Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Edl The Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
While Europe Slept - A Good Book?
Topic Started: Oct 6 2009, 10:14 PM (339 Views)
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

The book "While Europe Slept" by Bruce Bawer is a worthwhile read. The book is very well written, and Bawer tackles a subject close to his heart. As an American coming to live in Europe some years ago now, he was struck by the way Islamists had used Western society in order to advance their own aganda. After seeing the murder of Theo van Gogh, and the attempts to intimidate, murder, and sue people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Robert Redeker, Geert Wilders, Oriani Fallaci, Michel Houellebecq and Salman Rushdie, it's as plan as the nose on Arsene Wenger's face that Islam has wormed its way into the hearts and minds of our political elite. These are people who want to keep us all asleep, as they protect those would do us harm, and do harm to those who would protect us. Bruce Bawer's book is a real wake-up call. Bawer has also written some great articles over the years. Just Google him and see ...
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Land of my Fathes
Member Avatar
Patriot
I'm not buying this book because I applied the "Amazon test" to it, looking at the worst reviews in both the US Amazon and the UK Amazon and then looking at the best reviews. I found that the faults identified in the 1-star reviews were much the same as the strengths identified in the 5-star reviews.

To see the test at work, here's an example. One of the 2-star reviews claims that many of the facts in the book cannot be true eg Bawer says that Switzerland is now 40% Muslims, when the official figure is 5%. The "best recommended" American 5-star review (LINK) says: "The information he brilliantly provided often left me with my jaw hanging, wondering, "That's really what they think over there?" I learned an awful lot in the short time it took to read this book." In other words, the book appealed to someone who is probably gullible, and lots of members of the public thought that was a good review! You don't want to be labelled gullible - or do you?

Note - I expect to agree with much of what Bawer says about European Muslims - but I apply the test to discover if I'll believe or respect his work. When my test tells me the book probably appeals to the gullible, then it's probably propaganda. I want a book that challenges my prejudices - I don't need help reinforcing my beliefs!

Now, McAvelly has a big advantage over me, he's got a copy of the book (I suspect he's wasted his money). McAvelly needs to demonstrate that the book is not propaganda, he could start by telling us that Bawer does not say "Switzerland is 40% Muslim", or at least provide the context and prove Bawer has not been lying. (Or prove that the figure is true - but I'd really be dumbfounded if it is).

If it's really true that Bawer has lied to us about Switzerland then it's game-over and we can agree that the book is a waste of money. Here's a story (LINK) in the Times about a left-wing film director who has been attacked by his own supporters for maybe lying to them. If they can do it, then so can we. Not everyone who criticises Muslims and governments in Europe deserves our support.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
"I'm not buying this book ..." - LofmyFat

Then nothing you say about it matters.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Land of my Fathes
Member Avatar
Patriot
Nick McAvelly
Oct 7 2009, 01:43 PM
Quote:
 
"I'm not buying this book ..." - LofmyFat
Then nothing you say about it matters.
I'm sure we agree that anything you or I say about "Mein Kampf" doesn't matter either, since neither of us have a copy.

But there's a difference, because buying a copy of "Mein Kampf" doesn't support the ideology behind it. Whereas buying Bawer's book encourages a man who either despises us, or at least, encourages others to despise us. Patriotic Americans are naturally keen to do this - are you one of them?

I've been told that "Mein Kampf" is hugely popular in the Muslim world, though when I did a quick google, it seemed as if it's notable as a best-seller only in India.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

Have you heard yourself? You're hilarious, you really are. You invent a "test" which you later admit is your test, which you just made up off the top of your head, then spout off a load of nonsense, and then want other people to agree with you. What a hoot!

I mean your ridiculous attempt at an argument by analogy - that's a real peach. One for the ages, that one. You are right when you say "But there's a difference." A rather significant one which completely undermines your attempt at an argument by analogy. We all know enough about old Adolf throught his deeds to make a character judgement about him without reading what he wrote in prison. Isn't that so? Whereas you're trying to make judgements about an author based on ... well on nothing much of anything. The fact that he's American, and some fabulous "test" that has no importance at all outside your own imagination. What will you come up with next?

Keep it up, laomyfat!
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Elite Defender
Member Avatar
Member
It's like saying "don't worry the glass of water only has 1% of cyanide in it."

Poison is poison and terror is terror.

Regards

Elite
Let us stand united against the coming storm and steel ourselves to the night.

Click Here For An Important Message - Yes I am a Whitey.

Be Wary Of The Traitor & Callaborator.

