[Atilla]

(05-09-2013 07:22 AM)DjembaDjemba Wrote:  

Turkish women are solid. Very good quality of females, pity about the conservatism.

The majority of Turkish girls are conservative and wait for marriage to have sex, but there is a minority which isn’t at all. The Izmir area and tourist spots (Antalya, Bodrum, Marmaris) are you best bets, with Izmir having the most attractive of Turkish women. Plenty of foreign men have had quick sex with Turkish women before, including a number on this forum. Even if you don't get the Turkish flag, you’d enjoy the country and can work on a Plan B of the 30 million foreign tourists to Turkey each year, with the vast majority being from more sexually liberal European countries.

I didn't mean to make this even more off-topic, but this is a forum for banging foreign chicks, so it's appropriate.

[Cyr]

(05-09-2013 01:02 PM)iWin Wrote:  

Always absent in the context of sensationalistic and propagandic articles like this are the reason why Africans and Arabs are migrating to Europe. Quite simply it because Europeans have plundered the lands that those people have come from while simultaneously subverting grassroots movements and legitimate democratic processes in the name of exploitation of resources.

No one ever wants to mention neo-colonialism and undermining of socio-economic policies that leave those poor countries in ruin(ex. installing dictatorships, environmental ruin via multinationals, IMF/World Bank disastrous economic advice). Now obviously if you colonize a country and leave your cultural imprint you have established an everlasting link with those countries so it is only natural that the first place they look is where there are : a) better opportunities b)a common denominator like language. Europeans sound silly crying about "invasion" of their lands when they have only done that voraciously on other peoples soil since the beginning of time, while destroying everything in their wake from cultures to economies to entire populations.

Sure it is natural to feel threatened when foreign entities try to assimilate in your culture, but the thing is that Europeans would be in denial if they didn't acknowledge that they are complicit in this phenomenon. Europeans created these circumstances and now must live with them. By not giving people the right to create their own destinies you risk exactly what is happening.

iWin, I agree with you that the root of most of this mass immigration is western countries (mainly the US) fucking up people's home countries, but colonialism over 80 years ago by European countries has very little to do with the current wave of immigration. It is the current plundering for resources (eg uranium in somalia) which is responsible.
As well as this the problem isn't foreigners assimilating into Western culture but rather, them refusing to do so and instead resenting the countries which have offered them opportunities as the Boston bombings illustrate.

[Joga Bonito]

(05-09-2013 01:17 PM)Cyr Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 01:02 PM)iWin Wrote:  

Always absent in the context of sensationalistic and propagandic articles like this are the reason why Africans and Arabs are migrating to Europe. Quite simply it because Europeans have plundered the lands that those people have come from while simultaneously subverting grassroots movements and legitimate democratic processes in the name of exploitation of resources.

No one ever wants to mention neo-colonialism and undermining of socio-economic policies that leave those poor countries in ruin(ex. installing dictatorships, environmental ruin via multinationals, IMF/World Bank disastrous economic advice). Now obviously if you colonize a country and leave your cultural imprint you have established an everlasting link with those countries so it is only natural that the first place they look is where there are : a) better opportunities b)a common denominator like language. Europeans sound silly crying about "invasion" of their lands when they have only done that voraciously on other peoples soil since the beginning of time, while destroying everything in their wake from cultures to economies to entire populations.

Sure it is natural to feel threatened when foreign entities try to assimilate in your culture, but the thing is that Europeans would be in denial if they didn't acknowledge that they are complicit in this phenomenon. Europeans created these circumstances and now must live with them. By not giving people the right to create their own destinies you risk exactly what is happening.

iWin, I agree with you that the root of most of this mass immigration is western countries (mainly the US) fucking up people's home countries, but colonialism over 80 years ago by European countries has very little to do with the current wave of immigration. It is the current plundering for resources (eg uranium in somalia) which is responsible.
As well as this the problem isn't foreigners assimilating into Western culture but rather, them refusing to do so and instead resenting the countries which have offered them opportunities as the Boston bombings illustrate.

--

[Cyr]

(05-09-2013 01:52 PM)iWin Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 01:17 PM)Cyr Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 01:02 PM)iWin Wrote:  

Always absent in the context of sensationalistic and propagandic articles like this are the reason why Africans and Arabs are migrating to Europe. Quite simply it because Europeans have plundered the lands that those people have come from while simultaneously subverting grassroots movements and legitimate democratic processes in the name of exploitation of resources.

