A Giant Mosque for Strasbourg

From the desk of Tiberge on Tue, 2008-04-01 10:22

A giant mosque is being built for the city of Strasbourg. Joachim Véliocras writes at Islamisation that the Regional Council of Alsace, consisting mainly of UMP members, voted in favor of a 420,000 euro subsidy for the construction of the Grand Mosque of Strasbourg. The UMP is President Sarkozy’s party.

But it wasn’t enough: the general council of the department of Bas-Rhin, also controlled by UMP, granted a supplementary subsidy of 506,000 euros for the huge project. The other parties – Socialist and Green – unanimously voted for the grant. In the name of the Concordat, the UMP controlled municipal council (during the term in office of Fabienne Keller in 2007) granted 610,000 euros to help finance the construction.

The Concordat is a special agreement decreed by Bonaparte dating from 1801 that grants public status to religion, and that permits priests to be paid by the State. In 1801, Alsace was part of France. However, when in 1905 the law separating Church and State went into effect in France, Alsace was part of Germany. After WWI Alsace again became French but never renounced the Concordat.

The first stone of the mosque was laid on October 29, 2004 by UMP Mayor Fabienne Keller (who was defeated in the recent municipal elections by the socialist candidate Roland Ries). During the inauguration of the new “political center” of Islam in Strasbourg, she was assisted by the Archbishop of Strasbourg, Joseph Dore, who “was thrilled by the occasion”, the Grand Rabbi of Strasbourg, René Gutmann, and the president of the Urban Committee of Strasbourg, Robert Grossman of the UMP party.

Not to mention 2

Submitted by Atlanticist911 on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:36.

What if the competing "king" is a  boy-queen and a raving pacifist like kappert?

 

I think we're done here,don't you?

@Monarchist

Submitted by Atlanticist911 on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:23.

This is fun! OK,so,the 'king' elects himself,without asking the Polish people whether they want a monarchy or not.What if 2,3,or more 'kings' decide to 'elect' themselves to the position? Who decides and how would it be decided which (if any) of the self-proclaimed kings is fit for purpose? Who gets to tell the losing 'kings' they've lost?

@Atlanticist911

Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:38.

You must move beyond democratic mindset, because answers for your questions are obvious. Only one can win and losers will be aware of his victory better than anybody else.

How about democracy? No matter who would win, bureaucracy rules.

By the way...

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:48.

Growing up in Northern New Jersey where many European immigrants live and work, I've heard my share of Polish jokes. You, Monarchist, perpetuate the stereotype of "dumb Polack", when you insist on maintaining your ridiculous and unfounded love affair with having a monarchy over a democracy.

And please, for God's sake, STAY IN EUROPE.

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds..."

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

No.

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:41.

Monarchist, you got your a** whooped and you know it. You can't defend a single IOTA of your position!

Furthermore, I would venture to say that you are completely ALONE in your silly idea. I have yet to see a ANYONE chime in to support your position.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

Not to mention...

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:31.

What if the competing "king" doesn't accept the loss of his throne? Then what?

HINT: W_R.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

I'm curious whether

Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2008-04-04 22:58.

I'm curious whether democracy is working for for example millions of unborn babies brutally murdered in your country? I suppose that they would have different opinion if democrats would gave them a chance to speak out.

This is interest of an idiot to be ruled by wise person and vast majority of population definitely is not very smart.. Thus even smart people whom consist minority should be in favor of such solution, otherwise they will be ruled by masses or rather bastards who manipulate public opinion, in other words typical democracy in reality with absolutely no chances to change for better.

 

By the way Armor cannot say that immigration caused democracy, while I can write that democracy caused brainless immigration in western European form. Note that Eastern European countries ruled by by stupid however not democratic communist regimes had not such problems. This is obvious that democracy caused this proceeder. 

re: Abortion

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:18.