Click Here To Make A Donation To The EDL - Thank You


Sir Nicholas Winton
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Land of my Fathes
Member Avatar
Patriot
Nick McAvelly
Oct 7 2009, 03:55 PM
The fact that he's American, and some fabulous "test" that has no importance at all outside your own imagination. What will you come up with next?
He's an American who writes for other Americans, persuading them to despise Europeans - and you hope he profits from doing so.

And he may lie about us - perhaps you approve of that too.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

What colour is the sky in your world?
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

Land of my Fathes
Oct 7 2009, 04:34 PM
Nick McAvelly
Oct 7 2009, 03:55 PM
The fact that he's American, and some fabulous "test" that has no importance at all outside your own imagination. What will you come up with next?
He's an American who writes for other Americans, persuading them to despise Europeans - and you hope he profits from doing so.

And he may lie about us - perhaps you approve of that too.
Please try to bring something of substance to the table.

Making assumptions about someone based solely on their race, and then criticising them based on those assumptions - or as you call them, your "suspicions" - is simply racist thought, and that carries no weight here.

Perhaps you'd like to try to substantiate your "suspicions" about Mr. Bawer, who has lived in Europe for many years now, secretly (and in a way known only to you) "despising" Europe. Just a little logical point here, which you might want to take on board: if you want anyone to take your "suspicions" about what someone has written at all seriously, then you really need to actually read it yourself first. Read first, comment on what you've read second. You see how that works?

But going all high about what someone might have written, what they may have said, or seem to have written - when you don't know what they've written, because you've never read any of it - well, all that sort of thing does is makes you look like an ignorant twit, who can't think rationally.

Of course if you want to keep that up, it's your affair. I'm sure you'll find plenty people to laugh at you, if that's what gives you a warm fuzzy feeling in your bed at night. But no one's ever going to take you seriously.

Just so you know.
Edited by Nick McAvelly, Oct 7 2009, 05:04 PM.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
madeinengland
No Avatar

You have both raised good points so why do you choose to argue like children? From a neutral perspective:

1. LOMF made a GOOD point about the need to make sure this book is not just propaganda. If the author is making outlandish claims that cannot be supported by the evidence... then reading the book is going to be counter-productive.

2. NickMcA made a good point about the fact that LOMF seems to have some kind of chip on his shoulder regarding Americans and/or this author in particular. LOMF made a great point, but did it in a way that was unnecessarily condescending.

I'm sure you would both find common ground over a pint of beer so why let the anonymity of the internet make you into enemies?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Land of my Fathes
Member Avatar
Patriot
I posted another question to try and discover whether there are obvious lies in this book and then thought better of it.
Edited by Land of my Fathes, Oct 7 2009, 05:43 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

madeinengland
Oct 7 2009, 05:22 PM
You have both raised good points so why do you choose to argue like children? From a neutral perspective:

1. LOMF made a GOOD point about the need to make sure this book is not just propaganda. If the author is making outlandish claims that cannot be supported by the evidence... then reading the book is going to be counter-productive.

2. NickMcA made a good point about the fact that LOMF seems to have some kind of chip on his shoulder regarding Americans and/or this author in particular. LOMF made a great point, but did it in a way that was unnecessarily condescending.

I'm sure you would both find common ground over a pint of beer so why let the anonymity of the internet make you into enemies?
I don't consider anyone on here an "enemy" - it's wrong to say that. And thinking that anonimity has anything to do with anyone arguing against the rubbish in some of LOMF's posts, or pointing out his racist thinking? That' wrong too. The rubbish in LOMF's posts, together with the way he's behaved in perfect accordance with his own definition of racism - those deserve to be commented on, it makes no difference whether you have a pint in front of you, or a Sony VAIO.

So, back on topic: The best way to form your own opinion about the book in question is to read it - obviously.

Which LOMF hasn't bothered to do.

Bawer has also written many articles for many magazines. Easily Googled. He also has a blog, I think, called evening drinks in Oslo or something like that ... here's his main website. You can access some of his older articles there too. Well worth a browse ...

You'll notice btw that some of Bawer's articles are written in Norwegian. According to LOMF, Mr. Bawer "despises" Europe so much, he left his life in America behind, moved to Europe, made the effort to learn Norwegian, and he's stayed there ever since!
Edited by Nick McAvelly, Oct 7 2009, 05:48 PM.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

Land of my Fathes
Oct 7 2009, 05:41 PM
I posted another question to try and discover whether there are obvious lies in this book and then thought better of it.
If you want to know what's in the book, try reading it.