No one ever wants to mention neo-colonialism and undermining of socio-economic policies that leave those poor countries in ruin(ex. installing dictatorships, environmental ruin via multinationals, IMF/World Bank disastrous economic advice). Now obviously if you colonize a country and leave your cultural imprint you have established an everlasting link with those countries so it is only natural that the first place they look is where there are : a) better opportunities b)a common denominator like language. Europeans sound silly crying about "invasion" of their lands when they have only done that voraciously on other peoples soil since the beginning of time, while destroying everything in their wake from cultures to economies to entire populations.

Sure it is natural to feel threatened when foreign entities try to assimilate in your culture, but the thing is that Europeans would be in denial if they didn't acknowledge that they are complicit in this phenomenon. Europeans created these circumstances and now must live with them. By not giving people the right to create their own destinies you risk exactly what is happening.

iWin, I agree with you that the root of most of this mass immigration is western countries (mainly the US) fucking up people's home countries, but colonialism over 80 years ago by European countries has very little to do with the current wave of immigration. It is the current plundering for resources (eg uranium in somalia) which is responsible.
As well as this the problem isn't foreigners assimilating into Western culture but rather, them refusing to do so and instead resenting the countries which have offered them opportunities as the Boston bombings illustrate.

Gotta disagree with some of your post Cyr. The thing is that even though colonialism in the sense of physical occupancy is all but gone, European countries still engage in what is known as neo-colonialism where proxies and policy rather than all out military might are used to control developing countries. This commonly manifests itself in coup plots for example where European and US interests collude to install politicians that are sympathetic to Western interests.

An example is the Ivory Coast about 3 years ago where he incumbent president was arrested and sent to the ICC, by forces that were supported by the west. Who was then installed? A puppet that was educated in the West at Harvard and worked with World Bank, which is known for economically shackling developing countries and auctioning off their assets to foreign investors especially in Africa. IMO that's still very much colonialism.

I have a hard time believing most immigrants aren't incredibly grateful for the opportunities in their new land. The thing is that the actions of the minority tend to cast a blanket over an entire group of people, which of course is not accurate. Most learn the language, obey the laws, and remain respectful which counts as assimilation just same.

I'm not really disagreeing with you at all. I agree that the World Bank is almost as damaging as physical occupation, because it sells projects to poorer countries which they can never hope to fufill, and indebts them to the US. However I don't think that it's European countries which damages these areas so much as the US, which after all is the major decider of Western policy.
Also in retrospect, the Boston bombing was a poor example because it is an example of an outlier acting and has nothing in common with average immigrants, any more than when Americans go nuts. However (in England at least) many immigrants come to leech off the state and gain benefits, whilst not doing anything to assimilate into their new country's culture. I have nothing against Muslims and my grandfather Is even Iranian, but in my opinion, non-English speakers wearing a hijab is something which can change the character of an area, often negatively as the sense of community is eroded by people who have such drastically different culture that it can be difficult to assimilate successfully.

[Barron]

Reminded me of: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mHtq_QPUmw

Its the socialist system that breeds these problems in society. The one good thing that the US still has going for it is that if you don't work, life becomes fucking miserable as our welfare state is nothing like it is in EU. But that's slowly changing

[Blaster]

(05-09-2013 01:02 PM)iWin Wrote:  

Always absent in the context of sensationalistic and propagandic articles like this are the reason why Africans and Arabs are migrating to Europe.

Generalized anti-European blame is in fact commonplace and is precisely why there is a need for individual narratives. While real data and rational analysis are important too, those aren't possible when no one even thinks to look at the data. Stories like this are specifically to poke holes in the propaganda and inspire further research.

Quote:

Quite simply it because Europeans have plundered the lands that those people have come from while simultaneously subverting grassroots movements and legitimate democratic processes in the name of exploitation of resources.

You would condemn innocent Norwegian boys for crimes they have not committed.

Quote:

Now obviously if you colonize a country and leave your cultural imprint you have established an everlasting link with those countries so it is only natural that the first place they look is where there are : a) better opportunities b)a common denominator like language. Europeans sound silly crying about "invasion" of their lands when they have only done that voraciously on other peoples soil since the beginning of time, while destroying everything in their wake from cultures to economies to entire populations.

In other words: suck it up, assholes, you have it coming to you. This is sweet vengeance. There will be no compromise and no attempt to consider alternatives.

