Car rams into Police van on the Champs-Elysées

[Cell_DbZ]

Muslim countries are not run by religion, maybe Iran

I thought that Saudi Arabia, UAE,... implemented sharia.

So for example I do not vote as I see it as commiting blashphemy

Voting is blashpemy? how?
I do respect that you don't want to vote, however, I just don't see how that's 'blasphemy'.

but do I have the right to discuss with others and tell them my rationale for not voting in the Western norm?

Yes you do and that right is granted by our society, can I openly disagree with norms Saudi Arabia? Probably not. So maybe the 'evil government' of the western countries are perhaps not that evil

Or are there limits of freedom of expression (of course there are) and if so who sets them and are they fixed? If not fixed then can not one or many try to change them as they have changed in the past.

You can say wathever you think, I don't experience limits in my freedom of speech. The constitution fixes the human rights, the constitution will be changed if needed, as it has happened in history (voting rights for women is an example). Rights like freedom of expression are fixed, the constitution does not make a difference between gender, religion,...

Once upon a time it was a norm to lynch Africans in the USA and then that norm changed... Once upon a time it was norm for an African to give up his seat for a European and then that changed...

Which is good, today everyone must be treated equal according to the constitution. I made clear that reaching democracy is a long process. Western democracy is in my opinion fully developed (everyone enjoys equal rights), it will adapt when needed, this is what I meant with progressivness.

By the way the PEOPLE certainly do not rulewestern nations. None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free...

I am fully aware that governments have their own agenda, cannot be called morally clean and that no one is 'free', that is the reality we live in. But governements cannot actively opress peole, like they can in many other parts of the world, that's what the constitution is for; it is to protect the people. I am fully aware that there's always the danger that we could lose our democracy, that's why we have to keep fighting for it.
Perhaps you can point out how I am 'enslaved'? Yes, people must pay taxes, but that's how you keep running the state, sick/handicapped people cannot work on their own, how is the state going to keep maintaining infrastructure?

If only people did rule, then NATO would not have supported ISIS et al.

Really? when a terror attack happens, it is somehow the fault of our government that a terrorist starts shooting up innocent people? How convenient to blame the government for all bad things that happen, it is the perfect excuse to keep defending those scumbags, who are commiting those acts of pure evil.

If only people did rule, then NATO would not have supported ISIS et al.

NATO supports/created ISIS? As far as I am aware, it is the radical imam and his men with ak-47's who are killing many innocent people, NATO is not somehow commanding or paying them to do that, they are doing it themselves.
Perhaps you can prove that NATO created them? You seem to be so sure about that.
Yes, Usa/NATO have and still are supporting extremist groups (so are Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan,...) for their own gains, the Usa/NATO are not supporting ISIS to kill their own people.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Its easy to be a terrorist in these days - a DIY terrorist. All you need is to go to Hertz, Alamo or Budget rent a car, hire a van or car and ram several people. This easy. Like what we have seen past month.

You think it's easy now...wait until people start sending a driverless car with a rampage algorithm.

 

[TMA]

I thought that Saudi Arabia, UAE,... implemented sharia.

Voting is blashpemy? how?
I do respect that you don't want to vote, however, I just don't see how that's 'blasphemy'.

Yes you do and that right is granted by our society, can I openly disagree with norms Saudi Arabia? Probably not. So maybe the 'evil government' of the western countries are perhaps not that evil

You can say wathever you think, I don't experience limits in my freedom of speech. The constitution fixes the human rights, the constitution will be changed if needed, as it has happened in history (voting rights for women is an example). Rights like freedom of expression are fixed, the constitution does not make a difference between gender, religion,...

Which is good, today everyone must be treated equal according to the constitution. I made clear that reaching democracy is a long process. Western democracy is in my opinion fully developed (everyone enjoys equal rights), it will adapt when needed, this is what I meant with progressivness.