Democracy is not the cause of abortion's legality in the West. It is the fault of the collapse of Christian values and tradition. If you were a deeper thinker you would have drawn that conclusion. But, since you are a one note singer, you are blind to that fact. But don't worry, since Europe will become Eurabia in the near future, you won't have to worry about having democracy any longer.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

Collapse of Christian values

Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:32.

Collapse of Christian values in Europe begins with collapse of monarchy, you cannot deny this. Sheep without shepard don't know what to do and intellectual weakness push them towards demagogy of democratic populists, those who have no unchangeable values.

About Euroabia, well I'm aware of this threat but if majority of democrats is not aware then it means that they deserve this destination. Anyway I dare to doubt whether Muslim could be worse than "progressives" in the day of final triumph.

More Absurdity

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:35.

So you are saying that the existence of Christianity is dependent on the existence of kings???

Give me a break! I didn't know that Christ's teachings were so dependent on earthly things. You're not a Christian, are you? Not only is your thinking shallow, but your spirituality is just as superficial.

By the way, England still has a monarchy and abortion is legal there.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

@atheling

Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:49.

Well, you cannot deny historic facts. Monarchy is not guarantee for existence of Christianity but undoubtedly conditions are much better than in democratic country. While English monarchy in current form is a farce for tourists. Please just write that a God is a democrat...

@Monarchist

Submitted by atheling on Sat, 2008-04-05 18:42.

"Well, you cannot deny historic facts. Monarchy is not guarantee for existence of Christianity but undoubtedly conditions are much better than in democratic country. While English monarchy in current form is a farce for tourists. Please just write that a God is a democrat"

What historic facts? You have absolutely no basis - give me ONE example where a monarchy is better for Christianity! Like the monarchy of the Tudors, where Henry VIII stole church property and usurped the role of leader of the Christian faith?

Don't be idiotic. You have no knowledge of history, indeed, you can't even prove your silly assertions.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

You raised one example and

Submitted by Monarchist on Sat, 2008-04-05 23:15.

You raised one example and try to extend this to whole monarchical system. This is nice eristic trick but I don't buy it. We don't need to argue, this is commonly accepted historic fact that vast majority of European monarchs were Christians. Polish statehood is officially counted from 966, the date of Christianization of Poland. Since that time every single king was a Catholic, statistics are overwhelmingly on my side. What caused crisis of Christian values in Europe is the French revolution with its democratic message which was unfortunately realized later. Please be more polite, because you learned about one English king doesn't mean that you know history of Europe.

Definition of Fascism for Monarchist/Fascist

Submitted by atheling on Sun, 2008-04-06 19:46.

1.often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

Thank you, Merriam Webster.

Whether the dictator wears brownshirts or an ermine collar, it is still FASCISM.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

@atheling

Submitted by Monarchist on Sun, 2008-04-06 21:41.

The style in which you run this debate disqualify you as a partner for discussion. You intentionally provoke me because you know very well that I cannot answer in similar mood to a woman. As a monarchist I indeed has not such intentions and no matter what would you figure out, I refuse to take part in such "name calling" competition. Apparently you cannot stand and losing all coolness when somebody disagree with you, I noticed that you treat other posters in similar manner.

Lets skip to the essence of discussion... I suggest you to post definition of monarchy now...
When did you see me advocating nationalism, racism, socialism? I also favor monarchy over dictatorship. What is more, legitimation of my monarchy is in God as a stated earlier while legitimation of fascism are working masses. I have elitist tendencies and fascism is based on social bottoms. Either American education system is really in such a bad shape (like my friends from Free Republic often complain) or your only motivation is a personal attack.

I really suggest to abstain from personal attacks and rather respectfully disagree when no other choice...

@Monarchist/Fascist

Submitted by atheling on Sun, 2008-04-06 19:04.

I know more about the history of Europe than you do, and I have comprehended its lessons. You have not. Indeed, the history of Poland is NOT the history of Europe.