Quote:

Sure it is natural to feel threatened when foreign entities try to assimilate in your culture, but the thing is that Europeans would be in denial if they didn't acknowledge that they are complicit in this phenomenon.

They're not trying to assimilate. That's the problem. Or more accurately-- among immigrants not trying to assimilate a substantial number are aggressive and violent, and enjoy a strong network of support among their communities in opposition to the state.

Quote:

Europeans created these circumstances and now must live with them.

So you would rather watch them suffer, gloating at their misfortunes, rather than consider the possibility of compromise. Rather than see if there's a better way for these different cultures to live together, you'd continue to preach the values of ethnic blame, ethnic guilt, and ethnic vengeance. Meanwhile you'd ignore plenty of the ethnic whites in power who remain entirely unaffected by their idealism.

[Blaster]

Quote:

I have a hard time believing most immigrants aren't incredibly grateful for the opportunities in their new land. The thing is that the actions of the minority tend to cast a blanket over an entire group of people, which of course is not accurate. Most learn the language, obey the laws, and remain respectful which counts as assimilation just same.

Of course you are probably right, but it's important to make those points without relying on ethnic guilt, blame and vengeance to make your point. Step one is not to invalidate the narratives in the article (unless they are in fact invalid for reasons such as they aren't true) by saying "Europeans did this" and "Europeans did that" and therefore they deserve it.

[Joga Bonito]

(05-09-2013 03:05 PM)Blaster Wrote:  

Quote:

I have a hard time believing most immigrants aren't incredibly grateful for the opportunities in their new land. The thing is that the actions of the minority tend to cast a blanket over an entire group of people, which of course is not accurate. Most learn the language, obey the laws, and remain respectful which counts as assimilation just same.

Of course you are probably right, but it's important to make those points without relying on ethnic guilt, blame and vengeance to make your point. Step one is not to invalidate the narratives in the article (unless they are in fact invalid for reasons such as they aren't true) by saying "Europeans did this" and "Europeans did that" and therefore they deserve it.

--

[Blaster]

Quote:

--

Right, that's the main problem with your post. You changed the frame. Instead of discussing the article or anything directly related to it, you made a vague dismissive reference to "articles like this" and then proceeded to talk about European guilt as if it was relevant.

What you call hyperbole and getting "sensitive" was simply changing the frame, which was hopelessly burdened with meaningless generalizations. "European" for example. If you want to start a topic with generalizations that ridiculously broad, don't do it as a pretense to counter-argument of an article about a very specific situation.

Quote:

--

That's the general idea of the article, although there are more details. In other words: it has nothing to do with European colonialism.

[Joga Bonito]

(05-09-2013 06:01 PM)Blaster Wrote:  

Quote:

--

Right, that's the main problem with your post. You changed the frame. Instead of discussing the article or anything directly related to it, you made a vague dismissive reference to "articles like this" and then proceeded to talk about European guilt as if it was relevant.

What you call hyperbole and getting "sensitive" was simply changing the frame, which was hopelessly burdened with meaningless generalizations. "European" for example. If you want to start a topic with generalizations that ridiculously broad, don't do it as a pretense to counter-argument of an article about a very specific situation.

Quote:

--

That's the general idea of the article, although there are more details. In other words: it has nothing to do with European colonialism.

--

[JimNortonFan]

Step 1: Bring in immigrants out of guilt

Step 2: Lock immigrants out of education and jobs

Step 3: Out of guilt, put immigrants on welfare

Step 4?

[SpiderKing]

(05-09-2013 06:32 PM)JimNortonFan Wrote:  

Step 1: Bring in immigrants out of guilt

Step 2: Lock immigrants out of education and jobs

Step 3: Out of guilt, put immigrants on welfare

Step 4?

Step 4: grant amnesty + citizenship + more welfare = free votes?

[Blaster]

iWin Wrote:

The thread title alludes to immigration in Europe which is very obvious.

Had your post been merely a case against the thread title, which is not the actual title of the article, I probably would not have bothered to respond. I agree with that. The "invasion of Europe" theme is not supported by the article. Additionally, the site where I first read this article's translation has a blatantly anti-Muslim agenda. The assertion that the article is being pushed by activists with anti-immigration and anti-Muslim agendas is certainly true. I don't disagree with that either.

