I mean yeah I also thought it was muslims at first. guess racists are still capable of doing stuff like this also.
(guy looked white from clip I saw and eyewitnesses report him saying 'fuck foreigners' and 'I'm german'). presumably in german though..
lol POKER
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jul 22 2016 21:06. Posts 2227
On July 22 2016 19:39 Liquid`Drone wrote:
nice editing out your 'religion of peace' quippet
I mean yeah I also thought it was muslims at first. guess racists are still capable of doing stuff like this also.
(guy looked white from clip I saw and eyewitnesses report him saying 'fuck foreigners' and 'I'm german'). presumably in german though..
even if this is true just because he says "I'm German" doesn't mean we have to feed into his hate, he's obviously not a true German, anybody can say they're German
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
On July 22 2016 19:39 Liquid`Drone wrote:
nice editing out your 'religion of peace' quippet
I mean yeah I also thought it was muslims at first. guess racists are still capable of doing stuff like this also.
(guy looked white from clip I saw and eyewitnesses report him saying 'fuck foreigners' and 'I'm german'). presumably in german though..
even if this is true just because he says "I'm German" doesn't mean we have to feed into his hate, he's obviously not a true German, anybody can say they're German
or it is what they want.. if you are a majority and you want to purge the minority then starting a race war is just about the best way to go about it. The stupidity of the method is not the problem here, the goal is the problem.
On July 22 2016 20:33 Spitfiree wrote:
aaand thats how u start a race war
too bad shooters are too dumb to realize such thing
thats exactly what the shooter wants obv
Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jul 22 2016 23:41. Posts 2227
On July 22 2016 20:33 Spitfiree wrote:
aaand thats how u start a race war
too bad shooters are too dumb to realize such thing
didn't you say europe deserves terrorism because radicals blowing up airports is them defending themselves? if this was neo Nazis how does that not apply to them too
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
On July 22 2016 19:39 Liquid`Drone wrote:
nice editing out your 'religion of peace' quippet
I mean yeah I also thought it was muslims at first. guess racists are still capable of doing stuff like this also.
(guy looked white from clip I saw and eyewitnesses report him saying 'fuck foreigners' and 'I'm german'). presumably in german though..
Actually i think he is. Dont celebrate yet lol
Seems like the delay is strong on the ethnicity plus constant mention of being german, i think i still get it right by the end of the day. Some photos show he isnt white
This happened exactly 5 years after breivik. Breivik explicitly wanted to contribute to increased racial tension to instigate race war so muslims would be thrown out of our country before they were too many for it to be possible. Guy looks white, yells I am german, fuck foreigners and some insults geared towards turks.
soo.. seems pretty clear that this is a breivik copycat, just far less prepared (and prolly less dedicated), and less competent in the art of massacring.
lol POKER
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jul 23 2016 02:31. Posts 2227
On July 23 2016 01:24 Liquid`Drone wrote:
This happened exactly 5 years after breivik. Breivik explicitly wanted to contribute to increased racial tension to instigate race war so muslims would be thrown out of our country before they were too many for it to be possible. Guy looks white, yells I am german, fuck foreigners and some insults geared towards turks.
soo.. seems pretty clear that this is a breivik copycat, just far less prepared (and prolly less dedicated), and less competent in the art of massacring.
he was iranian, dual citizen
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
The more time goes on, the more this kind of stuff gets talked about all over the world.
The more time goes on, the more idiots who does this kind of stuff to get talked about all over the world.
Sometimes i think this kind of stupid shit shouldn't get talked about at all.
Watching a debate with norwegian prime minister Erna Solberg and her biggest opponment in politics Jonas Gahr Støre from a few days ago. Both sound like they are starting to suffer from a light version of islamophobia. (I suffer from a big, fatal version of it)
Head of "Islamic Council Norway" entering the debate, beeing a huge douchebag towards both of them. Not taking anything they had to say into concideration. Just denying everything even thou I think especially Jonas gave some reasonable advice....
On July 22 2016 20:33 Spitfiree wrote:
aaand thats how u start a race war
too bad shooters are too dumb to realize such thing
thats exactly what the shooter wants obv
How do we know that ?
I ask because this is the standard type of phrases that is thrown around in norwegian media ALL THE TIME and its never questioned.
Well if the shooter wanted muslims out of germany, shooting immigrants randomly would increase racial tension which is the natural path to pursue his goals
when I first heard shooting in munich I went oh fuck another islamist, thought it was 100% a muslim. Then I saw a video of him where he looked fairly white (Iranians are pretty much white pigment wise anyway). then I saw a screendump of some eyewitness comment saying that he was yelling I'm german and fuck foreigners. Then there was some video of him arguing with a bunch of turks, where he said 'fucking turks' or something to that effect. Then I realized that it was 5 years, on the day, after Breivik. I think assuming Breivik copycat from that information is perfectly rational - just like how assuming it was a muslim before I had that information was perfectly rational.
I still don't think this seems like islamic terrorism though. Sounds more like an insane guy snapping, with racial tension being the reason behind the snap.
On July 23 2016 09:33 Spitfiree wrote:
except you suggest that he s led by rational behaviour which is something to be proven when it comes to such people
People doing these kind of thing are mentally ill but it doesnt mean they are devoid of reason, if he did this against foreigners he is very likely aware that his actions will raise racial tension
I agree Baal. It just annoys me that those kind of assumptions are thrown out as facts in our media especially. "That would be what the shooter wants".
and yeah. No islamic connection here, guy said in a clip from before he started shooting 'I've been bullied for 7 years, and because of people like you I've decided to get a gun so I can kill you'. Then from his 'I'm german!!' statement it would sound like 'not being german' is an aspect of the bullying. He also seems to have been targeting youth.
This seems more 'school shooting' than 'terrorist' in nature basically - there's no ideological foundation, just hatred.
On July 23 2016 10:11 Liquid`Drone wrote:
and yeah. No islamic connection here, guy said in a clip from before he started shooting 'I've been bullied for 7 years, and because of people like you I've decided to get a gun so I can kill you'. Then from his 'I'm german!!' statement it would sound like 'not being german' is an aspect of the bullying. He also seems to have been targeting youth.
This seems more 'school shooting' than 'terrorist' in nature basically - there's no ideological foundation, just hatred.