I am fully aware that governments have their own agenda, cannot be called morally clean and that no one is 'free', that is the reality we live in. But governements cannot actively opress peole, like they can in many other parts of the world, that's what the constitution is for; it is to protect the people. I am fully aware that there's always the danger that we could lose our democracy, that's why we have to keep fighting for it.
Perhaps you can point out how I am 'enslaved'? Yes, people must pay taxes, but that's how you keep running the state, sick/handicapped people cannot work on their own, how is the state going to keep maintaining infrastructure?

Really? when a terror attack happens, it is somehow the fault of our government that a terrorist starts shooting up innocent people? How convenient to blame the government for all bad things that happen, it is the perfect excuse to keep defending those scumbags, who are commiting those acts of pure evil.

NATO supports/created ISIS? As far as I am aware, it is the radical imam and his men with ak-47's who are killing many innocent people, NATO is not somehow commanding or paying them to do that, they are doing it themselves.
Perhaps you can prove that NATO created them? You seem to be so sure about that.
Yes, Usa/NATO have and still are supporting extremist groups (so are Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan,...) for their own gains, the Usa/NATO are not supporting ISIS to kill their own people.

Read this then you will understand why I say NATO supports ISIS and watch Putin.

http://thesaker.is/how-and-why-u-s-honors-and-aids-al-qaeda/

These terrorists are always known to the security services but the security services don't seem to deal with them...I dunno....

KSA is as much a follower of Sharia as UK is. Just because there is the call to prayer five times per day or people observe correct dress when in public does not make it Sharia compliant. They do a lot of bad stuff... Do not use KSA as an example of an Islamic country when her very birth was a treacherous dagger into the Heartland of Islam.

Sharia is a complete system and when taken piecemeal can actually be regressive rather than progressive.

Rights and constitutions change (see the recent case of the Rep of Ireland over homosexual marriage) are never fixed unless they are fixed by an entity that is absolute...you will see my words coming true in the future (unfortunately)...
Who determines when an adaptation is needed? Can I not or others determine this?

Others may feel that Western democracy is not yet fully developed and requires another dialectica to reach maturation. You kinda sound like Fukuyama when he wrote the The End of History and the Last Man post collapse of the USSR.

As to voting and blasphemy: Who is the Sovereign in the UK where I reside? What does the political system in the UK say about this matter? It is my belief that the Sovereign in the UK (and elsewhere) is He, the One who created Time itself and all that one can hear, see, taste, touch, smell and conceive. Since the political system in the UK ( & pretty much everywhere else- could be a few exceptions) does not recognize Him as Sovereign but another, this is setting up partners with Him, thus blasphemy.

Now if the political system in the UK accepts The Lord of Abraham (PBUH) as Sovereign, then I would be more inclined to partake in it.

 

[Zibago]

I thought that Saudi Arabia, UAE,... implemented sharia.

Thats a separate debate but if you mean to say that these countries only have religious laws than you are slightly wrong the list consists of many more countries they just have strict implementation

Yes you do and that right is granted by our society, can I openly disagree with norms Saudi Arabia? Probably not. So maybe the 'evil government' of the western countries are perhaps not that evil

Not voting is wrong you dont get your point across the people in power if you dont vote

Really? when a terror attack happens, it is somehow the fault of our government that a terrorist starts shooting up innocent people? How convenient to blame the government for all bad things that happen, it is the perfect excuse to keep defending those scumbags, who are commiting those acts of pure evil.

I would say its more of an issue of the community and law enforcement if it occurs again and again in the same city

NATO supports/created ISIS? As far as I am aware, it is the radical imam and his men with ak-47's who are killing many innocent people, NATO is not somehow commanding or paying them to do that, they are doing it themselves.