But the original publisher of the article appears to be a financial newspaper. As best I can tell it's like a Wall Street Journal, Forbes, or Business Insider. It's notable, supposedly, for being one of the only major publications in Norway that does not receive state funding. There's a claim that it's the only newspaper willing to publish this perspective. And again, the title of the article says nothing about a general invasion of Europe by immigrants. The article is specifically drawing attention to one region of Norway and the particular problems there, which they claim are ignored by the rest of the country.

Quote:

You have yet to refute anything I say, but rather would like to engage in semantics.

Most of what you've written is not worth refuting. My point is not that your generalizations are wrong but that they are irrelevant*. "Engaging in semantics" as you call it is necessary because the language you have chosen to make your argument is vague. Specification of that language will ultimately make clear the disconnect between your argument and the article's.


*and, taken to extremes, very divisive to the extent that it encourages blame, guilt, and vague punishments for historical wrongs.

Quote:

This is very much due in part to European colonialism that is a fact.

That assertion is arguable but more importantly it's irrelevant.

Either the experiences of the boys in the article can be generalized to represent a social problem for Norway or they can't. If they are not rare scenarios that can be blamed more on the boys themselves than the environment they're stuck with, then you decide whether to do something about it or not. Maybe it means increasing police presence in the relevant neighborhoods. Maybe it means implementing stricter or biased immigration policies. Maybe it means changing school policies that punish kids for fighting back. Maybe it means implementing policies that better facilitate integration and social mobility. There are any number of potential solutions that could be discussed. The authors of the article undoubtedly have favored solutions but it's not necessary to accept those entirely in order to derive value from their research.

More importantly: none of those discussions should start out by discussing the historical colonization practices of Europe. Especially colonization practices of countries-that-are-not-Norway. They're simply not relevant.

Quote:

Its clear that this article is thinly veiled propaganda under the guise of events(bullying) that would happen with or without immigrants and that's why it is BS. A 2-year old could figure that out.

That is not clear. Although it could be made more clear with the right arguments and research, it's unlikely any of those arguments would involve nonspecific reference to European colonization.

[Duke Castile]

These people are going to places like Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Sweden Et Al because of the cushy welfare breaks. They have a great time there because of elitist pc liberal attitudes and the general lack of community among natives who aren't used to a bunch of savages or how to deal with them. They recognize one thing, overwhelming force. Anything else is perceived as weak precisely because it IS weak. Reasoning with savages on why you shouldn't run around in packs beating up people outside your religion is fucking retarded.

Blaming Europe or America is also completely wrong.

You guys act like these countries were populated by civilized gentlemen when in fact, they were always hell holes and now they are turning Europe and other places into them.

BECAUSE THEY CAN

Meanwhile in Ghana for example it's the Chinese doing the plundering.

It's not hard to figure out the reason for the sympathetic statements for why it's "understandable" that these people should run amok. You're either one of the liberals that's so far removed from reality that enables this sort of thing or you're a Muslim that is participating in the agenda.

[Cyr]

(05-10-2013 12:08 AM)Fisto Wrote:  

These people are going to places like Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Sweden Et Al because of the cushy welfare breaks. They have a great time there because of elitist pc liberal attitudes and the general lack of community among natives who aren't used to a bunch of savages or how to deal with them. They recognize one thing, overwhelming force. Anything else is perceived as weak precisely because it IS weak. Reasoning with savages on why you shouldn't run around in packs beating up people outside your religion is fucking retarded.

Blaming Europe or America is also completely wrong.

You guys act like these countries were populated by civilized gentlemen when in fact, they were always hell holes and now they are turning Europe and other places into them.

BECAUSE THEY CAN

Meanwhile in Ghana for example it's the Chinese doing the plundering.

It's not hard to figure out the reason for the sympathetic statements for why it's "understandable" that these people should run amok. You're either one of the liberals that's so far removed from reality that enables this sort of thing or you're a Muslim that is participating in the agenda.

This is very true. Although China/ the West have arguably been preventing these countries from developing, there has not been a sudden decline in any of these countres. Rather they have always had a different value system to the West and extremists, but now these are being foisted onto Europe. Why would a muslim woman/ family (who don't speak English) want to go to Norway if they didnt see that the welfare state there was ripe for the taking. Who will give a job to non English speakers who speak a language that almost no Norweigan people do? One of the main problens with this is that like it or noy the muslims cannot get a job and this leach off the state. Before this mass immigration, Scandanavian countries operated very successful welfare states where everyone put into the system and everyone benefitted from it but this has now been undone.