+ Obvious connection to Anders Behring Breivik. According to german police
Homeboy snackbars had a busy month, Orlando, Nice, subway, a couple of other ones
Btw, the "tanned" Iranian-German was anti-islam? he was reported shouting "allah akbhar", also inspired by Breivik guy according to shit liberal media, sure CNN , sure
Here's a pic of the shooter, I guess I was so wrong I'm sorry
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
^ 3 more attacks since I was wrong about that "tweet" and only that part. Still not a problem eh? In before bullys and Breivik did this and I'm just a shithead encouraging a race war. I don't live in Europe but yeah, I feel sorry for those who can't do a thing. Where I live growing up my airports been bombed, bus station and port. All snackbars related, since then we've learned our lesson and keep a close eye on them and although there haven't been any major shit going down (except for a couple of small bombings by snackbars again), it's tough to accept they will never change unless more of their own come out and condemn or actively participate in the capture of these fools. Keep quiet and the situation will only get worse and worse
Here you are trying to justify your racism because of such attacks, cuz of a retarded book.
While Israel s basically doing the same.. cuz of a retarded book as well .. also they happen to be a modern developed country and a main ally of USA, thats probably the main reason why the USA doesn't have 50k drones over them and the Saudis for example ( which are very well known for the lack of support for the Sharia Law and human rights and whatever )
Wonder why one thing gets more attention than the other.
How can one explain that its not a race problem, nor religious one. Its lack of education, its being put through tons of undeserved stress ( stress even seems like a joke word to use ) and its about 100 other things, but not the ones you think the main problem are.
And tbh after taking over a million refugees those acts are late to come, I'm also guessing the media is putting attention on such acts on purpose and not showing germans killing other germans or whatever. Crime levels would've definitely risen, but I doubt its up to the point where the media makes it look like it is. The shooting was obviously not a terrorist act, but one of other virtue.
Another thing is, since everyone is all against such acts of violence, you should also be against the media giving such big importance to it, since such coverage would only lead to higher amounts of such deeds, as it would give the courage to other dumbass motherfuckers to do shit.
Also here s a tip for "informing" yourself through media though :
When you re reading/watching news:
Step 1 Acknowledge what you just saw, since its obviously true and ask yourself why it happened
Step 2 Ask yourself why exactly did they just show you that, since its never about informing you I can assure you that as well
On July 25 2016 00:38 Spitfiree wrote:
Here you are trying to justify your racism because of such attacks, cuz of a retarded book.
While Israel s basically doing the same.. cuz of a retarded book as well .. also they happen to be a modern developed country and a main ally of USA, thats probably the main reason why the USA doesn't have 50k drones over them and the Saudis for example ( which are very well known for the lack of support for the Sharia Law and human rights and whatever )
Wonder why one thing gets more attention than the other.
How can one explain that its not a race problem, nor religious one. Its lack of education, its being put through tons of undeserved stress ( stress even seems like a joke word to use ) and its about 100 other things, but not the ones you think the main problem are.
And tbh after taking over a million refugees those acts are late to come, I'm also guessing the media is putting attention on such acts on purpose and not showing germans killing other germans or whatever. Crime levels would've definitely risen, but I doubt its up to the point where the media makes it look like it is. The shooting was obviously not a terrorist act, but one of other virtue.
Another thing is, since everyone is all against such acts of violence, you should also be against the media giving such big importance to it, since such coverage would only lead to higher amounts of such deeds, as it would give the courage to other dumbass motherfuckers to do shit.
Also here s a tip for "informing" yourself through media though :
When you re reading/watching news:
Step 1 Acknowledge what you just saw, since its obviously true and ask yourself why it happened
Step 2 Ask yourself why exactly did they just show you that, since its never about informing you I can assure you that as well
Many regions of the world are as poor and ignorant as the middle east but they dont blow themselves up, Islam has a vital role in that happening stop denying what is so absolutely obvious.
The media is a business, simple as that dont have ridiculous delusions of what they should or shouldnt put there, they report what sells.
You should be observing crime levels not levels of blowing themselves up. It's not like we can compare them though cause I doubt there s a legit statistics about that.
Also which other region in the world sleeps under the sound of drones for years now, would you mind pointing that out ?
The only problem with islam is that its followers are mostly uneducated and they are following it blindly. If you follow christianity blindly it would be close to the same, women for example would be considered slightly better than animals.
Last edit: 25/07/2016 10:08
1
NewbSaibot United States. Jul 25 2016 11:15. Posts 4943
On July 25 2016 08:59 Spitfiree wrote:
The only problem with islam is that
Great! We've made progress, you recognize that there is a problem with Islam.
bye now
Last edit: 25/07/2016 11:16
1
austrian oak Belgium. Jul 25 2016 12:00. Posts 520
Kind of surprising that only 36% of the asylum applicants in Germany are Syrian.
Where are the rest from? Libya and Iraq?
The stats as laid out in the article makes it sound as if there's already more MENA migrants that arrived this year than all of last year. How is Europe not just refusing these guys entry at this point? I don't get what the end game is supposed to be here from the European perspective.
On September 08 2008 10:07 Baal wrote: my head is a gyroscope, your argument is invalid
On July 25 2016 08:59 Spitfiree wrote:
The only problem with islam is that
Great! We've made progress, you recognize that there is a problem with Islam.
Previously I would've said that im against all religions, except i found out that is not the case, its more of a im against anything that takes advantage of stupid people to succeed in amoral deeds, which is not always the case with religions. As it is with Islam, its just that the majority of followers are dumb as hell and much easier to control and turn into radicals
@nolan Central/South Africa like Libya and such where countries are on the verge or in a civil war and the Mid-east countries. Im guessing most of syrians are in camps in Turkey, thats why the situation in Turkey is quite problematic for Europe, as Erdogan can flood the continent with millions of more migrants at any point if he decides to do so
On July 25 2016 08:59 Spitfiree wrote:
You should be observing crime levels not levels of blowing themselves up. It's not like we can compare them though cause I doubt there s a legit statistics about that.
Also which other region in the world sleeps under the sound of drones for years now, would you mind pointing that out ?
The only problem with islam is that its followers are mostly uneducated and they are following it blindly. If you follow christianity blindly it would be close to the same, women for example would be considered slightly better than animals.
Unlike you I acknowledge all the factors leading to these phenomenon, so yes of course Drones are a huge factor, but so is Islam, that is the fundamental flaw in your argument, your irrationally refuse to reckon that Islam is part of the equation.
Yes of course the difference between muslims and christians is how "serious" they take their religion, most Christians dont really give a fuck about the bible, I've been arguing since the start of thread like these that both religions when it comes to holy books are equally awful.
Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jul 26 2016 04:37. Posts 2227
On July 25 2016 12:45 nolan wrote:
Kind of surprising that only 36% of the asylum applicants in Germany are Syrian.
Where are the rest from? Libya and Iraq?
The stats as laid out in the article makes it sound as if there's already more MENA migrants that arrived this year than all of last year. How is Europe not just refusing these guys entry at this point? I don't get what the end game is supposed to be here from the European perspective.
and Afghanistan, there never was a plan, it's just a million levels of bureaucracy doing random shit
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
On July 25 2016 08:59 Spitfiree wrote:
You should be observing crime levels not levels of blowing themselves up. It's not like we can compare them though cause I doubt there s a legit statistics about that.