Yes, it really is that simple.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Land of my Fathes
Member Avatar
Patriot
Nick McAvelly
Oct 7 2009, 05:49 PM
If you want to know what's in the book, try reading it. Yes, it really is that simple.
Would I then know whether it's full of lies, as you presumably know but are not telling us?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

Or hard truths. Read it and see.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nemisis123456
Member Avatar
Infidel
Nick McAvelly
Oct 7 2009, 01:43 PM
Quote:
 
"I'm not buying this book ..." - LofmyFat

Then nothing you say about it matters.
Nick with all due respect LOMF made a valid point if the assertion is true.

You see if an author makes a claim then that claim MUST be validated, if not then the author is simply "exaggerating" the truth or making things up as he goes along. The worst case would be that hes been willingly deceptive, thats a bad move as it loses credibility, however one must stress that one mistake doesnt altogether discredit any other points made as they should be put under scrutiny as well to test the validity on their own merits (or not as the case may be).

Any author can be exposed for illogical inconsistencies or blatant fallacies. Stick to the truth and you wont get discredited. Its a simple rule of thumb, people can and will investigate claims to see if they are true so im interested if this claim is true or not.

Can you elaborate on this point please?

Cheers
Posted Image


AFDL Supporting True EDL


"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

Of course. I know that and you know that. The problem here is that LOMF either isn't interested in doing the necessary research, then putting together a meaningful argument. Or else he simply can't do it.

If LOMF or anyone else wants to comment on any specific points made in Bawer's book - or anyone else's book - then all that LOMF has to do is to provide an exact quote, make sure it's in the correct context, say whether the author was simply making an assertion, or if they were saying that someone else had made that assertion. If it's the the latter, then LOMF needs to say who that was, then check to see what they said and in what context it was said. Then make a judgment about those specific lines of text in Bawer's book. Then, as you say, go on and deal with the rest of the book.

Of course this entails actually reading the book first. LOMF hasn't done that. Some method of evaluating someone's work he's using, eh? Make an assertion about an author's work based on the author's race. That and some nonsense about a "test" that he makes up as he goes along. Hardly rigorous academic standards! Why should anyone take any assertion that is based on such methodology seriously? Can you elaborate on this point please? Cheers.

I wonder why it is that LOMF comes on to a forum like this, and spends so much time using such shabby methods to try to persuade others not to read the work of people like Robert Spencer or Bruce Bawer?

I'll ask you what I asked LOMF. He made assumptions about someone based on their race, then criticised them based on those assumptions. Do you think that's racist?
Edited by Nick McAvelly, Oct 8 2009, 07:57 AM.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Land of my Fathes
Member Avatar
Patriot
Nick McAvelly
Oct 8 2009, 07:34 AM
I wonder why it is that LOMF comes on to a forum like this, and spends so much time using such shabby methods to try to persuade others not to read the work of people like Robert Spencer or Bruce Bawer?
Stop wriggling. The original comment was this one from 72v I reccommended a book a while ago, a scathing critique on Islam in Europe, called "While Europe Slept". That book was written by a gay man who basically thinks the same as us, that it's bizarre that so-called liberals defend Muslims when they are in fact against every liberal stance we have..... and I congratulated 72V for both selecting a favourite argument to be aired and describing the situation/POV of the author. 72V proved himself a credit to the Forum.

Then I produced a detailed reason for not rating this book very highly, you can see it at (LINK)

Then I found claims that (the few) statistics Bawer uses are untrustworthy, including the claim that Switzerland is 40% Muslim.

Your failure even to confirm or deny the statistic is in the book will lead most people to conclude that it was written for the gullible. Even if my argument were weak and didn't convince the reader that the book is a waste of money, your aggressive lack of argument will do so!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

Keep it up, LOMF. You're quite entertaining. Your "detailed" reason for not rating the book highly was that it was written by an American, and according to you, Americans' tendency to extremism and partisan hatred made them a poor judge of Europeans. You did provide more a more detailed explanation of your own thought processes when you defined racism for us:

EDL
Oct 2 2009, 12:15 AM
What is the definition of the word "Racist" these days?

Quote:
 
You're a racist if you put people into groups based on their origins (widely defined) and you claim that certain unpleasant behaviours is typical of that group. - LMOF


You claimed that buying Bawer's book encourages a man who either despises us, or at least, encourages others to despise us. Patriotic Americans, you asserted, are naturally keen to do this. You then clarified your thinking and informed us that Mr. Bawer is an American who writes for other Americans, persuading them to despise Europeans.

In short, you put an individual who you have never met and do not know into a group based on his origins (widely defined) and then claimed that certain unpleasant behaviours is typical of that group. You acted in perfect accordance with your own definition of racism.

Didn't you?