ISIS are a result of forced regime change on stable countries by the Empire
The leaders kept the Mullahs in check masses can act like asses when their is no authority that is what happened

 

[Cell_DbZ]

Read this then you will understand why I say NATO supports ISIS and watch Putin.

http://thesaker.is/how-and-why-u-s-honors-and-aids-al-qaeda/




These terrorists are always known to the security services but the security services don't seem to deal with them...I dunno....

The fact that we didn't capture him in time has to do with the fact that sometimes our services are sheer incompetent.
Sadiq Khan is spending £1.7 million in battling 'hate speech' on the internet, instead of tracking and following the returned Jihadis, so blame him for the terror attacks in London. I don't get why those Jihadis have the possibility for returning home, you can even argue that even their human rights are respected and that our secret services will only act when there's enough proof. I personnely think we should be less tolerant to those Jihadis and ISIS sympathisers.
The fact that terror attacks happen is that the radical takes up the ak-47 and our society is too 'nice' to those guys, I do not buy your narrative that our government is out to kill it's own people in order to spread more 'hate' for one second.

KSA is as much a follower of Sharia as UK is. Just because there is the call to prayer five times per day or people observe correct dress when in public does not make it Sharia compliant. They do a lot of bad stuff... Do not use KSA as an example of an Islamic country when her very birth was a treacherous dagger into the Heartland of Islam.

Sharia is a complete system and when taken piecemeal can actually be regressive rather than progressive.

Then I am afriad there's not one mulsim country that can be considered 'good'
Sharia prescribes punishment by lashes
Apostasy is punished by death unless the apostate agreed to return to Islam. You cannot tell me that Shaira law is not resgressive or even barbaric when strictly implemented, Sharia will never be the norm in the west and must never be.

Rights and constitutions change (see the recent case of the Rep of Ireland over homosexual marriage) are never fixed unless they are fixed by an entity that is absolute...

I never evn denied that, it always changes for the better.

you will see my words coming true in the future (unfortunately)...

Get real, there will never be a change which will describe discrimintation. I don't recall that this has ever happened.

Who determines when an adaptation is needed? Can I not or others determine this?

Popular demand has done that every time, you on your own can advocate for change, but if not supported, forget it.
You can advocate Sharia, but if implemented, it will set us back and we would have no right to call ourselves a democracy anymore.

Others may feel that Western democracy is not yet fully developed and requires another dialectica to reach maturation.

Perhaps, I never denied this, it could change when needed.

You kinda sound like Fukuyama when he wrote the The End of History and the Last Man post collapse of the USSR.

I said clearly many times society keeps evolving, no need to make comparisons here, I can play that game too.

As to voting and blasphemy: Who is the Sovereign in the UK where I reside? What does the political system in the UK say about this matter?

The constitution says the people are the sovereign, you may argue that no one is free, but under 'God' I would be even less free. I can argue the mere existence of God, many people question this too, our society started to evolve into what it is today only when we stopped letting our lives be led by religion/God.
You have every right to believe in (your) God nontheless. But this seems to me that you are not assimilated properly.

Since the political system in the UK ( & pretty much everywhere else- could be a few exceptions) does not recognize Him as Sovereign but another, this is setting up partners with Him, thus blasphemy.

I call this evolution, but you are free to disagree.

Now if the political system in the UK accepts The Lord of Abraham (PBUH) as Sovereign, then I would be more inclined to partake in it.

I hope this never happens. I am pretty sure this is very unlikely.

At no point I meant to personally attack you, just that this is clear.

Thats a separate debate but if you mean to say that these countries only have religious laws than you are slightly wrong the list consists of many more countries they just have strict implementation

I know that, I don't think there's 1 place on earth where religious scripts are strictly followed.

Not voting is wrong you dont get your point across the people in power if you dont vote

I know, I think everyone should vote, but can you be forced? In my country you can get fined if you don't.

I would say its more of an issue of the community and law enforcement if it occurs again and again in the same city

I fully agree, incompetence of of secret services and major issues with certain communities are a perfect marriage for multiple terror attacks to happen.