[Teedub]

The colonization thing might hold true for UK/USA and the large Euro powers. However, I don't recall Norway colonizing anywhere, except perhaps Northern Europe via the vikings. No, the only thing Norway have done wrong is to embrace 'tolerance' and 'diversity' because of collective ethnic guilt because of actions of other white people. Absolutely treacherous of their elites to have done that to their own people.

[Arado]

Let's see what happens 10-15 years down the line when these colonial victim countries are plundered by China - which doesn't even pretend to give a shit about the natives and their development. Then cry me a river when they want Western Development organizations to return.

[KorbenDallas]

If you actually read the debate between Blaster and IWIN, Blaster schools IWIN completely. IWIN's response to innocent ethnic Norwegian young men who receive nothing from their governments but contempt, nothing from their communities except vicious attacks from foreigners, is European countries are bad and are colonizers.

The whole point of the article is how whites are all lumped into, "evil white privileged bullies" when in reality most whites are not born into the superclass that is actively engaging in the plundering, and are suffering the consequences of elitist policy just as the rest of the world is. IWIN, in my opinion, probably did not even read the article, but rather used what content he thought was in it to argue that evil ethnic norwegians had it coming because Europe is engaging in Neo-colonialsim. Which, is true on a certain level among the governments of Europe, but blaming the kids getting attacked in Norway just for being Norwegian is similar to feminists shrieking male privilege bullshit about all men, when, in fact, everyone on here knows life for men is not always easy.

[Lemmo]

(05-10-2013 04:06 AM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  

If you actually read the debate between Blaster and IWIN, Blaster schools IWIN completely. IWIN's response to innocent ethnic Norwegian young men who receive nothing from their governments but contempt, nothing from their communities except vicious attacks from foreigners, is European countries are bad and are colonizers.

The whole point of the article is how whites are all lumped into, "evil white privileged bullies" when in reality most whites are not born into the superclass that is actively engaging in the plundering, and are suffering the consequences of elitist policy just as the rest of the world is. IWIN, in my opinion, probably did not even read the article, but rather used what content he thought was in it to argue that evil ethnic norwegians had it coming because Europe is engaging in Neo-colonialsim. Which, is true on a certain level among the governments of Europe, but blaming the kids getting attacked in Norway just for being Norwegian is similar to feminists shrieking male privilege bullshit about all men, when, in fact, everyone on here knows life for men is not always easy.

Well, even if you make the huge leap of blaming 3rd world poverty and backwardness on European colonialism, it adds nothing to a discussion of whether European countries should let these people immigrate. It just sounds like the envious cheering the misfortune of the once powerful. Japan had a short lived empire but has largely been successful at keeping out 3rd world migrants (at least compared to the West).

[Samseau]

(05-08-2013 08:44 AM)j r Wrote:  

According to this, Norway is IRT paradise. That sounds suspect. One thing that I've noticed about white nationalists is that they all seem to assume that white woman have suddenly developed a brown fetish.

Actually, white women do go for these Islamic men because they can beat and intimidate these women with zero fear of repercussion from the state. The state, and it's PC bullshit, will ignore these crimes in fear of looking racist.

I talked about how Tamerlane was charged with domestic violence and yet was let go, and his wife still took him:

http://www.returnofkings.com/9968/the-am...l-time-low

Then Roosh validated my analysis when he provided me with this link showing that 75 percent of all Islamic converts each year are overwhelmingly women:

http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/s...ting-islam

The rulers of white countries are literally betraying their own population in order to maintain control over it.

[Therapsid]

Anyone else bored of white people who abandoned religion and the family complaining about foreigners who still uphold their religion and family traditions?

If all you're left with of European culture is your skin tone and some banal commitment to liberal democracy (the latter by definition can be claimed by anyone of any ethnic group) you've already lost.

Anyway, it's time people stopped being scared and started asking who the "rulers of white countries" really are.

[bojangles]

(05-10-2013 06:30 AM)Lemmo Wrote:  

(05-10-2013 04:06 AM)KorbenDallas Wrote:  

If you actually read the debate between Blaster and IWIN, Blaster schools IWIN completely. IWIN's response to innocent ethnic Norwegian young men who receive nothing from their governments but contempt, nothing from their communities except vicious attacks from foreigners, is European countries are bad and are colonizers.