I pointed out to you that your claim that Mr. Bawer despises Europeans and wishes Americans to do likewise is not supported by reality, for Mr. Bawer left America to live in Europe more than ten years ago. He settled in Norway, and went to the trouble of learning Norwegian. Not an easy language to learn, apparently. What's more, Bawer articles deal extensively with European issues, quite a few are written in Norwegian, and there is no reason to believe he does not wish Europeans to read his work. (Think about it. If one wished to attract an American audience, then one wouldn't write in Norwegian.) Your strange claim about the author's intentions simply does not stand up to scrutiny.

Go back and read the previous post. If you wish to comment on a specific assertion made by an author, you must provide an accurate quote, and it must be put in the proper context. You must find out if the author has simply made an assertion, or if he (or she) is referring to what someone else has said. If it's the latter, then you must find out what the author's source actually said, and put that in its proper context too. Then you may make a meaningful comment about those specific lines of text in the book in question. Once you've done that then you need to deal with the rest of the book. That's all you have to do.

Can you even do that? You'll need to start by actually reading the book you wish to discuss, of course. As for your childish assertion that it's up to me, or anyone else, to disprove your claim that the book is, or might be, "propoganda" - No. If you're making the claim, then the burden of proof is on you to support your claim. (As I just explained.) As for trying to say that someone failing to disprove any of your claims means that your claims are true - that's what's called a fallacy, my boy. An argument from ignorance. Here's a little quote for you:

Quote:
 
The argument ad ignorantiam (from ignorance) is the mistake that is committed when it is argued that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proved false, or that it is false because it has not been proved true. (Copi & Cohen, 11th Ed., Prentice Hall, p.l 139)


That's another book you might want to read btw.. It'd do you good.
Edited by Nick McAvelly, Oct 8 2009, 10:29 AM.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nemisis123456
Member Avatar
Infidel
Nick McAvelly
Oct 8 2009, 07:34 AM
Of course. I know that and you know that. The problem here is that LOMF either isn't interested in doing the necessary research, then putting together a meaningful argument. Or else he simply can't do it.

If LOMF or anyone else wants to comment on any specific points made in Bawer's book - or anyone else's book - then all that LOMF has to do is to provide an exact quote, make sure it's in the correct context, say whether the author was simply making an assertion, or if they were saying that someone else had made that assertion. If it's the the latter, then LOMF needs to say who that was, then check to see what they said and in what context it was said. Then make a judgment about those specific lines of text in Bawer's book. Then, as you say, go on and deal with the rest of the book.

Of course this entails actually reading the book first. LOMF hasn't done that. Some method of evaluating someone's work he's using, eh? Make an assertion about an author's work based on the author's race. That and some nonsense about a "test" that he makes up as he goes along. Hardly rigorous academic standards! Why should anyone take any assertion that is based on such methodology seriously? Can you elaborate on this point please? Cheers.

I wonder why it is that LOMF comes on to a forum like this, and spends so much time using such shabby methods to try to persuade others not to read the work of people like Robert Spencer or Bruce Bawer?

I'll ask you what I asked LOMF. He made assumptions about someone based on their race, then criticised them based on those assumptions. Do you think that's racist?
From what brief investigation i have conducted it would seem that Bruce Bawyer actually said that Switzerland has a 20% muslim population. This would differ to LOMF's quote of 40%.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurabia

http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2008/04/book-review-while-europe-slept.html

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/03/bostom-on-bawer-eurabian-nightmares.html

It would appear that both parties are wrong on the issue of "Swiss" muslim population read this....

SWITZERLAND
Total population: 7.4 million

Muslim population: 310,800 (4.2%)

Background: Official figures suggest the Muslim population has doubled in recent years, but some sources say there are also about 150,000 Muslims in the country illegally. The first Muslims arrived as workers in the 1960s, mostly from Turkey, the former Yugoslavia and Albania. They were joined by their families in the 1970s and, in recent years, by asylum seekers. (Comparatively few have citizenship.)

Sources: Total population - Swiss Federal Statistical Office, 2003 figures; Muslim population - Swiss Federal Statistical Office, 2000 figures.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4385768.stm



As for your little "tit for tat" arguement with LOMF's im not altogether that interested. If you want to pursue a "racist" arguement against him (which could be a way of defaming his character) then firstly you need to prove he made an assumption based on the race of the person being criticised. Then you would have to prove what "race" said person belonged to and then ascertain from the "context" of what was said whether there was any plausible inference to a racially motivated slur.

Failiure to meet said criteria would in fact make you the "slanderer" so to speak. Just be careful in your assertions.

Cheers
Posted Image


AFDL Supporting True EDL


"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

See previous post. You can read what he's been saying for yourself. Also note that I have asked LOMF several times if he thinks what he said matches his own definition of racism. It's a Y/N type of question. It either did or it didn't. Still waiting for a direct answer.

