|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On January 17 2016 05:20 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2016 05:13 m4ini wrote:
Btw: feel free to argue dumb shit like "apocalyptic mindsets", fact of the matter is though that people are scared. And that people arm themselves. And that's not Nazis arming themselves, they're long armed. It's normal people who are scared. Rightfully so.
edit: what the fuck has a huffpost statistic about terror-victims to do with criminal immigrants - lol. Just lol. The point I'm making is a very simple one. People are hysteric, the perceived danger does not match reality, violence and crime in Europe are steady or trending downward as well, and are at a much lower level then they were twenty or thirty years ago. And after all peope were really quick to draw a connection between refugees and terrorism, so I thought it would be relevant to point out that domestic terrorism in Europe was a way bigger threat in Europe than foreign terrorism is right now. http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21582041-rich-world-seeing-less-and-less-crime-even-face-high-unemployment-and-economicWe aren't living in more dangerous times, we simply have more cameras.
No one is arguing the overall crime statistics except you but seeing your last posts you are probably already used to discussing points nobody made in the first place.
|
|
|
On January 17 2016 05:30 AngryMag wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2016 05:20 Nyxisto wrote:On January 17 2016 05:13 m4ini wrote:
Btw: feel free to argue dumb shit like "apocalyptic mindsets", fact of the matter is though that people are scared. And that people arm themselves. And that's not Nazis arming themselves, they're long armed. It's normal people who are scared. Rightfully so.
edit: what the fuck has a huffpost statistic about terror-victims to do with criminal immigrants - lol. Just lol. The point I'm making is a very simple one. People are hysteric, the perceived danger does not match reality, violence and crime in Europe are steady or trending downward as well, and are at a much lower level then they were twenty or thirty years ago. And after all peope were really quick to draw a connection between refugees and terrorism, so I thought it would be relevant to point out that domestic terrorism in Europe was a way bigger threat in Europe than foreign terrorism is right now. http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21582041-rich-world-seeing-less-and-less-crime-even-face-high-unemployment-and-economicWe aren't living in more dangerous times, we simply have more cameras. No one is arguing the overall crime statistics except you but seeing your last posts you are probably already used to discussing points nobody made in the first place.
Well... we should? I don't see the logic in "something terrible happened on NYE, people are scared, thus Angela Merkel has failed!! Q.E.D" Merkel's job isn't to make you happy, her job is to keep you safe, among other things. If we're discussing security policy what else is relevant besides actual statistics and long-term outlook about crime and terrorism?
@m4ini :
Well if you say that crime statistics are systematically rigged I really can't prove you wrong, I doubt anybody can. The consensus seems to be that overall crime levels are at least steady over the recent years and have been going down a long time before that. If you claim that this is completely untrue I can't really disprove it. That crime in certain areas has increased I don't think anybody is disputing, but it has as well been going down in others so I don't really know how single examples are supposed to give us a coherent picture.
|
Well if you say that crime statistics are systematically rigged I really can't prove you wrong, I doubt anybody can. The consensus seems to be that overall crime levels are at least steady over the recent years and have been going down a long time before that. If you claim that this is completely untrue I can't really disprove it.
I didn't say it's rigged, i said "rigged". They're "verfaelscht", nicht "geschoent". Don't know a better english word than "rigged".
The rest of your claim is wrong, read up on crime statistics in regards to immigrants. Not "in general".
Merkel's job isn't to make you happy, her job is to keep you safe
Splendid job she did.
That crime in certain areas has increased I don't think anybody is disputing, but it has as well been going down in others so I don't really know how single examples are supposed to give us a coherent picture.
What..? You just did, are you asleep? Who cares that a town in Hinter-Wanneeickel has lower crime rates because the resident 64 year old pickpocketer died of an Asthma attack.
Crimerates around refugee-centers doubled, tripled and then some, and these are rarely on the outskirts of towns especially in the Ruhrgebiet, that's a fact. You can argue that "somehow" that has nothing to with refugees living in those refugee camps, if you decide to - but fact of the matter is that criminal offenses around refugee centers (especially pickpocketing and mugging) rose sharply (and nobody can tell exactly how much "violence" rose, since that's counted under Hatecrime/Rechtsextremismus). "Overall crimerate" has nothing to do with that, it just means that other things are happening less, like for example tax evasion.
|
On January 17 2016 05:37 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2016 05:30 AngryMag wrote:On January 17 2016 05:20 Nyxisto wrote:On January 17 2016 05:13 m4ini wrote:
Btw: feel free to argue dumb shit like "apocalyptic mindsets", fact of the matter is though that people are scared. And that people arm themselves. And that's not Nazis arming themselves, they're long armed. It's normal people who are scared. Rightfully so.