The whole point of the article is how whites are all lumped into, "evil white privileged bullies" when in reality most whites are not born into the superclass that is actively engaging in the plundering, and are suffering the consequences of elitist policy just as the rest of the world is. IWIN, in my opinion, probably did not even read the article, but rather used what content he thought was in it to argue that evil ethnic norwegians had it coming because Europe is engaging in Neo-colonialsim. Which, is true on a certain level among the governments of Europe, but blaming the kids getting attacked in Norway just for being Norwegian is similar to feminists shrieking male privilege bullshit about all men, when, in fact, everyone on here knows life for men is not always easy.

Well, even if you make the huge leap of blaming 3rd world poverty and backwardness on European colonialism, it adds nothing to a discussion of whether European countries should let these people immigrate. It just sounds like the envious cheering the misfortune of the once powerful. Japan had a short lived empire but has largely been successful at keeping out 3rd world migrants (at least compared to the West).

Surely the Japan thing is down to the rest of East Asia absolutely hating the fuck out of them

[Samseau]

(05-10-2013 07:49 AM)Therapsid Wrote:  

Anyway, it's time people stopped being scared and started asking who the "rulers of white countries" really are.

I know you're hinting at the Jews, because they're the ones who own the media, but do you really believe they can be stopped? The damage done by the Jews pushing the "multicultural" and "mass immigration" agenda has been so severe and complete that even if we deported every Jew today, there would still be a million non-Jews willing to uphold the cause.

The rulers of the whites are simply the richest men, who are generally Jews today but could be anyone in 50 years from now.

[Blaster]

(05-10-2013 07:49 AM)Therapsid Wrote:  

Anyone else bored of white people who abandoned religion and the family complaining about foreigners who still uphold their religion and family traditions?

Not me. I think it's interesting.

Quote:

If all you're left with of European culture is your skin tone and some banal commitment to liberal democracy (the latter by definition can be claimed by anyone of any ethnic group) you've already lost.

There are plenty of other European cultural values, though not all of them are shared by every nation.

[Therapsid]

(05-10-2013 08:05 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

(05-10-2013 07:49 AM)Therapsid Wrote:  

Anyway, it's time people stopped being scared and started asking who the "rulers of white countries" really are.

I know you're hinting at the Jews, because they're the ones who own the media, but do you really believe they can be stopped? The damage done by the Jews pushing the "multicultural" and "mass immigration" agenda has been so severe and complete that even if we deported every Jew today, there would still be a million non-Jews willing to uphold the cause.

The rulers of the whites are simply the richest men, who are generally Jews today but could be anyone in 50 years from now.

The difference between Jews and other rich white people is simply that, in the end, they identify with their core group - other Jews - including Jews in other countries, more than they do with their own nation.

It sounds evil or conspiratorial to say it given 20th century history, but then again, virtually every stereotype has a basis in fact. We know this regarding stereotypes for black, Arab, white, Chinese people, etc. We know what the Indian race troll is about. There's a reason for this age old stereotype as well.

Or to put it another way, if rich people are already inclined to be insulated from their nations and to be cosmopolitan minded, this is much more the case for an ethnic minority which already views its history in terms of a diaspora, stories about a Chosen People, covenant with God, and even in secular terms, a belief in their unique intelligence.

I was surprised to find out that even in European nations where Jews make up much less than 1% of the population, they still dominate the major newspapers and media conglomerates. Now, atribute that to superior IQ, work ethic, or whatever you will. But, in the end I think what makes it pernicious is that we're not allowed to talk about it. Here in the U.S. you'll only get your career ruined for asking these questions, but in many of these countries you can be sent to prison.

Anyway, I find it interesting that you have prominent Jewish personalities on both sides of the Islam and Muslim immigration debate. For example, the term "Eurabia" to describe the Islamization of Europe was coined by an Egyptian Jew Gisele Littman, i.e. Bat Ye'or. In other words, by a woman who most of us at first glance would call an Arab herself. Neocons and prominent atheists like Sam Harris are also disproportionately Jewish.

But then of course, the leading voices condemning the far-right and in favor of multiculturalism are also Jewish. In fact, "cultural Marxism" wouldn't exist without, of course, Marx, and leading Jewish representatives of the Frankfurt School like Adorno, Marcuse, Horkheimer, Benjamin, etc.

I tend to see this as an example of playing both sides of the field and analogous to the sort of financial chicanery that led to the 2008 economic meltdown. Heads I win, tails you lose, so to speak.