Still waiting for an answer from you too, as it happens.

Well? I mean, if you want to comment, give us your opinion. If you're not altogether interested, that's fine too.

I'm not altogether interested myself; so far as I'm concerend LOMF is an ignorant twit with nothing useful to say. And that's that. But the fact is, it says at the top of the page: "The EDL will not tolerate any racist or Islamophobic behaviour on this forum."

Now what does interest me is this: Is that meant? Or are the owners of this forum simply playing PC games? And if it's meant, is it only meant selectively? Is it okay to make assumptions about an individual based on their race, then cricicise them based on those assumptions - if they're American? If that's so then the statement at the top of the forum needs to be changed to "The EDL won't tolerate certain kinds of racism on this forum. Other kinds, we don't mind." This issue goes to the kind of organisation the EDL really is. So it's quite important.

And you're questioning whether Bruce Bawer is an American? Oh, come on. To the best of my knowledge, Bawer was born in New York. He received a BA, MA and a PhD from an American university (Stony Brook), before moving to Europe in the late 90's.
Edited by Nick McAvelly, Oct 8 2009, 10:30 AM.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

And just for the record, I have read the book (twice) but I don't have a copy on my bookshelf, so I don't have access to the text, and I can't comment on any specific assertions Bawer may have made. I don't know exactly what he said, and I can't put anything he said into it's proper context. Nor do I know if Bawer simply made a bald assertion, or if he was relying on another source. I have no way of knowing any of that, so I don't pretend to know.

Unlike LOMF.

But pretending to know is not true knowledge.

All that LOMF has given us here is hot air, and empty words. Once again: if LOMF genuinely wants to know what's in the book, then all he has to do is read it. Pretty simple, isn't it?

If LOMF wants to make an informed comment about what's in the book, then all he has to do is read it, think about what he's read, then start typing. It really is quite straightforward.

But ad hominem comments about the author based on his genes? Insinuations? Guesswork?

That's not the way to go.

Is it?
Edited by Nick McAvelly, Oct 8 2009, 10:41 AM.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Land of my Fathes
Member Avatar
Patriot
nemisis123456
Oct 8 2009, 09:38 AM
From what brief investigation i have conducted it would seem that Bruce Bawyer actually said that Switzerland has a 20% muslim population. This would differ to LOMF's quote of 40%. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurabia, http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2008/04/book-review-while-europe-slept.html, http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/03/bostom-on-bawer-eurabian-nightmares.html.It would appear that both parties are wrong on the issue of "Swiss" muslim population read this.... SWITZERLAND Total population: 7.4 million Muslim population: 310,800 (4.2%) ... some sources say there are also about 150,000 Muslims in the country illegally.
Thankyou. An excellent piece of work, which is also rather more convincing than my own (since I was only quoting a reader of this book who gave it 2-stars at Amazon, claiming to have spotted both serious errors/lies and highly suspicious figures that need a strong references, eg Denmarks 5% of Muslims take 40% of the welfare budget? Really?[citation needed]).

However, just because Bawer repeatedly says that the proportion of Muslims is 20% makes it much more likely that, as we were told, he wrote that it was 40% in the book that McAvelly started this thread about.
Quote:
 
As for your little "tit for tat" arguement with LOMF's im not altogether that interested.
Very wise, it's not alltogether interesting. Americans sent money to the IRA for years and still give more now. Gerry Adams gets a heroes welcome over there, including use of official residences (ie this is state support, not just a load of fanatics).

So patriotic people in here would be neither surprised nor shocked if I'd been rude about Americans. Which I don't think I was, Bawer seems to be a home-sick American, and his books appeal to those millions of his fellows back home who despise us.

As proof of the latter, I note that "While Europe Slept" has far more reviews in US Amazon than it does in UK Amazon, and many of the reviews are plainly from people who despise us and thank him for further justifying their prejudices (with lies, as it turns out!)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
However, just because Bawer repeatedly says that the proportion of Muslims is 20% makes it much more likely that, as we were told, he wrote that it was 40% in the book that McAvelly started this thread about. - LOMF


The book you started that other thread about, you mean. The book you never even bothered to read beforehand. That book.

You're priceless! You admit that your earlier "work" was pants, but at the same time, you want to say that proof that you were wrong actually means you were right! LOL ... you're a real hoot!

(talk about doublethink)

Since you're keen to talk about percentages and the population size of different countries, remember to factor into your any real argument you might want to construct at some point in the future, regarding American and British Amazon websites, that there are, oh, slightly more people living in America than there are living in the UK. Just a few more eh ...