Also which other region in the world sleeps under the sound of drones for years now, would you mind pointing that out ?
The only problem with islam is that its followers are mostly uneducated and they are following it blindly. If you follow christianity blindly it would be close to the same, women for example would be considered slightly better than animals.
Unlike you I acknowledge all the factors leading to these phenomenon, so yes of course Drones are a huge factor, but so is Islam, that is the fundamental flaw in your argument, your irrationally refuse to reckon that Islam is part of the equation.
Yes of course the difference between muslims and christians is how "serious" they take their religion, most Christians dont really give a fuck about the bible, I've been arguing since the start of thread like these that both religions when it comes to holy books are equally awful.
You are right about contemporary Christians being Christians only in name. But completely wrong since if they became fundamentalist Christians then they would have to forsake all of their sins including murder and rebellion.
On July 25 2016 08:59 Spitfiree wrote:
You should be observing crime levels not levels of blowing themselves up. It's not like we can compare them though cause I doubt there s a legit statistics about that.
Also which other region in the world sleeps under the sound of drones for years now, would you mind pointing that out ?
The only problem with islam is that its followers are mostly uneducated and they are following it blindly. If you follow christianity blindly it would be close to the same, women for example would be considered slightly better than animals.
Unlike you I acknowledge all the factors leading to these phenomenon, so yes of course Drones are a huge factor, but so is Islam, that is the fundamental flaw in your argument, your irrationally refuse to reckon that Islam is part of the equation.
Yes of course the difference between muslims and christians is how "serious" they take their religion, most Christians dont really give a fuck about the bible, I've been arguing since the start of thread like these that both religions when it comes to holy books are equally awful.
You are right about contemporary Christians being Christians only in name. But completely wrong since if they became fundamentalist Christians then they would have to forsake all of their sins including murder and rebellion.
No, we had our times when Christians actually followed their holy book, it was called the Dark Ages and the inquisition.
yeah yeah... just like real muslims doesnt kill others, therefore ISIS isnt muslims right? you will either engage in a discussion about the brutal verses of the bible or you will quit that bullshit "true Scotsman" fallacy argument.
A priest just got his throat slit by radical islamists in front of his congregation while doing mass. (according to initial reports)
I'm not making any new threads about this shit anymore since nothing fruitful comes out of it anyway.
On July 25 2016 08:59 Spitfiree wrote:
You should be observing crime levels not levels of blowing themselves up. It's not like we can compare them though cause I doubt there s a legit statistics about that.
Also which other region in the world sleeps under the sound of drones for years now, would you mind pointing that out ?
The only problem with islam is that its followers are mostly uneducated and they are following it blindly. If you follow christianity blindly it would be close to the same, women for example would be considered slightly better than animals.
Unlike you I acknowledge all the factors leading to these phenomenon, so yes of course Drones are a huge factor, but so is Islam, that is the fundamental flaw in your argument, your irrationally refuse to reckon that Islam is part of the equation.
Yes of course the difference between muslims and christians is how "serious" they take their religion, most Christians dont really give a fuck about the bible, I've been arguing since the start of thread like these that both religions when it comes to holy books are equally awful.
You kind of contradict yourself, but nevermind.
Regardless of that its pointless to even discuss if Islam is a huge factor or not, either way its present and here to stay and its not like u can eradicate or ban it, cause then you put the values of the modern day society in the trash bin ( you would hurt more innocents than actual terrorist, and im sorry, but people that would choose security over freedom, do indeed deserve neither, as cliche as it is, I know that you in particular think the same way )
The solutions must work around it, and thats the biggest problem with radical thinking like ban refugees and stop immigration and blah blah. It would simply be a waste of resources to even try it.
If politicians gave a fuck they would've already completely crushed ISIS with a ground operation, however that will not happen since it would kill a huge weapons market. Nobody gives a fuck about values, not politicians, not ISIS, its all about the money. How long do you think it ll take for NATO to completely demolish ISIS as an organization ?
Sadly you get cases of deranged individuals blowing themselves cause they are influenced by the global picture and have the wrong understanding of the situation.
Its the standard stalemate situation where the people need one thing and the politicians do the exact opposite. Mid-east is probably the biggest money making area in the world for the past 20 years. Its pointless to fight the individuals if the source of the problems stands unchanged, such time and efforts waste.
There s also the problem with Europe not knowing what the hell to do with all those people that already came. They are also here to stay, there s no way you extradite even a slight % of them. Obviously majority are normal people, however the scum that came with them could potentially force a nasty situation for everyone. Its quite surprising things didnt escalate considering the amount of terrorist acts past weeks. Or the german media might be keeping things low again, wouldnt be the first time they hide germans lighting refugee camps on fire.
Also a problem with the discussion here is that some people seem to be too " engaged" in the situation and do not view it from the outside, as a spectator which would enable them to think on a macro level. You can't think about the individual or any feelings when fixing such major crises, best case scenario would be fixing it for the 2 main majorities of the problem
On July 25 2016 12:45 nolan wrote:
Kind of surprising that only 36% of the asylum applicants in Germany are Syrian.
Where are the rest from? Libya and Iraq?
The stats as laid out in the article makes it sound as if there's already more MENA migrants that arrived this year than all of last year. How is Europe not just refusing these guys entry at this point? I don't get what the end game is supposed to be here from the European perspective.
On July 25 2016 08:59 Spitfiree wrote:
You should be observing crime levels not levels of blowing themselves up. It's not like we can compare them though cause I doubt there s a legit statistics about that.
Also which other region in the world sleeps under the sound of drones for years now, would you mind pointing that out ?
The only problem with islam is that its followers are mostly uneducated and they are following it blindly. If you follow christianity blindly it would be close to the same, women for example would be considered slightly better than animals.
Unlike you I acknowledge all the factors leading to these phenomenon, so yes of course Drones are a huge factor, but so is Islam, that is the fundamental flaw in your argument, your irrationally refuse to reckon that Islam is part of the equation.
Yes of course the difference between muslims and christians is how "serious" they take their religion, most Christians dont really give a fuck about the bible, I've been arguing since the start of thread like these that both religions when it comes to holy books are equally awful.
You are right about contemporary Christians being Christians only in name. But completely wrong since if they became fundamentalist Christians then they would have to forsake all of their sins including murder and rebellion.
No, we had our times when Christians actually followed their holy book, it was called the Dark Ages and the inquisition.
yeah yeah... just like real muslims doesnt kill others, therefore ISIS isnt muslims right? you will either engage in a discussion about the brutal verses of the bible or you will quit that bullshit "true Scotsman" fallacy argument.
