.

Chechnya is the architect of its own problems.

I’m very well aware of the history back to well before 1921, and the involvement with Nazi Germany, a thing that did them no good at all. Certainly the attempt to declare an independent state in the way that it was done, and the way that the Russian people living there were treated inevitably led to a strong reaction from Russia – and rightly so.

My knowledge about Islam is wide and deep and acquired over many years. Michael, I really do wonder as to the depth of knowledge and “hands on” experience YOU have in this subject.

To suggest that a person can be a Mohammedan and still share much less than integrate into Europe is nonsense. A Mohammedan may live in Dar ul-Haarb, for such is what Europe still is, but share or integrate? Impossible.

Mohammedans, even as individuals, can also live in a Dar ul-Hudna “house of treaty” but they must at all times hold true to Islam, and the moment that Islam and living in Dar ul-Islam becomes possible or is helped by them then they must revert. They can do no other if they are Mohammedans. The option simply doesn’t exist.

Right now Sweden more than most is as near as dammit to being Dar ul-Dawa, the “house of invitation” where Mohammedans have been invited to introduce Islam but where the people of the land are not yet Mohammedans but soon will be.

This probably due to ignorance of what is involved and basic decency amongst most Swedes who can’t or won’t see the evil involved

Secular Muslims? Another non-sequiter.

Islamic extremists in every country, no. Islamic activists. Different Islamic power groups put different emphasis on the directions mandated by the Koran but that is all. The instructions and directions are the same for any Mohammedan from (almost) one extreme to the other.

The exception are the Sufi, but as the rest of the Islamic world denies they are really Mohammedans they can and should be overlooked.

There can be no organisation to oppose the activists as to do so would be to deny the Koran and that is a thing that can never be done and remain Islamic.


As form being attacked, let me ask this. If invaded and your very civilisation and culture not only threatened but actually demands made that it should be changed to accommodate the colonizers, what then? Just sit back and let it take place.

As for what’s taking place today, and putting the truth on the table, should that not be done simply because it’s unpalatable or comes as a surprise to people?

 

[Gwyllgi]

Mycernius, Rather than a torturous cut and paste I’ll comment directly on your reply.

I write that Islam is a theocracy because Islam is not constrained by national borders.

Islam exists in essence as the House of Islam (Dar ul-Islam) or the House of wart/conflict (Dar ul-Haarb).

(There are various other “houses” but in every case these are transition states.)

Because of this differentiation between the concepts that we have regarding the make up of the world and the Islamic view so I state (correctly) that Islam is a Theocracy.

Islam is a religion only in the broad use of the word. Islam is very much more, much closer to a cult than a religion. Islam dictates every aspect of life from birth to death and even the way that a Mohammedan wipes his backside, which hand to use, how many stones (yeugh!) to use, and even what to do with them afterwards.

The religious, perhapse “theist” part of Islam is what binds the whole thing together by threat and promise.

Christianity does NOT have a religion at its core. At least true Christianity and not Christian churches such as the Roman Catholic church that is a singularly un-Christian organisation (reach for my tin hat!) that has Christianity at its core.
Christianity as a theism pure and simple.
Our Western democracies do have Judeo-Christianity at the core of our democracies, not the rules and commandments of these religions, but the basic morality.
Our cultures have evolved with these moralities about not stealing, not killing, not lying, not doing things that cause social or family disruption, and the very strength of our democracy has resulted in our societies now for the most part becoming politically secular while retaining the decency and values we take for granted and assume others do also.

I wonder how many people realise that lying in Islam is not only permitted but advised under certain circumstances?
Is Christianity a warped and plagiarised religion, a mish mash of misunderstood twisted and even deliberately distorted things that provide the stick and the carrot to impose and excuse discipline on those caught up in? No. Christianity is following the teaching of Christ and believing in him as a personal saviour.

Most self proclaimed Christian churches, now that’s a different matter. Many if not most are distinctly un-Christian.

Am I a Christian? No. I’m a dyed in the wool “hard” atheist.

Cherry picking from the “holy” books.

It’s a very complex subject and one that I suspect that you and I would violently agree on if we spent time together!

To start with it’s utterly misleading to think of The Bible as being in the same category as the Koran.