edit: what the fuck has a huffpost statistic about terror-victims to do with criminal immigrants - lol. Just lol. The point I'm making is a very simple one. People are hysteric, the perceived danger does not match reality, violence and crime in Europe are steady or trending downward as well, and are at a much lower level then they were twenty or thirty years ago. And after all peope were really quick to draw a connection between refugees and terrorism, so I thought it would be relevant to point out that domestic terrorism in Europe was a way bigger threat in Europe than foreign terrorism is right now. http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21582041-rich-world-seeing-less-and-less-crime-even-face-high-unemployment-and-economicWe aren't living in more dangerous times, we simply have more cameras. No one is arguing the overall crime statistics except you but seeing your last posts you are probably already used to discussing points nobody made in the first place. Well... we should? I don't see the logic in "something terrible happened on NYE, people are scared, thus Angela Merkel has failed!! Q.E.D" Merkel's job isn't to make you happy, her job is to keep you safe, among other things. If we're discussing security policy what else is relevant besides actual statistics and long-term outlook about crime and terrorism? @m4ini : Well if you say that crime statistics are systematically rigged I really can't prove you wrong, I doubt anybody can. The consensus seems to be that overall crime levels are at least steady over the recent years and have been going down a long time before that. If you claim that this is completely untrue I can't really disprove it.
Because a raw statistic has no real meaning. If all the shit crime just magically disappears but murder rates, rape and serious crime quadruples, you will have a huge decrease in overall crime but the physical safety of the populace didn't exactly increase. Statistics need contexts to gain meaning. Several sorts of crime like pickpocketing, robberies are on the rise in certain areas (Ballungsgebiete), many foreigners involved, organizing themselves. These people shouldn't be here but we won't get rid off them because the countries of their origin of course won't take them back. Why would they? Nobody has a use for small time criminals. If we would actually have useful rules to prevent shitbags from entering the country in the first place, this problem flatout wouldn't exist to that degree.
Personally I actually laugh about do gooders getting robbed blind in city areas. You reap what you sow. It is a bit like children and hotplates. They have to touch them atleast once to believe that it actually burns. People somehow are only learning through negative stimuli nowadays.
|
If we would actually have useful rules to prevent shitbags from entering the country in the first place, this problem flatout wouldn't exist to that degree.
According to Nyxisto, there is no such thing. It's either "close the borders" or "status quo".
edit:
But to humor him, i did like what refugees did today in cologne. I certainly do understand that not every refugee is a criminal. But if you have 1000 refugees, of which 100 are likely to commit crimes, you don't let those 100 in and take the other 900. If that means that those other 900 have to wait longer, that's sad and stuff, but shit happens. You can not just disregard public safety etc of your own population to rescue criminals.
It's, as i said, idiotic.
|
On January 17 2016 05:51 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +If we would actually have useful rules to prevent shitbags from entering the country in the first place, this problem flatout wouldn't exist to that degree. According to Nyxisto, there is no such thing. It's either "close the borders" or "status quo". edit: But to humor him, i did like what refugees did today in cologne. I certainly do understand that not every refugee is a criminal. But if you have 1000 refugees, of which 100 are likely to commit crimes, you don't let those 100 in and take the other 900. If that means that those other 900 have to wait longer, that's sad and stuff, but shit happens. You can not just disregard public safety etc of your own population to rescue criminals. It's, as i said, idiotic.
Even the 900 good ones should not be taken. They lived in Turkey and crossed several safe countries. The country should be closed to all male muslim immigrants. They only bring disaster as can be seen if you ever take a walk around one of the muslim areas in town.
|
I like people bashing muslim extremist now when they were commiting crimes in their countries while they was doing same on Kosovo 1998 and 99 you all supported Serbia bombing. Albanian muslims were organ dealing whole war and everyone kept eyes closed. You have terrorist state in south Europe and you just dont care.
|
On January 17 2016 06:44 ZeRoX_TV wrote:
I like people bashing muslim extremist now when they were commiting crimes in their countries while they was doing same on Kosovo 1998 and 99 you all supported Serbia bombing. Albanian muslims were organ dealing whole war and everyone kept eyes closed. You have terrorist state in south Europe and you just dont care.
The West in general has very strongly turned a blind eye to any of the Muslim issues in East Europe/Russia. It is considered "racist" to acknowledge the existence of a troublesome/terror-supporting Muslim population and it is considered inhuman to refuse to flood your country with "refugees" from the MidEast.