Once again the roman catholic church is a front for the dying roman empire nothing to do with Christianity during the dark ages they banned the bible and confiscated everything to keep for themselves in their library.
Christianity is not about the church and Jesus warned about it many times. In 1604 the most accurate translation of the bible KJV was translated.
Let's look at some of the direct opposition the pagan romans have with Christianity: Worshipping Mary they worship her because they worship the goddess Semiramis, Isis etc. They have statues and worship them. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Incense, candles and even the chalice and scepter are used all they need is a sword for the complete set ready to conjure up demons. Checkerboard floor obvious occult references, columns everywhere, obelisks everywhere list goes on.
They call their priests father And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. No where in the bible is it taught to confess to a priest in fact the New Testament makes it so that you don't even need priests.
It is a practice of blasphemy. In your own country they offer food to the spirits and worship some skull lady.
What you do not seem to understand is that the Old Testament is a theocracy for the people of Israel living thousands of years ago those laws were to protect and bring about the Messiah. Those laws apply to Christians only when repeated in the New Testament
We will see what the fruits of a secular world post 1950 will be like I wouldn't get your hopes up it's looking like the age of the Jezebel.
2 Timothy 3King James Version (KJV)
3 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as their's also was.
10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,
11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.
12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
its pointless to even discuss if Islam is a huge factor or not, either way its present and here to stay and its not like u can eradicate or ban it, cause then you put the values of the modern day society in the trash bin ( you would hurt more innocents than actual terrorist, and im sorry, but people that would choose security over freedom, do indeed deserve neither, as cliche as it is, I know that you in particular think the same way )
The solutions must work around it, and thats the biggest problem with radical thinking like ban refugees and stop immigration and blah blah. It would simply be a waste of resources to even try it.
this so much.
You can either stir shit up or try to make things work. Pragmatism could also lead a sane person to try to distort aspects of the truth, for example when debating if Islam is a religion of peace or not. Well guess what, muslims aren't going anywhere and instead of pointing fingers and alienating them perhaps it's better if they actually thought it is. Then their kids might become atheists or believe in a watered down version of their religion or whatever.
It's a bit frustrating to see people only remember intellectual honesty when it suits an agenda of stirring shit up. So much anti-pc talk and anger about politicians misrepresenting the situation... Face it, the atheistic pov is completely irrelevant to most people around the world and politicians lie for a living, these are facts; we aren't teens to believe we're going to argue our way out of the surrounding religious folklore infesting the world, these things change slowly. Modernity will shrink the barbarity away until every blood thirsty savage transforms into a harmless new age bs eater or better. Well, maybe it won't if everyone does what's required to start a war of sorts.
I guess my point is, it really doesn't seem wise to try to make two contrasting religious worlds clash head on
new shit has come to light... a-and... shit! man...
Regardless of that its pointless to even discuss if Islam is a huge factor or not, either way its present and here to stay and its not like u can eradicate or ban it, cause then you put the values of the modern day society in the trash bin ( you would hurt more innocents than actual terrorist, and im sorry, but people that would choose security over freedom, do indeed deserve neither, as cliche as it is, I know that you in particular think the same way )
The solutions must work around it, and thats the biggest problem with radical thinking like ban refugees and stop immigration and blah blah. It would simply be a waste of resources to even try it.
It does mater to acknowledge it, if you dont know the causes of a problems odds are that you will chose the wrong solution, I absolutely agree that no freedoms should be given away in exchange for temporal safety, I disagree that you cant do nothing about immigration, obviously you cant just stop it, but you can have a reasonable policy and a filter that of course would be very fallible but better than opening the floodgates to millions.
If politicians gave a fuck they would've already completely crushed ISIS with a ground operation, however that will not happen since it would kill a huge weapons market. Nobody gives a fuck about values, not politicians, not ISIS, its all about the money. How long do you think it ll take for NATO to completely demolish ISIS as an organization ?
Well I dont know about that, while I dont doubt a thing like that is possible, I also think eliminating a big terrorist cell isnt an easy task military wise, its not just like bomb X, they are tightly entangled with civilians, military action has rarely destroyed terrorist cells actually it has done the opposite. I would assume the truth lies in the middle, with many people actually wanting to destroy ISIS but not able to and many people simply pursuing personal gains there.
There s also the problem with Europe not knowing what the hell to do with all those people that already came. They are also here to stay, there s no way you extradite even a slight % of them. Obviously majority are normal people, however the scum that came with them could potentially force a nasty situation for everyone. Its quite surprising things didnt escalate considering the amount of terrorist acts past weeks. Or the german media might be keeping things low again, wouldnt be the first time they hide germans lighting refugee camps on fire.
Indeed that is a problem that cannot be reversed, mass deportation would cause mayhem, thats is why the problem must be acknowledged, so politicians like Merkel dont keep turning a blind eye against these issues causes these irreversible problems, so now Europe has no choice but to try to "westernize" their middle eastern immigrants, I think Isolating them and would be a huge mistake, like those cheap Ghettos Sweden is building for muslims I think that is a perfect recepee to cause fanaticism and hatred.
Once again the roman catholic church is a front for the dying roman empire nothing to do with Christianity
True Scotsman fallacy once again, you dont get to define who are and who arent real christians, Catholics would say the same about you, its the same thing muslims do over and over.
Let's look at some of the direct opposition the pagan romans have with Christianity: Worshipping Mary they worship her because they worship the goddess Semiramis, Isis etc. They have statues and worship them. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Incense, candles and even the chalice and scepter are used all they need is a sword for the complete set ready to conjure up demons. Checkerboard floor obvious occult references, columns everywhere, obelisks everywhere list goes on.
They call their priests father And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. No where in the bible is it taught to confess to a priest in fact the New Testament makes it so that you don't even need priests.
It is a practice of blasphemy. In your own country they offer food to the spirits and worship some skull lady.
Yes and Mormons think Jesus leaves in a distant planet, and born against Christians think rapture is coming and the earth is 6,000 years old and guess what? all of them are also Christians
Oh the food to spirits part is a tradition that precedes Christianity in Mexico, and the "skull lady" is worshiped by cartels and criminals and yes they also qualify as Christians.
What you do not seem to understand is that the Old Testament is a theocracy for the people of Israel living thousands of years ago those laws were to protect and bring about the Messiah. Those laws apply to Christians only when repeated in the New Testament
So you are saying that the Old Testament is indeed the world of god, but that it no longer applies, you are saying Jesus (who is the same person as Yaweh) commanded people to kill their children if they disrespected them, to kill non-believers, that he killed people by whims?
That is the morality of your god? a petty, jealous murderer?
I disagree that you cant do nothing about immigration, obviously you cant just stop it, but you can have a reasonable policy and a filter that of course would be very fallible but better than opening the floodgates to millions.
