Study: European Muslim population can only grow
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
Even if all migration into Europe were to immediately and permanently stop – a “zero migration” scenario – the Muslim population of Europe still would be expected to rise from the current level of 4.9% to 7.4% by the year 2050. This is because Muslims are younger (by 13 years, on average) and have higher fertility (one child more per woman, on average) than other Europeans, mirroring a global pattern.
So the most pessimistic projections shows that Muslims will comprise about one in fourteen Europeans? And that's not a very realistic projection, because Muslims will age and will become more prosperous, both of which will lower the fertility rate.
Hysteria is rarely a good substitute for rational thought.
So the most pessimistic projections shows that Muslims will comprise about one in fourteen Europeans? And that's not a very realistic projection, because Muslims will age and will become more prosperous, both of which will lower the fertility rate.
Hysteria is rarely a good substitute for rational thought.
genuineoriginal
New member
The Real History of the Crusades
the Crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a direct response to Muslim aggression—an attempt to turn back or defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands.
the Crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a direct response to Muslim aggression—an attempt to turn back or defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands.
Maybe it is time for Europe to defend themselves against the same enemy one more time.
musterion
Well-known member
Can't. This time the main enemy is their own government, which has effectively disarmed them.
musterion
Well-known member
This is an excellent example of what's called Deliberately Missing the Point.
Would your jihad target all Muslims, including peaceful ones, or just your fellow jihadists who happen to be Muslims?
(Barbarian notes that data suggests Muslims will remain a small minority in Europe for many years to come)
Even if all migration into Europe were to immediately and permanently stop – a “zero migration” scenario – the Muslim population of Europe still would be expected to rise from the current level of 4.9% to 7.4% by the year 2050. This is because Muslims are younger (by 13 years, on average) and have higher fertility (one child more per woman, on average) than other Europeans, mirroring a global pattern.
So the most pessimistic projections shows that Muslims will comprise about one in fourteen Europeans? And that's not a very realistic projection, because Muslims will age and will become more prosperous, both of which will lower the fertility rate.
It appears you had none.
Even if all migration into Europe were to immediately and permanently stop – a “zero migration” scenario – the Muslim population of Europe still would be expected to rise from the current level of 4.9% to 7.4% by the year 2050. This is because Muslims are younger (by 13 years, on average) and have higher fertility (one child more per woman, on average) than other Europeans, mirroring a global pattern.
So the most pessimistic projections shows that Muslims will comprise about one in fourteen Europeans? And that's not a very realistic projection, because Muslims will age and will become more prosperous, both of which will lower the fertility rate.
It appears you had none.
Maybe [MENTION=7147]jgarden[/MENTION] can weigh in on this.
genuineoriginal
New member
Here are the facts:
Jihad is what militant Muslims do against people they consider to be infidels.
Crusades were European Christians defending themselves against militant Muslims.
Non-Muslims are not jihadists by definition and do not wage jihad.
genuineoriginal
New member
Yes. Liberalism is insane.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
He never does. Once again, Musty's tin foil, paranoid obsession with Muslims comes to the fore again...
:freak:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Um, no, that would be your mantle. I suppose you think Trump's retweets of the nutball 'Britain First' party was a good thing, right?
Christianity missed its big chance to limit Islamic expansion to the West when the Catholic and Orthodox Churches refused to put their differences aside and field a unified army to defend Constantinople.
The Crusades had very little to do with true Christianity - there is a theory that the conquest of Jerusalem by the Turks was the pretext used by the Pope to rid Europe of its warring knights that had reduced the continent to a state of constant turmoil!
The real beneficiaries of the Crusades were the European kings and the Catholic Church who were able to consolidate their power, which included repossessing the estates of those 1000's of knights, without heirs, who never returned!
Last edited:
genuineoriginal
New member
That image would be truthful if it showed SJW snowflakes making that comment.
How does that differ from what militant Islamophobes do against people they consider to be infidels?
So what's your excuse, then? You seem completely obsessed with Muslims.
genuineoriginal
New member
According to you SJWs, an Islamophobe is anyone that wants militant Muslims to stop being the cause of 94% of the terrorist attack casualties in the US.
The Myth of the Non-Muslim Terrorist
Even by the FBI’s curious standard, the sort of truly violent terrorism that most concerns Americans is extremely rare in the United States. Only 29 attacks on their list of incidents between 1980 and 2005 resulted in actual death. Of these 29 attacks, Islamic extremists were responsible for 24%, accounting for 2,981 kills (civilians only), while the non-Muslim attack body count is 196.
Thus, what the FBI report is really saying is that a demographic which makes up only 1% of the American population accounts for one-fourth of all deadly terror attacks in the U.S. and 94% of related casualties!