ISIS are a result of forced regime change on stable countries by the Empire
The leaders kept the Mullahs in check masses can act like asses when their is no authority that is what happened

I agree that forced regime changes gave them an easy opportunity to form, what you say I think is correct, but in the end of the day it is the radical who picks up an ak-47 who is killing the people, not NATO/Usa.

 

[Zibago]

I know that, I don't think there's 1 place on earth where religious scripts are strictly followed.

In some places they are partially followed but mostly they are used for managing the asses i mean masses

I know, I think everyone should vote, but can you be forced? In my country you can get fined if you don't.

Australia has mandatory voting no?
I think all countries should have it
And fine is a good solution its your duty to vote

I fully agree, incompetence of of secret services and major issues with certain communities are a perfect marriage for multiple terror attacks to happen.

And add into that the toxic result of ghetoism mentality that has made neighbours strangers

I agree that forced regime changes gave them an easy opportunity to form, what you say I think is correct, but in the end of the day it is the radical who picks up an ak-47 who is killing the people, not NATO/Usa.

That is 100% true but managing them requires political stability in the troubled regions and an work by community to eradicate their mentality

You can advocate Sharia, but if implemented, it will set us back and we would have no right to call ourselves a democracy anymore.

Be careful what you wish for you just might get it is the answer here
Trust me they want that system because they live in a comfortable system the day they get it they will scream and run away @Kaptaan

 

[RoadRunner401]

You think it's easy now...wait until people start sending a driverless car with a rampage algorithm.

You mean like drones bringing freedom to people all over the world

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

You mean like drones bringing freedom to people all over the world

More like instead of somebody planting a car bomb in a crowded market that kills 22+ people they will simply send a driverless truck to do it.

 

[TMA]

The fact that we didn't capture him in time has to do with the fact that sometimes our services are sheer incompetent.
Sadiq Khan is spending £1.7 million in battling 'hate speech' on the internet, instead of tracking and following the returned Jihadis, so blame him for the terror attacks in London. I don't get why those Jihadis have the possibility for returning home, you can even argue that even their human rights are respected and that our secret services will only act when there's enough proof. I personnely think we should be less tolerant to those Jihadis and ISIS sympathisers.
The fact that terror attacks happen is that the radical takes up the ak-47 and our society is too 'nice' to those guys, I do not buy your narrative that our government is out to kill it's own people in order to spread more 'hate' for one second.


Then I am afriad there's not one mulsim country that can be considered 'good'
Sharia prescribes punishment by lashes
Apostasy is punished by death unless the apostate agreed to return to Islam. You cannot tell me that Shaira law is not resgressive or even barbaric when strictly implemented, Sharia will never be the norm in the west and must never be.


I never evn denied that, it always changes for the better.

Get real, there will never be a change which will describe discrimintation. I don't recall that this has ever happened.

Popular demand has done that every time, you on your own can advocate for change, but if not supported, forget it.
You can advocate Sharia, but if implemented, it will set us back and we would have no right to call ourselves a democracy anymore.

Perhaps, I never denied this, it could change when needed.

I said clearly many times society keeps evolving, no need to make comparisons here, I can play that game too.

The constitution says the people are the sovereign, you may argue that no one is free, but under 'God' I would be even less free. I can argue the mere existence of God, many people question this too, our society started to evolve into what it is today only when we stopped letting our lives be led by religion/God.
You have every right to believe in (your) God nontheless. But this seems to me that you are not assimilated properly.

I call this evolution, but you are free to disagree.

I hope this never happens. I am pretty sure this is very unlikely.

At no point I meant to personally attack you, just that this is clear.


I know that, I don't think there's 1 place on earth where religious scripts are strictly followed.

I know, I think everyone should vote, but can you be forced? In my country you can get fined if you don't.

I fully agree, incompetence of of secret services and major issues with certain communities are a perfect marriage for multiple terror attacks to happen.