Sadly, its basically up to Bulgaria and Greece and neither has anywhere near the resources needed to deal with such crisis. Only way would be an outside help, don't know about Greece, but about Bulgaria it would mean the military personel of the USA which s probably a few thousand that is here to be placed on the borders, however the USA has nothing to do with this crisis so I doubt they ll do anything about it, plus those soldiers are here for another reason and not to babysit our border.
The guy that suicided in Ansbach spent 6 months here after an extradition, but obviously still managed to get to Germany and he s not even the first case.
From a military point of view Europe is basically defenseless, thats the whole idea behind NATO, to have the USA protect our borders, except the USA has already pointed it out countless times that a great amount of time has passed since WW2 so maybe.. just maybe its about time the EU does something about their military force, there were big budget cuts on Europe defence and it was a reasonable one. Its not supposed to be the USA's job to be protecting the continent. Especially not that many decades later.
The whole situation in Europe is pretty fucked on so many levels right now, with EU being unstable, UK leaving the EU, immigrant crisis, constant acts of terrorism, Turkey becoming a totalitarian state after that sociopath most likely staged the coup d'etat, Black Sea struggle for control between the USA and Russia ... and well Russia being Russia. I'm guessing most people in charge don't even know where to start from at this point
Once again the roman catholic church is a front for the dying roman empire nothing to do with Christianity
True Scotsman fallacy once again, you dont get to define who are and who arent real christians, Catholics would say the same about you, its the same thing muslims do over and over.
Let's look at some of the direct opposition the pagan romans have with Christianity: Worshipping Mary they worship her because they worship the goddess Semiramis, Isis etc. They have statues and worship them. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Incense, candles and even the chalice and scepter are used all they need is a sword for the complete set ready to conjure up demons. Checkerboard floor obvious occult references, columns everywhere, obelisks everywhere list goes on.
They call their priests father And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. No where in the bible is it taught to confess to a priest in fact the New Testament makes it so that you don't even need priests.
It is a practice of blasphemy. In your own country they offer food to the spirits and worship some skull lady.
Yes and Mormons think Jesus leaves in a distant planet, and born against Christians think rapture is coming and the earth is 6,000 years old and guess what? all of them are also Christians
Oh the food to spirits part is a tradition that precedes Christianity in Mexico, and the "skull lady" is worshiped by cartels and criminals and yes they also qualify as Christians.
What you do not seem to understand is that the Old Testament is a theocracy for the people of Israel living thousands of years ago those laws were to protect and bring about the Messiah. Those laws apply to Christians only when repeated in the New Testament
So you are saying that the Old Testament is indeed the world of god, but that it no longer applies, you are saying Jesus (who is the same person as Yaweh) commanded people to kill their children if they disrespected them, to kill non-believers, that he killed people by whims?
That is the morality of your god? a petty, jealous murderer?
No I can't decide but the bible does.
Titus 1:16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
I will not watch a 1hr video of stupidity, discuss it yourself.
Also why do you quote the bible to me? The whole argument is that the bible is a a book written by ignorant men in ancient times that holds no moral value whatsoever arguing by quoting it is a circular argument.
Just watch the last 20 minutes, he discussed Israel,Iran,Syria,USA foreign decision policies and relationships. Even though the talk is old, its still relevant as the same policies are still being ran.
If you wanna see how he debunks the whole illusion of democracy in our civilized society just watch the whole talk.
I've seen a lot of criticism on Chomsky except it all seems dull and when they have ground, he himself admits that he s wrong. He s quite the rational mind, obviously with radical thinking, but he somehow manages to set limits up to what seems adequate and true.
This isnt terrorism, it is a very criminal and shitty thing to do but its motivation it is not to cause terror in the population so it doesnt fall under that definition.
I dont know many people who disagrees that what Israel does to Palestine is atrocious, and I havent seen anyone in this thread profess hatred towards muslims either.
On July 25 2016 12:45 nolan wrote:
Kind of surprising that only 36% of the asylum applicants in Germany are Syrian.
Where are the rest from? Libya and Iraq?
The stats as laid out in the article makes it sound as if there's already more MENA migrants that arrived this year than all of last year. How is Europe not just refusing these guys entry at this point? I don't get what the end game is supposed to be here from the European perspective.
and Afghanistan, there never was a plan, it's just a million levels of bureaucracy doing random shit
i've never been a big conspiracy nerd, but i refuse to believe that sincere care for the fellow man is the driving factor in the various political groups that propagate european immigration.
it's either better economically for their social circle to have migrants, or perhaps even more scandalous they consider the future voting implications as a benefit for their party.
On September 08 2008 10:07 Baal wrote: my head is a gyroscope, your argument is invalid
even more scandalous they consider the future voting implications as a benefit for their party.
That seems to me like the most reasonable explanation, I dont see many ways they can economically benefit from mass migration, I think its a political move for votes that backfired big time
On July 25 2016 12:45 nolan wrote:
Kind of surprising that only 36% of the asylum applicants in Germany are Syrian.
Where are the rest from? Libya and Iraq?
The stats as laid out in the article makes it sound as if there's already more MENA migrants that arrived this year than all of last year. How is Europe not just refusing these guys entry at this point? I don't get what the end game is supposed to be here from the European perspective.
and Afghanistan, there never was a plan, it's just a million levels of bureaucracy doing random shit
i've never been a big conspiracy nerd, but i refuse to believe that sincere care for the fellow man is the driving factor in the various political groups that propagate european immigration.
it's either better economically for their social circle to have migrants, or perhaps even more scandalous they consider the future voting implications as a benefit for their party.
The explanation doesn't even have to be that deep. All you need is any political meme to get the same thing. "Assault weapons ban" in the US is another. The content of the "policy" is irrelevant. The only thing that concerns the political elite is strengthening, or at least not weakening, their support by doing whatever random thing has caught on. No matter how nonsensical or poorly thought through it is. Because sadly, in politics, in medicine, in all the most important fields for our civilization, there's no immediate gratification for just sitting there like a normal person, doing nothing, and in the process not fucking anything up by immeasurable incompetence.
In the case of immigration, it's confounding because it involves people so there are also direct benefits, not only in what you call future voting implications, meaning making sure immigrant children repay you by voting for the people who let them into the country, but also the people who are already here. Like in the US, Hispanics as a group strongly lean and turn out for Democrats partly because of the stance on illegal immigration, which mainly affects Hispanics. But in a more general sense, the same tribalism extends to the political coalition in general, not just cases where there's a "demographic." An older one was stem cell research (wanted an example from the right also). It was a big deal simply because people made it one. But again, the politicians are complicit in this too, but not treacherously so. It's not the Bildeberg/Illuminati whatever level of devious. It's naked self-interest. People: Protect the souls! Politicians: You'll be happy to know we came up with a wonderful moratorium on stem cell research to slow down your access to new cures for diseases! People: Thank you you've secured my vote! That's as stupid as people are. That's our world. It doesn't even have to be conscious - politicians sincerely believe some of the same bullshit. A bunch of people's concern for keeping their 20 year careers as bumbling politicians and bureaucrats (that think they're fooling everyone by pretending to be necessary) is the reason Germany has tentatively absorbed an entire city of foreigners.