Even by the FBI’s curious standard, the sort of truly violent terrorism that most concerns Americans is extremely rare in the United States. Only 29 attacks on their list of incidents between 1980 and 2005 resulted in actual death. Of these 29 attacks, Islamic extremists were responsible for 24%, accounting for 2,981 kills (civilians only), while the non-Muslim attack body count is 196.
Thus, what the FBI report is really saying is that a demographic which makes up only 1% of the American population accounts for one-fourth of all deadly terror attacks in the U.S. and 94% of related casualties!
No, I am more concerned with truth than with Muslims.
That is why I am opposed to SJW lies.
Why do you use "SJW" to describe Americans who support the Constitution? Your obsession with Muslims obscures the fact that law enforcement agencies regard right-wing terrorism as a greater danger than Islamic terrorism in the United States.
At the same time, the United States also faces significant challenges from domestic terrorists. In fact, between 1980 and 2000, the FBI recorded 335 incidents or suspected incidents of terrorism in this country. Of these, 247 were attributed to domestic terrorists, while 88 were determined to be international in nature...During the past decade we have witnessed dramatic changes in the nature of the terrorist threat. In the 1990s, right-wing extremism overtook left-wing terrorism as the most dangerous domestic terrorist threat to the country...On the national level, formal right-wing hate groups, such as the National Alliance, the World Church of the Creator (WCOTC) and the Aryan Nations, represent a continuing terrorist threat. Although efforts have been made by some extremist groups to reduce openly racist rhetoric in order to appeal to a broader segment of the population and to focus increased attention on antigovernment sentiment, racism-based hatred remains an integral component of these groups’ core orientations.
Right-wing groups continue to represent a serious terrorist threat. Two of the seven planned acts of terrorism prevented in 1999 were potentially large-scale, high-casualty attacks being planned by organized right-wing extremist groups.
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/testimony/the-terrorist-threat-confronting-the-united-states
Here are some things that pose a greater danger to you than Muslim refugees:
Right wing terrorists
Cows
Stairs
Hot Tap Water
Roller coasters
Your bed
Bees
Dogs
But you can take some comfort in knowing that you are less likely to be killed by a meteorite than to be killed by an Islamic terrorist. And yes, I know that this isn't about the facts, as far as you're concerned.
Your continuing obsession with Muslims isn't fact-based.
Not just the militants.
Islam calls for the hatred of all infidels, and infidels are all that do not bow to their pagan god Allah.
Yep.
:cheers:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Thank you for injecting some much needed sanity along with a chuckle...
:chuckle:
You said it.
Case in point, one of my various Muslim friends.
His Greek wife had converted to Islam from a basically Greek Orthodox position (in word mostly).
But she was just too American in her ways.
Two children later, they ended up divorced.
He was raised here, so it was not much of an issue for him, beyond the usual issues any divorce can bring about.
In contrast, his old man all but dis-owned him, for having allowed the divorce.
On the other side of it all, his younger sons have moved from the Middle East with their mom, to be with him, here in the states.
As we North Americans say, when we are thrown by something "what the - what was that all about!"
For the two boys arrive in the states and from day one are all about YouTube this, and Facebook that, and football, basketball, and McDonald's, and fast cars.
Their old man is now beside himself. He actually broke down in tears about it all.
His grandchild, well, he's even worse - he now goes by the name "Little Mo."
I mean, the name Muhammad is a great honor for them.
I told him that is how life is - that often (though some on TOL obviously prove otherwise) each generation tends to want less of the ways of prior generations.
How that at one time, the governments and peoples of countries like Great Britain; France; Spain; Japan; Italy; and Germany had all been our mortal enemies.
And that now, each is our ally, more or less - especially their people - and their kids even more so.
Is it war we believe in; is this what we want for our children, I asked him.
I have friends from some those countries now - close friends.
And you know that Japan's war had partly been a religious war; which was their suicide bombers, and why they had refused to surrender and so on - their belief that their Emperer was Devine.
Is this what we want for our children, I asked him again.
If so, you're simply too late, I said - your children and even your grandchildren have been too impressed with the voice of "the individual" that is America.
After a while, he smiled, this great man who together with his own ever evolving culture, I have been so privileged to know all these years.
He tapped me on my knee, and said "I have much to learn, Dano..."
I said to him, what about Little Mo?
"Yes," he said "Lih..Little Mo, too..."
Off we went to one heck of a Persian restaurant to eat all sorts of amazing foods.
Lol - Little Mo kept insisting we stop at a McDonald's, on the way home...
Ten to one, the little guy got his Happy Meal :thumb:
THIS is MY...ALREADY GREAT AMERICA!