Elerond

They are not fleeing islam as a religion. They colonising and creating their own societies. You mean to say that most of them are fleeing war, persecution or poverty in their own countries and we don't let them to integrate to our society but instead we put them for years in centers where they have little to none daily interaction with main population. I would point out that tens of thousands of Muslim refugees are willing to convert to Christianity (although often motivated y hope that makes us to let them stay) Strange how middle eastern and north african muslims fail to integrate into western societies while the rest does even if you take into account the detriment policy of dumping anyone into the ghetto. Previously we invited Salman Rushdies to the west to live in freedom from tyranny, but last year the door was open for any jester fooling the lady border patrol officer that he suddenly wants to be christian and if you don't open the border for him, he and his pals will storm it, throw rocks at you or any other means necessary. It is strange how there are several (5) restaurants run by middle eastern and north african muslims just one kilometer radius from my home So well integrated that they are exporting the best back: http://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/cnn_finland_tops_list_of_countries_with_muslim_fighters_in_syria/7446816 The world would be better of by sending them all back, build a wall around them, wait a few hundred years, and open the door and hopefully something civilized will emerge from the other side. Perpetually importing people from regions that do nothing but destabilizing a society is simply not going to cut it. Better do it now in a civilized matter before creating the balkanisation begins the inevitable war begins. So 30 people went in Syria to be terrorists and nearly 1000 of them decided to make pizza and kebabs in Tampere.

They are not fleeing islam as a religion. They colonising and creating their own societies. You mean to say that most of them are fleeing war, persecution or poverty in their own countries and we don't let them to integrate to our society but instead we put them for years in centers where they have little to none daily interaction with main population. I would point out that tens of thousands of Muslim refugees are willing to convert to Christianity (although often motivated y hope that makes us to let them stay) Strange how middle eastern and north african muslims fail to integrate into western societies while the rest does even if you take into account the detriment policy of dumping anyone into the ghetto. Previously we invited Salman Rushdies to the west to live in freedom from tyranny, but last year the door was open for any jester fooling the lady border patrol officer that he suddenly wants to be christian and if you don't open the border for him, he and his pals will storm it, throw rocks at you or any other means necessary. It is strange how there are several (5) restaurants run by middle eastern and north african muslims just one kilometer radius from my home

Oh cmon, this is insulting. Our own countries shoot people trying to escape to Western world. I would say it was almost 0 people who get out of CCCP who wanted to create communism in the West. On contrary there are tons of Muslims in West who actually want to create sharia laws and caliphate inside of western world. Sharia laws are similar to ten commandments and laws in old testament, meaning that Muslims that don't live according to them are living in sin. There are lots of christian in western world that wants to make our countries laws more like laws in old testament, but that want alone don't make it become reality. And that is the fear that we somehow would suddenly accept Muslims code of morals instead of our own, and they would not and their children will not adopt our ethical codes and standards and assimilate them to their religious belief is the thing that currently drives lot of our policies and is one of the roots cause that drives resurgence extremist politics in main stream. In Finland we have over 100k people with Russian heritage and 70k of them speak Russia as their first language, big sunk of them are from Soviet times. In comparison there are 40k-65k Muslims in Finland. It is Muslims that are taking over our country according to our politicians. Not sure what are you saying by this. Also 10 commandments probably are not against most of secular laws in West, where Sharia sure is. Also I didn't heard that Christians are creating their own courts outside of regular secular courts. Like You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant (original translation slave), his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. Or Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. Thus you will say to Israel’s sons: “Yahweh your fathers’ deity, Abraham’s deity, Isaac’s deity, and Jacob’s deity – He has sent me to you;” This is My name to eternity, and this is My designation age (by) age. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain." And laws in old testament go even more against many of our laws. There are Christian religions that have their own courts. Like for example in Finland we have Laestadianism which is a conservative Lutheran revival movement started in Lapland in the middle of the 19th century. Which has their elder council that judge over its members and their members often don't even go in our regular secular courts when it comes to disputes between two members. And they aren't only Christian sect that has their own court system.