The former is a very politically biased collection of separate books assembled in the case of the OT generally in time order, and the NT a series of accounts, most non contemporary of what they describe followed by a series of commentaries and letters from Paul. In order to make much sense of the OT, especially the Pentateuch, it’s necessary to read it in context with events taking place at the same time.

That, for example, explains why early on in the Bible homosexuality was strictly forbidden, and yet later on when time has passed and circumstances changed David and Jonathan were plainly at it like knives.

The Koran on the other hand is very different. For one thing it is not (usually) presented in time order, for another it is not intended as a history, and for a third it is intended to be remembered and recited and above all to BE cherry picked from. What is also worth note is that when the various sura are assembled in time sequence what emerges is a mass of contradictions, of changes to suit Mohammed’s needs and wants, and even some big time embarrassments.

Embarrassments such as the Gharaniq business that are now known as the Satanic verses, things that Mohammed rapidly pulled out when it was pointed out they ran counter to his claims about his “Allah”.

Christian extremists who deliberately kill?
If these people actually followed the teaching of Christ there is no way while they’ve got a hole where the sun don’t shine they would, or for that matter COULD do the things that they do.
If they followed the teaching of their religion they simply could not, and yet if the teaching of the Koran is followed, especially when the Hadith are used as examples of what Mohammed did and said, there can be every justification to kill the infidel. Especially if we draw a picture of Mohammed satirising him because of what his followers get up to.

 

[Maciamo]

I don't think that the Chechens would be so obsessed with their independence from Russia had they not been Muslim to start with, and had Chechnya not had a border with another country. There are other Muslim republics inside the Russian Federation, but none would be foolish enough to become an independent island in the middle of Russia.

Then there is petrol in Chechnya... Russia would not hold to this tiny region so vehemently had it not been for the black gold. I wonder whether the Chechens would seek independence at all if they didn't have petrol. The big question is : should greed give a regional group a reasonable right to independence ? What if New York decided it didn't want to share the juice of the apple with the rest of the USA anymore ? Would that be a sufficient argument to grant the Neo-Eboracians their independence ? I think it is a pretty selfish thing to do when you have a long relation with a country. New York only has a bit over 200 years of common history with neighbouring states, but the North Caucasus has had close ties with the people of Russia at least since the Neolithic (7,000 years in this case).

 

[Michael Folkesson]

Gwyllgi

Man, don't go there. Trying to make it that we draw our moral from religion. You are doing the same mistake as many Christians and Muslims do, believing that one needs a religion to form a sense of right and wrong. Do you really think that people had no moral or laws before Christianity? This is very primitive thinking. A multitude of people in Europe has left that primitive world of make-belief and matured into a recognition that religion can't explain life and existence, but only give a rigid version of dogmas that cannot be proven as it can't deliver until life is gone. Yes, there are quite some Christian scientists doing fine in their work and their world view. Those Christians believe in a different version of Christianity than those of the devout followers of literal faith. Picking and choosing is the privilege of the modern man.

Any herd animal has a set of morals, Gwyllgi. They all have to have rules, and we would never have made it if we didn't have it from the start. The peoples of the book had to have moral standards to start with to be able to put it down on paper, and if I may, much of the moral contents of the Bible are appalling to say the least, as are many of those of the Qur'an. They weren't appalling in the times they were written though. Does this make Muslims primitive? Yes. Does it make them by default murderers or violent? No. Some of the most gentle and decent people I've met are Muslims.

It is somewhat similar and connected to democracy. One can't force people to form a viable democracy by gunpoint or plain argument. One has to grow a democratic culture for that. Democracy is not a natural system for mankind. If it were, we would have had it from the start and not only for the last 200 years. Mankind matured into it, and we can thank the industrial revolution for the strength of it.

We are flock animals, and democracy is constantly attacked by internal and external forces, sometimes ourselves. The strength and viability of democracy is only carried by us who make out the people, the power base of government. If we don't understand democracy, if we don't live in a democratic way, considering every democratic value as evident and important and exercise those values in our daily life - from family to sports, work and interaction with each other and our government - we will lose out in democracy. We might still have enough freedom - cropped and pruned - but we will slowly lose our influence. The biggest danger is in that if people live in a good enough living standard they will not question the loss/absence of influence and power and not demand it. Ranging from some of the small rich countries in the Arabian Peninsula as UAE, countries like Singapore and to the US. People who live well enough to not protest are giving away their right to do so in lack of interest. Yes, we too in all parts of Europe have our share of democratic problems but not to the extent of non-European democracies. Yet. If we don't look up we will go down that path, something our EU must be all about. Democracy and the rights of the peoples of the Union.