The content is only relevant because it determines the memetic danger of it. What I mean is that when there's language that plausibly makes the idea sound really grave. Like in the case of stem cells, people coming up with bullshit about baby souls and everything, at a glance that would definitely affect people. If you go on Facebook every day and you see dozens of images of "THESE PEOPLE ARE FLEEING WAR YOU RACIST MONSTER," that can have a strong effect on random people not paying much attention to reality. Now, the contagiousness of the idea is independent of the truth of it. Some ideas spread easily, but they're also great ones. Like "Save the world from Hitler." But take the exact same idea and it will fit just as easily in another context "Save the world from communism, fight the Reds in Vietnam" - that is, until the evidence starts to stack up against the idea.
It's a totally organic thing, a natural fluctuation, of the political system. It's extremely bad of course, but it's not unexpected. The pushback is now more than warranted. One thing about Vietnam is it was perpetrated by people acting with absolute power and impunity. Whether by design or accident, the US system's precarious balance means you can always swing in the other direction. But all Europe leans further to the left so I wonder whether at some point it may start to be a danger of parliamentary systems that a country could manage to fuck things up so badly that the system couldn't correct itself. We know countries collapse and Europe is no exception. Is Greece still around? I haven't been following.
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
sorry, but the 'importing immigrants for voters' idea is absolutely ridiculous, at least in the context of the european left.
There are basically two reasons for the pro-refugee acceptance pov. First, and most importantly, is the humanitarian angle. If any of you actually spend time with pro-refugee acceptance activists, you will know that this is true. People want to accept refugees because they feel it is the morally correct choice, not because they believe it is economically beneficial. Leftists might sometimes cite statistics showing that someone predicts that migration will be economically beneficial - but this is a counter argument to the idea that accepting refugees is going to destroy/bankrupt the country. It's not the reason behind the policy.
Second is less of an explanation for why people want to accept refugees, and more of an explanation of why the opposition to immigration doesn't set - the group of people pro-refugees and pro-non-western immigration (which is still founded in humanitarianism) do not themselves and are not projected to themselves struggle with any of the consequences of immigration. They (we) don't live in areas with a lot of immigrants (and the immigrants who do live in 'our' areas are likely to be the well-integrated and successful ones who make positive societal contributions through positive diversity), have jobs that are so language-dependent that immigrants are no threat to the job market / don't receive benefits and thus also aren't too worried about the fund of benefits being smaller / to a greater degree consume culture and go to restaurants, two areas where the immigration benefit is actually tangible.
Like, I totally accept the argument that massive immigration brings with it too many negative aspects for it to be a valid policy. I totally accept the argument that germany and sweden were reckless and irresponsible in a way that hurts their respective societies, and I totally accept the argument that one refugee in norway is so costly that we could have helped 50 in turkey or greece or lebanon or whatever. I might personally have some disagreements with those arguments, but they are all fair enough.
But I don't accept, at all, the notion that pro-refugee groups have been motivated by any type of nefariousness. The only selfishness involved in this is that the feeling of doing the right thing makes you feel good about yourself. There might be stupidity involved, in the sense that the action that 'feels' like the right thing might actually be really societally stupid and dangerous, but please don't try to find bad intent; that's virtually non-existent.
like, I know a lot of leftists politicians, and some right wing ones. my brother is a former member of parliament for the socialist left party in norway, which is probably the political party in Norway with the most pro-refugee and pro-immigration point of view. And every actual politician I have met, from both sides of the political aisle, in Norway - it's certainly my impression that this changes if you go to the US (but hardly for any european country) - have championed the causes they believe in more so than the causes they believe give them voters. When campaigning, they might try to stir the discussion away from topics where they know they are a minority, but I have never encountered a single politician or activist who was fighting for a political cause they didn't believe in just because they thought it was a good way of achieving reelection. The overwhelming majority of people who get involved in politics do so because they want to make the world a better place. Wealth they could almost always get more of elsewhere (successful politicians have skillsets that are highly valuable in the private consulting market), and power/influence are means of achieving their goals more than goals by themselves.
On July 31 2016 12:54 Liquid`Drone wrote:
like, I know a lot of leftists politicians, and some right wing ones. my brother is a former member of parliament for the socialist left party in norway, which is probably the political party in Norway with the most pro-refugee and pro-immigration point of view. And every actual politician I have met, from both sides of the political aisle, in Norway - it's certainly my impression that this changes if you go to the US (but hardly for any european country) - have championed the causes they believe in more so than the causes they believe give them voters. When campaigning, they might try to stir the discussion away from topics where they know they are a minority, but I have never encountered a single politician or activist who was fighting for a political cause they didn't believe in just because they thought it was a good way of achieving reelection. The overwhelming majority of people who get involved in politics do so because they want to make the world a better place. Wealth they could almost always get more of elsewhere (successful politicians have skillsets that are highly valuable in the private consulting market), and power/influence are means of achieving their goals more than goals by themselves.
The uncle of my mom has been minister multiple times in Italy and was connected to basically every important person in Italy. I had a family heavily involved in politics for 3 generations. From my experience in my country it is the total opposite of what you said. From what I heard all they care about is personal gain, and politicians easily toss their morals and original ideas in exchange for personal benefit. They ask and give favors, promote illegality and believe they are above citizens. They aren't simply concerned with people, it's a different world.
This relative of mine was the brother and best friend of my maternal grandad, who was a proud man that fought for democracy in second world war, and they ended not talking to each other for 20 years because my grandad was disgusted by what my mom's uncle had become after he became an important politician. He was also from the socialist party, not right wing.
My bad. Should not have generalized to mean all of europe. My stepdad has for decades been a Polish politician, and he's been a self-serving bastard changing views based on what was popular at the time - he's held office for like 4 different parties and been involved in several cases of semi or full-blown corruption.
I do however wholeheartedly stand by the content of my post when relating to scandinavia - and to a large extent to germany as well. I think there's likely to be a very strong correlation between how self-serving politicians are and how much faith people have in the political system and fabric of society - and I've read some statistics showcasing the stark contrast between countries, especially northern and southern european countries, when evaluated by this metric. And either way I think the refugee crisis and acceptance of refugees is a very bad example because strict on immigration is a better way to win voters than easy on immigration - if anything what I am observing is that politicians are abandoning their humanitarian principles for votes - not that they adopted humanitarian principles for votes in the first place.