They are not fleeing islam as a religion. They colonising and creating their own societies. You mean to say that most of them are fleeing war, persecution or poverty in their own countries and we don't let them to integrate to our society but instead we put them for years in centers where they have little to none daily interaction with main population. I would point out that tens of thousands of Muslim refugees are willing to convert to Christianity (although often motivated y hope that makes us to let them stay)

Oh cmon, this is insulting. Our own countries shoot people trying to escape to Western world. I would say it was almost 0 people who get out of CCCP who wanted to create communism in the West. On contrary there are tons of Muslims in West who actually want to create sharia laws and caliphate inside of western world. Sharia laws are similar to ten commandments and laws in old testament, meaning that Muslims that don't live according to them are living in sin. There are lots of christian in western world that wants to make our countries laws more like laws in old testament, but that want alone don't make it become reality. And that is the fear that we somehow would suddenly accept Muslims code of morals instead of our own, and they would not and their children will not adopt our ethical codes and standards and assimilate them to their religious belief is the thing that currently drives lot of our policies and is one of the roots cause that drives resurgence extremist politics in main stream. In Finland we have over 100k people with Russian heritage and 70k of them speak Russia as their first language, big sunk of them are from Soviet times. In comparison there are 40k-65k Muslims in Finland. It is Muslims that are taking over our country according to our politicians.

https://youtu.be/xecEV4dSAXE Look from 21:19 forward

Fight against it like we fought against communism. Invite people in, promise them freedom and self control. It was communists that build wall to prevent people leaving their country not western people building wall to prevent people coming in from communistic regimes. Now days we fight more like authoritarians than people from the free world. Like people are saying that Muslims will take over our countries are same fear that communist had towards western people, it is wear that our way of living isn't appealing enough to people and outside philosophy will over run it if we don't protect our way philosophy even if it means to go against our own values and ideologies.

Some could say that there would be much less people immigrating if France had not conquered quite lot other countries in North Africa, Middle East and Asia. In the early 1960's France, like the UK, gave back all their colonies, there was no more occupation or Colonialism http://www.empathosnationenterprises.com/Consulate/EN-Library/Black-Studies/afindep.html So where do we draw the line where countries take responsibility for their own citizens, ensure good governance, stimulate their economies so there is less immigration? 100 years.....1000 years ? The line is where said action don't anymore have impact on people's lives. But France gave for lots of people in its colonies France citizenship, which is main reason why there is so many Muslims in France today. They had their assimilation policy where they teach people become French and then become French if it they didn't want to be French. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assimilation_(French_colonialism) Also France had law, passed in 1961 [article 21-19(5º)], that enabled people from former French territories to apply for immediate naturalisation, bypassing the normal five-year residency requirement for would-be French citizens. That was in effect until it was repealed (by article 82 of law 2006-911) on July 25, 2006 under the direction of Nicolas Sarkozy, who was then Minister of the Interior. So are we now criticizing France for trying to speed up the integration process from there former colonies or are you saying the integration was correct but the implementation was wrong? And what should they done differently in the 1960's-1980's that would have led to a different outcome nowadays where some of the French citizens from former colonies feel marginalized and turn to Islamic extremism and attack France itself ? There is no right or wrong, they are just things that effect in current situation in France regardless of do people like it or not. Because there is no changing past and ignoring and denying past don't help either. Current policies need to be made by taking account effects of past actions and look ways to make countries work in their current situations and not hoping some fairytale where past didn't happen.

Some could say that there would be much less people immigrating if France had not conquered quite lot other countries in North Africa, Middle East and Asia. In the early 1960's France, like the UK, gave back all their colonies, there was no more occupation or Colonialism http://www.empathosnationenterprises.com/Consulate/EN-Library/Black-Studies/afindep.html So where do we draw the line where countries take responsibility for their own citizens, ensure good governance, stimulate their economies so there is less immigration? 100 years.....1000 years ? The line is where said action don't anymore have impact on people's lives. But France gave for lots of people in its colonies France citizenship, which is main reason why there is so many Muslims in France today. They had their assimilation policy where they teach people become French and then become French if it they didn't want to be French. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assimilation_(French_colonialism) Also France had law, passed in 1961 [article 21-19(5º)], that enabled people from former French territories to apply for immediate naturalisation, bypassing the normal five-year residency requirement for would-be French citizens. That was in effect until it was repealed (by article 82 of law 2006-911) on July 25, 2006 under the direction of Nicolas Sarkozy, who was then Minister of the Interior.

They cut some of the content promised in stretch goals, like Italian localisation and mysterious companion The Toy. And to make matters worse they forgot/were too busy to communicate such cuts for backers until quite last moment.

Some could say that there would be much less people immigrating if France had not conquered quite lot other countries in North Africa, Middle East and Asia.