Loss of democracy is not necessarily bad for a people. The benevolent dictatorship is the best system imaginable and a high living standard carrying cropped freedom and democracy is in line with that. But it's not what we want. It's not in our interests. The founding fathers of the US and Thomas Jefferson were bright people, and that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance is very true.

Now, only the strength of the democratic cultures we belong to can protect those rights and values, which brings us to aspects like the Mohammed imageries of Jyllandsposten and Lars Vilks. Set aside that they were made to provoke - and that Lars Vilks as a part of his artistry is a bit of a dick - they are representative for what we need to fight for. This is not limited to freedom of expression. Attacks on and conflicts with democratic values come constantly in many forms daily like those of business interests, corruption and politicians that work for their own interests, the bombardment of our minds of advertising and censorship of information and contorted journalism. It also comes in form of religious dogma. No religion has been a proponent of democracy through history. Faith alone is not a problem, but divine law is.

The problem with blanket statements of Muslims living in the west that they are militant, fundamentalist and dangerous are that it's not true. There are very dangerous Muslims out there, but they are clearly a minority. Our fight need to be together with the Muslims that live with us as a part of our country.

If Muslims wan't to pray to a god through Mecca with the Qur'an and the rosary, failing to see the idolatry in it, they must be able to do so freely. Subjecting Muslims to the same treatment as one accuses them of is not gentle, decent or in par with European values. As we accept Christian Swedes we must accept Muslim Swedes. As long as Muslims live under the same laws as everyone else in the country do, there is a future of integration. Democracy is a painful mistress. For some reason people almost never agree. That's what synthesis and compromise are there for.

There are always people bringing up but's, if's and maybe's around the most astounding issues. "What if hundreds of millions of Muslims poured into Europe?! We would be subjected to Sharia and oppressed in our own countries!" Two sides of fundamentalist proponents with their own version of the truth, each accusing the other one for having no moral. What is the future in that?

The exact same argument some people have about the Muslims are the ones that were spoken against the Jews. What do you want to do with the Muslims? Concentration camps? Throw every Muslim out of Europe? When did ethnic cleansing become decent? The Muslims are here to stay. If they are not welcomed into the society, society itself is to blame for conflict. Creating ghetto's was never a good idea.

 

[Michael Folkesson]

Maciamo

I think mainly the history of Russian oppression and atrocities in the Caucasus is the basis of their antagonism against Russia. It's not only oil from the Russian side, it's about the cohesion of the Russian federation as well. The break up of the Soviet Union brought Russia into a panic. Everything they took for granted crumbled. I remember the fear I saw in some people's eyes - when I lived in Moscow and St. Petersburg - while discussing secession of the Caucasus regions. There were speculations that the whole fabric of the country would break in the seams. One has to see the first Chechen war in the light of that and the Soviet break up. A war that destroyed the region, and paved the way for the second one.

This is a very, very small region with just over a million people. It's quite on the Kosovo level. The possible threat to the federation is not gone. If Chechnya goes, then it's quite likely that Dagestan and Ingushetia goes and the region falls apart, and then the gods only know what region will want to secede next. There are voices for increased independence from different oblasts in Russia. Even Kaliningrad has such movements. Chechnya is at the start of that seam that could unravel.

What Russia is doing in the f. soviet republics of Ukraine, Moldavia(Transnistria), and Georgia(Abkhazia and S.Ossetia) would never be accepted anywhere else. The threat to Europe is minimal, but we will be increasingly come into conflict with Russia and Russian interests as we enlarge the Union and in our relations with f. Soviet Republics and the Caucasus.

Nothing can justify the attack in Moscow, but it can be understood. I don't really think Chechen fight for independence is to be described as ungrateful. I am not sure about what they should pay gratitude to. But historical grievances are not anymore important to the solution for peaceful relations in the region than the were in Yugoslavia. One can dwell on and on about who did what, when and how and all that, but in the end it's only important what is in the interest of the peoples for the future. Maybe it's as a part of Russia, maybe not. Subdued by weapons they will never be Russian by heart. Question is how many times Russia will have to rebuild Grozny.