I agree that forced regime changes gave them an easy opportunity to form, what you say I think is correct, but in the end of the day it is the radical who picks up an ak-47 who is killing the people, not NATO/Usa.

I agree with you on Sadiq Khan, I consider him part of the problem along with other traitors in the British Establishment. But this clamp down on "Hate Speech" (really Truth Speech) is what they want.

I do not mean to say that Muhammadan Sharia should be be used as the legal system in the West, that would be foolish to the extreme. For if that were to happen, it would be a consequence of the people and as the vast majority are not Muslims, this is not gonna happen and nor should it. BUT they who have power in the West wish to give the PERCEPTION that this is a REAL and TANGIBLE threat so they can further their Clash!
(On a slight tangent what do you think of Jewish courts in Britain for Jews to settle civil matters in?)

You do not have to buy my narrative. Mr Putin and others in the know, know what dirty tricks the Western Deep State have been doing to further a Clash. It is plain as day light that NATO had supported and still probably supports ISIS. If one supports another in murder but does not pull the trigger, he is still blameworthy, no??




"...But this seems to me that you are not assimilated properly."

Thank you for your honesty. This is what I had suspected all along. So in order to assimilate properly I would have to compromise on my faith?

 

[Cell_DbZ]

BUT they who have power in the West wish to give the PERCEPTION that this is a REAL and TANGIBLE threat so they can further their Clash!

I percieve this differently, I have never seen (a believable) politician scream about that soon sharia would be inplemented.
my problem is that a significant part of the muslim community is unwilling to accept the values of the country they live (there are a lot of muslims who want sharia), those people are detached from the rest, then they start to radicalize and then blame everyone else of Islamophobia, racism,... And in fact, there are a significant amount of political parties who turn a blind eye and sometimes even call people racist for pointing out the problem.
I do not believe that western government are willfully trying to create division, let alone civil unrest in their own country.

(On a slight tangent what do you think of Jewish courts in Britain for Jews to settle civil matters in?)

I think it is bs, everyone has to follow western law, but there are also christian courts (at least in my country), and those kind of courts are placed lower in the hierarchy of law. In other words, they will have to follow what the judge says, even their own judge says otherwise, religious courts have no 'enforceability' in Belgian law and I am pretty sure this is the same in Britain.

You do not have to buy my narrative. Mr Putin and others in the know, know what dirty tricks the Western Deep State have been doing to further a Clash.

Oh, I am fully aware that Usa/NATO, but also Russia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,... are supporting extremist groups for their own gain, as much as I hate tgat, this is the sad reality we live in. What I was arguing that is that even if NATO/Usa might be 'supporting' ISIS as far as trying to dispose Assad (or other regimes) and for their own egotistical interests, they are not supporting ISIS murdering innocent people. If they do, you will have to come up with proof.
Mister Putin might be right about what he says, but he's doing the same thing with supporting Hezbollah.

If one supports another in murder but does not pull the trigger, he is still blameworthy, no??

Yes, the Usa/NATO (and many other countries) are supporting terror groups, they are giving them the capability for commiting those murders and therefore are partially responsible for what is happening. However, has the Usa actively supported the murden of innocent people? I stand by what I said earlier: in the end of the day, Usa/NATO are not saying "murder those innocent people", it is the choice of the Jihadi to kill innocent people for their rotten ideology, not Usa/NATO.

"...But this seems to me that you are not assimilated properly."

Thank you for your honesty. This is what I had suspected all along. So in order to assimilate properly I would have to compromise on my faith?

Saying 'voting is blasphemy', because of your faith is in fact a sign of not assimilating, so in order to fully assimilate you will have to compromise in your faith (by voting, for example). I do not know how you feel about your 'position' in western society, but if you feel detached, it is your own fault.