Some sort of modern double standard. In my experience (lived in the US for a while now) it comes from ignorance.
|
So, lets play a game!
Say, the anti-refugee-poster are right: The refugees will only bring disaster to a given country.
What to do with all the refugees streaming to us, then?
|
What people consider inhumane or racist in that context is the lingo that is being used. Who does 'flood' us with refugees? 'Invasion' is another nice one. After all it is known that people fleeing from war practically constitute a foreign army. If it's all just healthy skepticism why is a god portion of the 'skeptics' adopting far-right rhetoric?
|
On January 17 2016 07:41 Nyxisto wrote:
What people consider inhumane or racist in that context is the lingo that is being used. Who does 'flood' us with refugees? 'Invasion' is another nice one. After all it is known that people fleeing from war practically constitute a foreign army. If it's all just healthy skepticism why is a god portion of the 'skeptics' adopting far-right rhetoric?
Are you the thought police now? 
People can hold different values from you and that's perfectly okay. However the German left has a tremendous problem with extending this to other Germans.
|
On January 17 2016 07:39 Schmobutzen wrote:
So, lets play a game!
Say, the anti-refugee-poster are right: The refugees will only bring disaster to a given country.
What to do with all the refugees streaming to us, then?
Send them to live in refugee camps in Turkey, send money to help fund improvements to said arrangements, and offer the standard process for admission into the country.
Might be better ways but that is the most established one as of now.
|
That has nothing to do with thought police!
That is just a (although somewhat tiring and somewhat washed up) analysis of real spoken words.
And besides every ideology can have a problem with overextending...
|
On January 17 2016 07:49 Schmobutzen wrote:
That has nothing to do with thought police!
That is just a (although somewhat tiring and somewhat washed up) analysis of real spoken words.
And besides every ideology can have a problem with overextending...
It does!
The evil man used words I didn't to describe a situation which he might perceive differently. He also might have a different idea of what amount of trouble he deems acceptable to deal with this whole situation. Therefore he clearly must be labeled a nazi and consequently be banned from voicing his opinion!
|
LegalLord: no, the premise was: If the refugees are chaotic and a harbinger of disaster to any given country - your proposition is just not good.
And, Turkey already has the most refugees (by far the most - without conceding because of they can't handle it).
|
On January 17 2016 07:53 Schmobutzen wrote:
LegalLord: no, the premise was: If the refugees are chaotic and a harbinger of disaster to any given country - your proposition is just not good.
And, Turkey already has the most refugees (by far the most - without conceding because of they can't handle it).
The big difference is the way Turkey and Western European countries handle the situation. They stick them in camps, making them go back as soon as possible whereas we try to fruitlessly integrate them into our society. Not to speak of the difference in social security systems etc.
|
No!
Thought police is something very differnent to a spoken words police. Very different!
And your analysis is off, because it is an overly used trope, because I have and had a many discussions with a lot of people - and some of them do, what you describe - voicing concern and using some words are not automatically make you a nazi. But using it constantly and more often than not, will probably do.
|
On January 17 2016 07:58 Schmobutzen wrote:
No!
Thought police is something very differnent to a spoken words police. Very different!
And your analysis is off, because it is an overly used trope, because I have and had a many discussions with a lot of people - and some of them do, what you describe - voicing concern and using some words are not automatically make you a nazi. But using it constantly and more often than not, will probably do.
See.
There's quite a big difference between "Jews and Gypsies are genetically inferior and should be purged" and "Hey, I don't actually disagree with what is going on and I use words that someone deems offensive."
I, for example, think Nyxisto's position is not very well thought out, but that doesn't make me label him as a left of Lenin antisocietal alternative nut. Many people on the left side of the political spectrum are incapable of engaging in a real debate because of muh values!!!! and anyone who disagrees with those immediately is someone not to be argued with on the basis that he disagrees.
|
On January 17 2016 06:44 ZeRoX_TV wrote:
I like people bashing muslim extremist now when they were commiting crimes in their countries while they was doing same on Kosovo 1998 and 99 you all supported Serbia bombing. Albanian muslims were organ dealing whole war and everyone kept eyes closed. You have terrorist state in south Europe and you just dont care.
Boo hoo hoo, turns out the world is driven by power and influence, more news at 11. Muslim extremists served their purpose and helped the united state sustain its power. When you use an attack dog to kill someone, do you want that dog kept in your home? Or do you keep it in a cage? It's a whole different thing to wake up one day to hear the dog bit your daughter. That dog was supposed to just attack your rival. Supporting a dog's biting of a rival is very different from supporting a dog's biting of your daughter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