Santafairy Korea (South). Jul 31 2016 18:07. Posts 2227
On July 31 2016 12:45 Liquid`Drone wrote:
There might be stupidity involved, in the sense that the action that 'feels' like the right thing might actually be really societally stupid and dangerous, but please don't try to find bad intent; that's virtually non-existent.
was this for me? that's what I said
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
1
Liquid`Drone Norway. Aug 01 2016 03:15. Posts 3093
I agreed with your post, so I definitely wasn't arguing with you. I guess it was mostly directed towards nolan (but also baal for entertaining the idea), and anyone who might feel the same way.
On July 31 2016 14:52 Liquid`Drone wrote:
My stepdad has for decades been a Polish politician, and he's been a self-serving bastard changing views based on what was popular at the time - he's held office for like 4 different parties and been involved in several cases of semi or full-blown corruption.
Thats how politicians work, actually self interest is how most people work, especially people who seek power, and this power system not only usually helps the biggest assholes raise faster but power corrupts everyone, its one if the most rare attributes a person can have, it is the ultimate test that a handful of leaders have had through history, to resist the corrosive force power have on you.
And here you are arguing that Merkel is somehow isnt all this, she isnt like most people, selfish and self serving, her assention to the highest seat in a super powerful country was righteous that she is able to rest to what amost no man can, the natural corruption of power and that above all else, she is pursuing what is objectively morally right regardless or her partys affiliation or political rhetoric.
Liquid`Drone Norway. Aug 01 2016 20:50. Posts 3093
My understanding is really more along the lines of the refugee crisis being the one situation where merkel truly followed her heart.. Pre-refugee crisis she's been a super pragmatic chancellor who has never been blinded by ideology, been occupied with consolidation of power and finding agreeable solutions across the board that provides stability and some life improvement in small increments at a time. Then the refugee crisis comes, and this is no longer the case - she chooses potentially unstable and polarizing because she believed it was the right thing to do - potentially ruining her own political career as a consequence thereof. (To be fair, the population was indeed very pro-refugee at first and has become less positive as time has passed, so I do get where you're coming from. I just think it's wrong in this case - which I mostly base on seeing what germans whose political views tend to overlap with mine think about the issue. But either way, I'm not gonna defend this one to death. ;p )
Also I've actually met Merkel, she smiled to me and waved her hand from 15 meters distance before entering her car (security was making it clear that I could not come any closer). But either way she came off as this (tiny and frail) old nice grandmother and I have had a much better impression of her after seeing her in person.
I totally agree that people are selfish and self serving. But sometimes even this becomes altruistic, to some people the experience of self-sacrifice for an important case is less devastating than the experience of having the chance to make the world a better place and not acting. And it's just.. I know quite a lot of people who have been pro-refugee activists in some form. They all tend to be particularly selfless and caring people. anecdotal whatever, 'open borders' is hardly ever really a populist position imo, leftist populism takes a different form.
On August 01 2016 19:50 Liquid`Drone wrote:
My understanding is really more along the lines of the refugee crisis being the one situation where merkel truly followed her heart.. Pre-refugee crisis she's been a super pragmatic chancellor who has never been blinded by ideology, been occupied with consolidation of power and finding agreeable solutions across the board that provides stability and some life improvement in small increments at a time. Then the refugee crisis comes, and this is no longer the case - she chooses potentially unstable and polarizing because she believed it was the right thing to do - potentially ruining her own political career as a consequence thereof. (To be fair, the population was indeed very pro-refugee at first and has become less positive as time has passed, so I do get where you're coming from. I just think it's wrong in this case - which I mostly base on seeing what germans whose political views tend to overlap with mine think about the issue. But either way, I'm not gonna defend this one to death. ;p )
Also I've actually met Merkel, she smiled to me and waved her hand from 15 meters distance before entering her car (security was making it clear that I could not come any closer). But either way she came off as this (tiny and frail) old nice grandmother and I have had a much better impression of her after seeing her in person.
I totally agree that people are selfish and self serving. But sometimes even this becomes altruistic, to some people the experience of self-sacrifice for an important case is less devastating than the experience of having the chance to make the world a better place and not acting. And it's just.. I know quite a lot of people who have been pro-refugee activists in some form. They all tend to be particularly selfless and caring people. anecdotal whatever, 'open borders' is hardly ever really a populist position imo, leftist populism takes a different form.
yes I think there is a good chance she did it because she though thought it was the right thing to do, if she knew it was political suicide at the time I doubt it, there is also the possibility that she thought it was the right thing to do and she thought she would look like a savior, that would go in line with how most people act.
i guess i'm just a cynic, i still refuse to believe politicians are motivated 100% by kind feeling and altruism in this regard, they might sincerely feel that way but they wouldn't go to these lengths without some extra bonuses involved, in my humble opinion.
edit:
regarding the french mosques, if you read the article it's 'since last december', and from what i gather a large amount of these mosques are effectively 5 jihadis having a 'mosque' in a rented small office or something of the sort.
On September 08 2008 10:07 Baal wrote: my head is a gyroscope, your argument is invalid
20 mosques/places of prayers closed since last December, per google.
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
On August 01 2016 19:50 Liquid`Drone wrote:
My understanding is really more along the lines of the refugee crisis being the one situation where merkel truly followed her heart.. Pre-refugee crisis she's been a super pragmatic chancellor who has never been blinded by ideology, been occupied with consolidation of power and finding agreeable solutions across the board that provides stability and some life improvement in small increments at a time. Then the refugee crisis comes, and this is no longer the case - she chooses potentially unstable and polarizing because she believed it was the right thing to do - potentially ruining her own political career as a consequence thereof. (To be fair, the population was indeed very pro-refugee at first and has become less positive as time has passed, so I do get where you're coming from. I just think it's wrong in this case - which I mostly base on seeing what germans whose political views tend to overlap with mine think about the issue. But either way, I'm not gonna defend this one to death. ;p )
Also I've actually met Merkel, she smiled to me and waved her hand from 15 meters distance before entering her car (security was making it clear that I could not come any closer). But either way she came off as this (tiny and frail) old nice grandmother and I have had a much better impression of her after seeing her in person.
I totally agree that people are selfish and self serving. But sometimes even this becomes altruistic, to some people the experience of self-sacrifice for an important case is less devastating than the experience of having the chance to make the world a better place and not acting. And it's just.. I know quite a lot of people who have been pro-refugee activists in some form. They all tend to be particularly selfless and caring people. anecdotal whatever, 'open borders' is hardly ever really a populist position imo, leftist populism takes a different form.
yes I think there is a good chance she did it because she though thought it was the right thing to do, if she knew it was political suicide at the time I doubt it, there is also the possibility that she thought it was the right thing to do and she thought she would look like a savior, that would go in line with how most people act.