The facts remain: you have no way of knowing the motivations of the author in question, yet tried to convince others that he "despised" Europe, and wanted to convince Americans to do the same. You based this on a rash generalisation, which has no logical merit whatsoever.

Bawer moved to Europe more than a decade ago. If he "despised" Europe why did he do so? He learnt Norwegian. If he "despised" Europe why did he do this? He settled in Norway. Same question. He writes articles in Norwegian, which I think it's fair to assume, are not aimed at an American audience. Why would he bother write in Norwegian if he was aiming at an American audience? Your little theory just doesn't stand up to scrunity. Give it up.

Your half baked theories and "suspicions" are nothing but the threadbare ramblings of an ignorant person who, for some reason known only to himself, wants to persuade EDL supporters in Great Britain not to read writers like Robert Spencer and Bruce Bawer.

Now, I couldn't give two hoots whether Switzerland has a twelve per cent Muslim population, or twenty. Really, you can believe me when I say to you that I don't stay awake at night worrying about such trivia.

But if I do what you obviously can't, think properly, and play devil's advocate here, what can be said if Bawer's figure is incorrect? Well, what one can't safely do is just assume that Bawer knowingly fabricated that figure out of thin air (ie lied). It is possible that he got the figure he used from another source, and that either that source made an error and Bawer didn't realise that, or he misunderstood a statistical chart used by that source. There are several possibilities, and you have no way of knowing what actually happened. So any assumptions you make in that regard are worthless. All you can safely say, should you find an error in some book you're reading, is that an error exists. That's all.

What's more, I'm sure a well-read fellow like yourself will be familiar with the following argument which John Stuart Mill put forward in support of free speech:
Quote:
 
Secondly, through the silenced opinioin be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied. (Mill, "On Liberty," Penguin, p. 116)

An extended form of the same argument can be found here. Do yourself a favour and read it. If you understand what Mill is saying in that passage, then you'll understand why your own view is incorrect. If a writer, somewhere in his entire body of work, makes an error about the number of Muslims living in Switzerland, it does not follow that everything he ever wrote is without value. Only an ignorant person, or someone with an agenda that involves discrediting writers who criticise Islam (the genre Spencer and Bawer have been working in), would make such a ill-founded claim. As Mill says ...

Quote:
 
Such being the partial character of prevailing opinions, even when resting on a true foundation, every opinion which embodies somewhat of the portion of truth which the common opinion omits, ought to be considered precious, with whatever amount of error and confusion that truth may be blended. No sober judge of human affairs will feel bound to be indignant because those who force on our notice truths which we should otherwise have overlooked, overlook some of those which we see. (ibid., p. 109)


And finally, here's something else for you to consider. It's called a "companions in guilt move." With a little twist to it. Would you be willing to hold yourself to the same standards you require of Mr. Bawer? Should we treat you as you would have us treat him? If someone has a "suspicion" about you, does this mean that everything you say is worthless, and no one should read anything you write at all, ever? If you make an error in something you write, does it follow that everything you write will also be erroneous? You see what I'm driving at here. Your own posts are so riddled with mistakes of one kind or another, that if you were consistent in your application of the standards you say you wish to use, then you would condemn the very posts in which you make your claims about Bawer - a writer who you have never even read!

Have a little think about that. And do try to study that passage by Mill. Once you've finished reading "While Europe Slept" that is. Then, you might, just might, have something worthwhile to say here.
Edited by Nick McAvelly, Oct 8 2009, 02:51 PM.
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Land of my Fathes
Member Avatar
Patriot
Nick McAvelly
Oct 8 2009, 02:25 PM
LOFM
 
However, just because Bawer repeatedly says that the proportion of Muslims is 20% makes it much more likely that, as we were told, he wrote that it was 40% in the book that McAvelly started this thread about.
Now, I couldn't give two hoots whether Switzerland has a twelve per cent Muslim population, or twenty. Really, you can believe me when I say to you that I don't stay awake at night worrying about such trivia.
Thankyou for confirming that the actual evidence is not of interest to you.
McAvelly
 
for some reason known only to himself, wants to persuade EDL supporters in Great Britain not to read writers like Robert Spencer and Bruce Bawer. ... what one can't safely do is just assume that Bawer knowingly fabricated that figure out of thin air (ie lied).
At least one of them seems to tell lies - and perhaps more importantly, his readers don't care!
McAvelly
 
If you understand what Mill is saying in that passage, then you'll understand why your own view is incorrect. ... every opinion which embodies somewhat of the portion of truth
Mill would be astounded to hear his views used to justify anything from a person who cannot separate opinion from facts, and seeks to justify arguments or writings with known lies.
McAvelly
 