The French Revolution and its ensuing terrorism is more aligned with your political thinking, and believe me, what you propose WILL involve much bloodshed and terror because NO sane person would embrace it. The people will revolt, and your "king" will have a bloodbath killing all those who oppose him. That's the way it works, and you're a blind fool who can't see it. You can't even answer the questions that I, Atlanticist and Kapitein Andre have posed to you.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

@Monarchist

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:03.

Answer Atlanticist's question first.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

@Monarchist

Submitted by Atlanticist911 on Fri, 2008-04-04 22:42.

How do you propose to convince a majority of Poles to accept the (re) introduction of monarchy into your country? Would you force them to accept it or attempt to convince them by rational argument then allow them to have a referendum on the issue and wouldn't said referendum be a form of democracy in action?  Who would be your personal candidate for 'King of the Poles' and why? Would a Queen be acceptable to you and if not,why not?  

@Atlanticist911

Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:07.

Of course I would not try to convince majority, I'm not a democrat in any way... After some period of time they would be convinced from personal experience. In the same time in democratic countries TV channels would showing (from close range) small bunch of sponsored by democratic regimes "oppositionists" protesting against "human rights" violations. While a king must elect himself, otherwise he would not be worth of such post. My personal attitude would depend from his policies.

LOL!

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 23:10.

Thanks for the belly laugh! As a matter of fact, I've shown your comments to many of my (American) friends and colleagues who are dumbstruck that this is the kind of thinking that goes in in Europe.

Scratch Monarchist and find a dictator underneath!

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

@ Sly Fox

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 22:47.

Do you really think he's thought that deeply on the matter? I doubt if he's ever gotten that far.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

@ Monarchist

Submitted by Atlanticist911 on Fri, 2008-04-04 22:03.

"This website itself showing very well effects of democracy". Agreed.It allows you for example to post this drivel.Question: Who educates the educators?

This website itself showing

Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2008-04-04 21:53.

This website itself showing very well effects of democracy. Don't you think that you behave in the same manner of naive socialists whom see each every time their system collapsing but still believe in some new upgraded socialist project? So when you will acknowledge reality? Soon you will tell me that God himself is a democrat.

Yes aristocracy in traditional form was not perfect, otherwise they would survive to this day. Currently we need proper educated people chosen by a monarchs to replace aristocracy. After all I don't support rule of aristocracy, they would be just a tool in the hands of absolute monarch.   

Learn English first...

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 21:56.

Then come back with an answer. I don't know what you're talking about.

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

My English is not great

Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2008-04-04 22:05.

My English is not great indeed but I already posted on many forums and never got answer like yours above. Speak for itself...

While the fact that I can write here have nothing to do with democracy, this is just policy of this website. My posting would be deleted on many mainstream websites of d***cratic Europe.

Throwing the Baby Out with the Bath Water

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 22:16.

I don't have time to decipher everything you write, Monarchist. But I do have time to tell you this:

Just because "democracy" isn't working for YOU, doesn't mean it isn't working for everyone else. Here in the US our democracy works just fine, human frailties and failures notwithstanding. The alleged deletion of your posts on other websites has NOTHING to do with a democratic form of government. That's another absurd assertion on your part.

You and Armor are broken records. Armor blames EVERYTHING on immigration. You blame EVERYTHING on democracy. Do you realize how stupid and immature that is? When are you Euros going to grow up?

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

One note song...

Submitted by atheling on Fri, 2008-04-04 19:09.

You just don't learn, do you?

"The real argument against aristocracy is that it always means the rule of the ignorant. For the most dangerous of all forms of ignorance is ignorance of work."  GK Chesterton

 

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.” – Thomas Paine

Joachim Véliocras writes

Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2008-04-04 18:43.

Joachim Véliocras writes at Islamisation
that the Regional Council of Alsace, consisting mainly of UMP members,
voted in favor of a 420,000 euro subsidy for the construction of the
Grand Mosque of Strasbourg. The UMP is President Sarkozy’s party.

I dare to say that France would be more successful with  less voting...

 

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. Perhaps it is time for liberty?