 

[TMA]

I percieve this differently, I have never seen (a believable) politician scream about that soon sharia would be inplemented.
my problem is that a significant part of the muslim community is unwilling to accept the values of the country they live (there are a lot of muslims who want sharia), those people are detached from the rest, then they start to radicalize and then blame everyone else of Islamophobia, racism,... And in fact, there are a significant amount of political parties who turn a blind eye and sometimes even call people racist for pointing out the problem.
I do not believe that western government are willfully trying to create division, let alone civil unrest in their own country.

I think it is bs, everyone has to follow western law, but there are also christian courts (at least in my country), and those kind of courts are placed lower in the hierarchy of law. In other words, they will have to follow what the judge says, even their own judge says otherwise, religious courts have no 'enforceability' in Belgian law and I am pretty sure this is the same in Britain.

Oh, I am fully aware that Usa/NATO, but also Russia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,... are supporting extremist groups for their own gain, as much as I hate tgat, this is the sad reality we live in. What I was arguing that is that even if NATO/Usa might be 'supporting' ISIS as far as trying to dispose Assad (or other regimes) and for their own egotistical interests, they are not supporting ISIS murdering innocent people. If they do, you will have to come up with proof.
Mister Putin might be right about what he says, but he's doing the same thing with supporting Hezbollah.

Yes, the Usa/NATO (and many other countries) are supporting terror groups, they are giving them the capability for commiting those murders and therefore are partially responsible for what is happening. However, has the Usa actively supported the murden of innocent people? I stand by what I said earlier: in the end of the day, Usa/NATO are not saying "murder those innocent people", it is the choice of the Jihadi to kill innocent people for their rotten ideology, not Usa/NATO.

Saying 'voting is blasphemy', because of your faith is in fact a sign of not assimilating, so in order to fully assimilate you will have to compromise in your faith (by voting, for example). I do not know how you feel about your 'position' in western society, but if you feel detached, it is your own fault.

What utter rubbish! If I arm a hitman but I never told him to kill someone, then I am innocent? NATO knows full well what types of these people are and what ideology they have (crazy, mass murdering, heart eating Khawarij terrorists) and she bloody arms them to further Israel's strategic goals (which is what is really all about), but because she never sent the memo: "Do not kill innocents, please", she bears no responsibility in their murder? She is as guility as the one who pulls the trigger! Perhaps your and my moral codes are different?

It is laughable to compare Russia post USSR with the foreign policies of NATO. Russia is acting within International Legal frameworks when she supports Assad's government. This is something that NATO likes to ignore. She does not support proxy terrorists ( by her definition) groups to go and overthrow governments she does not like. Russia has not sunk to such an arrogant and hypocritical level. NATO deems ISIS et al as terrorists then she bloody arms them covertly!!

I hope one day NATO the Tyrant is disbanded. (Will probably never happen).

Regarding voting: So there is not much room for Freedom of Faith then in the liberal West? I appreciate your honesty and what I wanted to show to the Muslims who are following this discussion that even the mere belief in the heart regarding Sovereignty rests with God, is not acceptable by liberal Western standards.

I do not know what assimilate means. I suspect what they wish is for people who hold religious beliefs and wish to follow the religious way of life, to forgo on these matters, and so much for Freedom...

If by assimilate they mean, obey the law of the land, learn the native language, do not force people to not vote or convert, then that I can accept. But I fear, the real goal is the former...

I feel happy regarding my position. But the winds are changing...for the worst...the Clash is nigh...

 

[Cell_DbZ]

What utter rubbish! If I arm a hitman but I never told him to kill someone, then I am innocent? NATO knows full well what types of these people are and what ideology they have (crazy, mass murdering, heart eating Khawarij terrorists) and she bloody arms them to further Israel's strategic goals (which is what is really all about), but because she never sent the memo: "Do not kill innocents, please", she bears no responsibility in their murder? She is as guility as the one who pulls the trigger! Perhaps your and my moral codes are different?