Your own posts are so riddled with mistakes of one kind or another
I'm sure you'll point them out and I'll graciously admit any and all I make.
McAvelly
 
Bawer moved to Europe more than a decade ago. If he "despised" Europe why did he do so?
Because he found Europe much freer than he found the US (a conclusion many of us have come to as well). Later, his paranoia drove him to despise us. (Did he develop this condition here, or did he bring it with him? Has he still got enough guns?)
McAvelly
 
He learnt Norwegian. If he "despised" Europe why did he do this?
Because his then boyfriend was Norwegian? What's that got to with the diameter of doughnuts?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nick McAvelly
Member Avatar

You're not pretending, are you? You really are just as ignorant as you appear to be. Wow! It's not every day one meets such a rare flower. But it's always a treat. Always entertaining.

What will you come up with next, Lomf ..
"A man who wishes to profess goodness at all times will come to ruin among so many who are not good. Therefore, it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain himself to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity." The Prince, Ch. 15.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nemisis123456
Member Avatar
Infidel
Nick McAvelly
Oct 8 2009, 09:50 AM
See previous post. You can read what he's been saying for yourself. Also note that I have asked LOMF several times if he thinks what he said matches his own definition of racism. It's a Y/N type of question. It either did or it didn't. Still waiting for a direct answer.

Still waiting for an answer from you too, as it happens.

Well? I mean, if you want to comment, give us your opinion. If you're not altogether interested, that's fine too.

I'm not altogether interested myself; so far as I'm concerend LOMF is an ignorant twit with nothing useful to say. And that's that. But the fact is, it says at the top of the page: "The EDL will not tolerate any racist or Islamophobic behaviour on this forum."

Now what does interest me is this: Is that meant? Or are the owners of this forum simply playing PC games? And if it's meant, is it only meant selectively? Is it okay to make assumptions about an individual based on their race, then cricicise them based on those assumptions - if they're American? If that's so then the statement at the top of the forum needs to be changed to "The EDL won't tolerate certain kinds of racism on this forum. Other kinds, we don't mind." This issue goes to the kind of organisation the EDL really is. So it's quite important.

And you're questioning whether Bruce Bawer is an American? Oh, come on. To the best of my knowledge, Bawer was born in New York. He received a BA, MA and a PhD from an American university (Stony Brook), before moving to Europe in the late 90's.
Looks like im going to be the one taking the "middle ground" here.

I have already stated im not really that interested in your spat with LOMF. However you have accused him of being "racist" so one would expect you to substantiate your claim.

Im making a calculated guess here about the "question you are waiting to be answered" by myself. Would i be right if i quoted this as being your question? Please verify....

Quote:
 
Make an assertion about an author's work based on the author's race. That and some nonsense about a "test" that he makes up as he goes along. Hardly rigorous academic standards! Why should anyone take any assertion that is based on such methodology seriously? Can you elaborate on this point please? Cheers


I would just like to point out that whether that "methodology" was of any relevance to you is immaterial as that "methodology" actually pointed out a mistake from the author. The exact point that LOMF's was making im sure.

I do remember asking you in my previous post.....

Quote:
 
If you want to pursue a "racist" arguement against him (which could be a way of defaming his character) then firstly you need to prove he made an assumption based on the race of the person being criticised. Then you would have to prove what "race" said person belonged to and then ascertain from the "context" of what was said whether there was any plausible inference to a racially motivated slur.


Now i asked these things simply because we need to ascertain the "race" of Bruce Bawer so we can look objectively to your claim that LOMF typed a racially motivated slur about him.

I know that Bruce Bawer is an American this is an undisputed FACT. Another undisputed FACT would be that an American is NOT a race. An American is a member of a nationality this also is a FACT. In fact if you imply that American is a race then to what race do Americans belong to? Quite an oxymoron if you ask me which in itself implies racism as America is a multicultural nation state. Perhaps you are trying to contort the English definition of racism? Or perhaps you are unaware of what a "race" actually is? I dont know either way i would just be speculating only you can confirm that.

Now regarding LOMF's comments i dont agree with them because to me they possibly imply xenophobia. Again this is only speculation based of my interpretation of his posts nothing more but i have given a frank and honest appraisal about them. I have no ill will or bad feelings toward my American brothers and sisters over the pond generally. There are exceptions to the rule but that rule applies to EVERY nation/nationality, race, religion etc etc. There is good and bad in this world wherever it may be.

Quote:
 
"The EDL will not tolerate any racist or Islamophobic behaviour on this forum."


That is correct however as i have just pointed out LOMF did not make any "racist" comments by definition, even though i dont necessarily agree with them they were not racist.