IIRC any conspicuous symbols are banned, crosses included -- if there were any. There are no crosses in French schools AFAIK. I mean that people could wear crosses in full view of everybody and school official didn't see that conspicuous, where things like hijabs of course were always ordered to be removed (but it is long time that I have last time read news about it).

Any examples of such laws? I would say France is an example of what happens when you cater to the minorities to the extreme. If you fulfill all the demands the demands will just grow and grow to the point you are not able to fulfill them. Then the violence starts and if you don't respond to violence but instead encourage and exuse it then it will escalate. Burka ban, ban for religious items in schools but not extending to crosses, and quite lot or regional/city ordinances to prevent building mosques, when mosques can be open etc.. Most of this were cancelled by courts, but they have caused protest, riots etc. in past 16 years. I would not say that Nicolas Sarkozy's policies for example are examples of catering minorities to extreme. But maybe I am wrong and he was very minority loving president.

France is excellent example what happens when you have millions of people in certain minority and then your politicians decide to get some populist points by picking said minority by creating laws and regulations that are designed to harass said minority. And now decade later said minority is full of people that resent majority of French people in such extent that they seem to be easy to incite to commit terrorist attacks against said majority.

Germany has had long time now law that forbids slandering heads of foreign states. This year they seem to try to abolish that law, but it is still in effect. One main reason for abolishing that law is probably this case.

This comment from the article's comments gives good indication why Trump don't need to care factualness of his tweets. His supporters don't just seem to give him benefit of doubt but they actually invent narratives in their head that Trump does only good things and everything else is conspiracy against him even if its is just linking and commenting tweets that Trump himself has made. "Katharine Dupre The reason you think the President is lying is because the Washington Post lies about what he is doing. Wake up and smell the coffee!" Some could say that it don't look that one could argue with Trump's supporters reasonable manner, because they don't believe in reason, but only in their own world view and everything else is wrong and bad.

They say that Times and National Geographic aren't write about same story, but I am not entirely convinced of that isn't the case

If I don't like game after couple hours I stop playing if I don't have before hand knowledge that it gets better after sometime. But these days I take quite little risk with games that I buy, as I seem to have quite little time to play games these days. Like I didn't even log 1000 hours last years all games combined.

Here somethings of some significance that happened in 1954

You mean same country that Trump chose to be his first country to align towards? It is OK for USA to reach agreements with Russia but not for Iran? Well that is not what happened, the sanctions against Russia havent been dropped so what agreements do you mean? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/trump-calls-putin-world-leaders/ Trump and Putin discuss stabilizing ties, Kremlin says CNN's Matthew Chance in Moscow said a Kremlin summary of the phone call talked about stabilizing the relationship between the two nations and several other subjects. Some of the other issues included restoring trade ties, international terrorism, the situations in Ukraine and the Korean Peninsula, and the coordination of military action against ISIS and other terrorist groups in Syria.

You mean same country that Trump chose to be his first country to align towards? It is OK for USA to reach agreements with Russia but not for Iran?

It is mind warming to see that all the super Christians and bible thumpers in US Senate and Congress are still willing stand behind Christian values like they are when it comes to subjects like marriage equality and having right to refuse service because of religious values

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/us/politics/trump-syrian-refugees.html All these countries have ISIS groups, so its a valid preventative measure, are you worried this making the USA look bad ? Also Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Malaysia and France have ISIS groups.

Because they are allies of USA and were just forward thinkers in policies that USA will establish?

It seem that this dangerous citizen of UK, but who is ex-Somalia fears that his return to US will also be denied https://www.facebook.com/MoFarahGold/posts/1369028299785195 Mo Farah On 1st January this year, Her Majesty The Queen made me a Knight of the Realm. On 27th January, President Donald Trump seems to have made me an alien. I am a British citizen who has lived in America for the past six years - working hard, contributing to society, paying my taxes and bringing up our four children in the place they now call home. Now, me and many others like me are being told that we may not be welcome. It’s deeply troubling that I will have to tell my children that Daddy might not be able to come home - to explain why the President has introduced a policy that comes from a place of ignorance and prejudice. I was welcomed into Britain from Somalia at eight years old and given the chance to succeed and realise my dreams. I have been proud to represent my country, win medals for the British people and receive the greatest honour of a knighthood. My story is an example of what can happen when you follow polices of compassion and understanding, not hate and isolation. EDIT: Removed alternative facts that slipped in. As Farah don't anymore have Somalian citizenship and he has not yet tried to enter to USA after the ban.