Allright, I will say this one more time. NATO is not innocent, NATO is supporting many evil groups for their own gain, NATO is also responsible for those groups killing innocent people and it is not excuseable other than this beign the reality. I agree that NATO is very hypocritacal in many of it's actions. Why are you not calling out Saudi Arabia for supporting the very same groups? (without Saudi money, those groups would barely function) Why are you not calling out Saudi Arabia for beign the main source of financing for the 9/11 attack? Why are you not calling out Iran for doing the exact same thing? What I was saying was that no one else can be blamed for the terror attack in Paris or Kabul, but the terrorist doing it, NATO is using that scum for its own gains abroad (don't you think I am defending that), not for killing innocent people, as long you cannot accept that, then you could in theory blame every single terror attack on NATO. You seem to blame NATO for everything. Terror attack in Paris? Must be the fault of NATO, beacause they have given weapons to terrorist and it is certainly not the fault of the terrorist using them... Bad weather? NATO must be doing this to harm everyone in the world...
I recognize NATO's wrongdoing (I am staunchly against many of it's wars). The terrorist using the ak-47 to kill innocents is still the main culprit. Even if they wouldn't have weapons, the idealogy of those people would still be there.

It is laughable to compare Russia post USSR with the foreign policies of NATO. Russia is acting within International Legal frameworks when she supports Assad's government. This is something that NATO likes to ignore. She does not support proxy terrorists ( by her definition) groups to go and overthrow governments she does not like. Russia has not sunk to such an arrogant and hypocritical level.

I have defended the Russians in the past, but Russia is just another country with its own interests, Russia is supporting the seperatists in Ukraine (they have the excuse of those seperatists beign Russian or pro-Russia), in the end of the day they are in fact violating international norms. I defended their annexation of Crimea in the past, but it is still illegal, they have justifications. I agree that NATO is in fact doing more harm than Russia accross the world.

Regarding voting: So there is not much room for Freedom of Faith then in the liberal West? I appreciate your honesty and what I wanted to show to the Muslims who are following this discussion that even the mere belief in the heart regarding Sovereignty rests with God, is not acceptable by liberal Western standards.

I do not know what assimilate means. I suspect what they wish is for people who hold religious beliefs and wish to follow the religious way of life, to forgo on these matters, and so much for Freedom...

If by assimilate they mean, obey the law of the land, learn the native language, do not force people to not vote or convert, then that I can accept. But I fear, the real goal is the former...

You said that voting is 'blasphemy', I personnaly belief that voting only does good as in letting you voice beign heard, I am also against forcing people voting against their will.
You also said that you only recognize 'God' as your authority, does this mean that you do not recognize the constitution and the law as the authority of the country you live in? Are you willing to break rules implemented by the country you live in for your God? If this is the case, then yes, that 'freedom' of religion should be limited. If not, then feel free to do what you like, go to the mosque 4 times a day? Go ahead, no one will stop you (I certainly won't). The west seperates religion from legislation, I am afriad that everyone has to do and respect that.

If by assimilate they mean, obey the law of the land, learn the native language, do not force people to not vote or convert, then that I can accept.

That's what I meant.

I do not know what assimilate means. I suspect what they wish is for people who hold religious beliefs and wish to follow the religious way of life, to forgo on these matters, and so much for Freedom...

The constitution defends equal rights for everyone, it also defend free practice of religion (you obviously cannot break those very same rules in your practice). The mere existence of the constitution defends those rights, if a government would try to do that, they will be stopped (not only by the constitution, but by the people too).

But I fear, the real goal is the former...

Why do you assume that this is what I want? I admit I might be unclear in my comments, but please never assume that I am like that. If you meant the state, I wholeheartedly disagree this is the goal of any government, they must always swear to respect the constitution, they must swear to respect to respect and defend rights for all.

I feel happy regarding my position. But the winds are changing...for the worst...the Clash is nigh...

No one can deny that tensions are rising, but rights of one group will never be stripped.