Yeah I can agree with this. I think it's unlikely that she thought it would politically backfire the way it has, I think she thought she did the right thing, that people would see it was the right thing and that they would appreciate her for doing the right thing. (more so than they'd be negative at least).
On August 03 2016 13:55 VanDerMeyde wrote:
Maybe it was wishful thinking...
Facepalm
First we close their mosques, then we send em to live in a particular district, then we send them to a camp.. oh wait that was Hitler my bad
they already live in their own districts and refugee camps, Winston
Its one thing to be put in camp cause of massive immigration, another to be put there even though you already live somewhere else.
Of course, you gotta come off and do a dumb comment as usual.
Politicians don't do things " because its the right thing to do" especially, someone like Merkel. Don't be that naive. Whether we understand the true reasoning behind it though, is another thing.
Spitfire, not everyone likes Burka, Sharia laws, Jihadism, Martyrdom and all the proven problems with Islam. You have to get used to this idea, even if you dont give a fuck about how women are threated in the muslim world or gay men thrown down from buildings or stoned to Death.
Radical Islam is much closer to Nazism than those you try to label as such. I dont mind migration as long as there are jobs to offer. I think people from South America, America, Canada, Australia, Europe, Asia etc are great. The problem is mass import of Islam and islamisation of Europe.
My neighbour is from Argentina acctually. He used to live in Sweden. He told me the other day, "you have to convert to Islam if you want to continue living where I lived". Would you say he is a racist, islamophobe etc ?
The Islamisation of Europe was long predicted by demography , its not a new occurrence, the mass immigration just makes the process faster.
Nope I wouldnt say he is, and I'm not in favor of islam either. You just cant be happy cause mosques get closed. Everyone has the right of his own beliefs. Forcing beliefs on others like Sharia law, etc. is another thing. Such things should result into people getting deported back to wherever they came from or get heavy sanctions if they are native citizens.
Putting a global label on all muslims however is just as ignorant.
Im not a believer of destroying the innocents as nearby casualties because the majority are dumb fucks. Thats the reason we are in this position in the first place, how do you not get that honestly
1
Liquid`Drone Norway. Aug 04 2016 23:09. Posts 3093
I think almost everyone in western countries who enter politics does it because they want to influence the world in a way they perceive as positive. I think this is true for literally every single member of the norwegian parliament. Obviously that's not the only reason why, but if people ONLY want power, wealth, prestige or fame, then politics just is not a good choice. For one, it's difficult. Successful politicians will usually have a near-academic understanding of a multitude of subjects, and they could be successful in academia or consulting or whatever if not politics. Even though you might achieve fame, at best you're liked by a small majority of the population. It doesn't pay particularly well (in any western country).. Power&prestige, sure, but only really for like, 0,1% of people who enter politics. A large majority of politicians are local politicians - which is sometimes largely unpaid work that is largely unappreciated..
I agree there are prominent exceptions, I don't think berlusconi ever had much of a noble agenda, and I totally understand if people are skeptical of the intentions of many high level politicians even if I might personally disagree regarding specific individuals. But a huge majority of people who enter politics never reach positions of much individual power.. I honestly think that even though high level positions is a different game, possibly because power pretty much always corrupts, politicians on average are if anything more noble than the population as a whole (I do accept the caveat that nobody is more noble than anyone ).
lol POKER
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Aug 04 2016 23:25. Posts 2227
On August 03 2016 13:55 VanDerMeyde wrote:
Maybe it was wishful thinking...
Facepalm
First we close their mosques, then we send em to live in a particular district, then we send them to a camp.. oh wait that was Hitler my bad
they already live in their own districts and refugee camps, Winston
Its one thing to be put in camp cause of massive immigration, another to be put there even though you already live somewhere else.
then when do you think the new holocaust will start? now that radicalization centers are being closed, realistically how long do you predict before there's extermination camps?
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
1
PolarFox United States. Aug 05 2016 00:37. Posts 103
Why is no one else reporting this except for the tabloid that is express.co.uk aka daily express ?
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
On August 03 2016 13:55 VanDerMeyde wrote:
Maybe it was wishful thinking...
Facepalm
First we close their mosques, then we send em to live in a particular district, then we send them to a camp.. oh wait that was Hitler my bad
they already live in their own districts and refugee camps, Winston
Its one thing to be put in camp cause of massive immigration, another to be put there even though you already live somewhere else.
then when do you think the new holocaust will start? now that radicalization centers are being closed, realistically how long do you predict before there's extermination camps?
Do I really have to explain every simple post to you ? I'm not saying there ll be a genocide ( although we could argue the genocide has already happened in Mid-east, but w/e we re talking about Europe ). I'm saying that such way of thinking is dangerous to say the least. Do you think Hitler viewed himself as the villain ? Didn't think he s getting rid of a pest that would lead to Europe's destruction ?
How can i have a normal discussion with someone that takes everything literally ??
P.S. Friendly remainder, all of the questions are rhetorical.
I still dont get why I cant be happy whenever mosques are closed. Did I miss some sort of new blasphemy law or something ?
I cant really help it eighter. Its a dumb, evil and dangerous religion. It poisons every society it enters. And I dont believe the politicians when they say "Islam has nothing to do with Islam" in speeches. So I choose to feel happy about that, now what are you gonna do ?
I wish one of your guys had children if I could kick them in the fucking head or stomp on their testicles so you can feel my pain because thats the pain I have waking up everyday -- Mike Tyson
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Aug 05 2016 21:27. Posts 2227
On August 03 2016 13:55 VanDerMeyde wrote:
Maybe it was wishful thinking...
Facepalm
First we close their mosques, then we send em to live in a particular district, then we send them to a camp.. oh wait that was Hitler my bad
they already live in their own districts and refugee camps, Winston
Its one thing to be put in camp cause of massive immigration, another to be put there even though you already live somewhere else.
then when do you think the new holocaust will start? now that radicalization centers are being closed, realistically how long do you predict before there's extermination camps?
Do I really have to explain every simple post to you ? I'm not saying there ll be a genocide ( although we could argue the genocide has already happened in Mid-east, but w/e we re talking about Europe ). I'm saying that such way of thinking is dangerous to say the least. Do you think Hitler viewed himself as the villain ? Didn't think he s getting rid of a pest that would lead to Europe's destruction ?
How can i have a normal discussion with someone that takes everything literally ??
Okay, I understand, you were actually joking, mocking the Godwin's Law people who think closing radical mosques, which is a reasonable and prudent idea, is bad because it puts us on a slippery slope to Arab genocide.
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