Quote:
 
And you're questioning whether Bruce Bawer is an American? Oh, come on. To the best of my knowledge, Bawer was born in New York.


Actually no i wasnt questioning whether Bruce Bawer was an American, i was asking you to what "race" did he belong? Quite a different thing altogether which i believe i have substantiated already.

Quote:
 
He received a BA, MA and a PhD from an American university (Stony Brook), before moving to Europe in the late 90's.



For a man of such renowned intellect and intelligence its somewhat amazing he failed to have the correct information about the muslim populous of Switzerland. Im quite baffled by that but we are all human beings more than capable of making silly mistakes.
Posted Image


AFDL Supporting True EDL


"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
beowulf
No Avatar
Member
bawer is defo a yank and bawer is a queer as well,both facts would be known o any one who as read his work, statemets that his book is anti european seem to me to be reactionary, because the reasons he questions the european stance are the very same reasons i question the european leadership and mass media, yes he does critise how quickly western europe are quick to condem he states and israel while at the same time making endless excuses for islamist aggression and terrorism. personally not the best book i,ve read on the subject personally I would recommend 7/7 celsius by michael gove.. it gives a much more british perspecive of the whole situation, alsos gives indepth back ground on the Muslim Brotherhood and also shows how the so called moderate MAB and MCB have links to extremist groups with islamist idealogy for a global ummah. google how the so called MCB signed an agreemnt that jewish targets both military and civilian were ustified both in israel and else where including britain.. will the moderate muslims please stand up and make your selves heard .
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old War Dog
Member Avatar
OldWarDog
I've not read this entire thread, so just tell me to shut-the-f**k up if I'm talking nonsense. I've read some posts and tried to piece it together.

From what I can surmise, NICK opened the thread to recommend a good book, then LOMF discredits the book based on some reviews he's selectively chosen from Amazon, without having read the book.

The old adage, 'don't judge a book by it's cover' springs to mind. Read the book before you criticise. Otherwise, your critique has no more credence than Sam I Am in Doctor Zeus's Green Eggs and Ham story.

Anyway, while we're on the subject of good books. My latest just arrived in the post. It's, "United in Hate - The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror" by Jamie Glazov. Has anyone read it? it's captured me already, very intense and very informative.
Edited by Old War Dog, Nov 11 2009, 07:39 PM.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nemisis123456
Member Avatar
Infidel
Actually geert if you read the WHOLE thread then you would have noticed Robert Spencers (deliberate?) Mistake.

Did you notice it?
Posted Image


AFDL Supporting True EDL


"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old War Dog
Member Avatar
OldWarDog
I didn't read the whole thread... far too boring matey.... why don't you just point out the mistake instead of playing childish games?
Edited by Old War Dog, Nov 11 2009, 07:58 PM.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nemisis123456
Member Avatar
Infidel
Its the 20 percent fallacy for the muslim population of Switzerland if I remember correctly mate.

Its a short thread you won't be hard pressed finding EVIDENCE that PROVES my point.

Take a proper look.
Posted Image


AFDL Supporting True EDL


"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old War Dog
Member Avatar
OldWarDog
So he makes one mistake and then everyhing he's ever written is discredited?

You're BONKERS!!

Robert Spencer is a good guy. You on the other hand are just a bed-wetting, gibberish-talking nincompoop.
Edited by Old War Dog, Nov 11 2009, 08:10 PM.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nemisis123456
Member Avatar
Infidel
Thanks for realising he made a mistake :)

And I already said it doesn't discredit EVERYTHING he says.

Read PROPERLY!
Posted Image


AFDL Supporting True EDL


"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old War Dog
Member Avatar
OldWarDog
I don't want to read three full pages about a book I don't want to read.

If you have something to say, just say it. So, he made a mistake, have you never made a mistake (obviously not eh?)..... What is your point?? You aren't seriously trying to discredit Robert Spencer over one little error are you? The man is one of the few making a difference in the fight against Islam.... Why do you try so hard to discredit him? Are you an Islamic fundamentalist? Or just a fundamental headcase?
Edited by Old War Dog, Nov 11 2009, 08:16 PM.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nemisis123456
Member Avatar
Infidel
No geert I actually AGREE with you.

READ my posts before you make yourself look even more stupid.

Cheers :)
Posted Image


AFDL Supporting True EDL


"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old War Dog
Member Avatar
OldWarDog
Trust me, it's not me that's looking stupid here NEMESIS. You're making a right twat of yourself.

Just tell me what you're trying to say?? I'm not into riddles.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · EDL Chat · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Feliz Navidad (Gold) created by Sarah & Delirium of the ZNR