Germany: Merkel disgust at New Year gang assaults

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think he is saying that you cannot ban someone from access simply due to their race, religion or political affiliation, just because such people have caused problems in the past.

I completely agree, but I would consider this to be more of an immediate situation. If people from the refugee center have been committing assaults at the pool, then setting a restriction in place to ensure safety is the best immediate solution. It's not a great solution, but it's better than letting another assault take place in the short term.

Like I said in an earlier post, this is a clusterfuck. Because of the lack of restrictions on refugee intake, everybody is losing, including the legitimate refugees. We're not all going to be coming away from this happy. If it comes down to a temporary restriction on pool access for certain refugees vs serial sexual assaults, well sorry but you're gonna have to hang up your swimming trunks for a bit.

True, but you only need to send back a few to send a strong message of fear. Those people traveled for months mostly on foot to get where they are. If they see that people who break the law are being sent back and all their effort is for nothing then I assume most of them will think twice before breaking the law.

I hope this is the case. But really, the people committing these crimes have got some serious balls on them.
 
True, but you only need to send back a few to send a strong message of fear. Those people traveled for months mostly on foot to get where they are. If they see that people who break the law are being sent back and all their effort is for nothing then I assume most of them will think twice before breaking the law.

I agree with this to be honest.

Being stern on law breakers is a good way to send a message. Here to help but not here to be taken advantage of.
 
I completely agree, but I would consider this to be more of an immediate situation. If people from the refugee center have been committing assaults at the pool, then setting a restriction in place to ensure safety is the best immediate solution. It's not a great solution, but it's better than letting another assault take place in the short term.

It's also a solution that may very well be illegal, as it at first glance violates Art 3 GG.

Like I said in an earlier post, this is a clusterfuck. Because of the lack of restrictions on refugee intake, everybody is losing, including the legitimate refugees. We're not all going to be coming away from this happy. If it comes down to a temporary restriction on pool access for certain refugees vs serial sexual assaults, well sorry but you're gonna have to hang up your swimming trunks for a bit.

The problem is more complex. We wouldn't be facing such problems if politics had taken a realistic stance towards migration, if they had worked towards a reasonable European plan in the past decade, if they had properly financially supported local solutions and if they had prepared properly for migration.

No one gave a flying fuck about this.
 
NBC News: "Cologne Sex-Attack Spree Sparks 'Huge Spike' in [Non-Lethal] Weapons Sales"
MAINZ, Germany — A spate of Hundreds of sex assaults allegedly committed mostly by North African men on New Year's Eve in Cologne has sparked an "explosion in sales" of pepper spray and non-lethal guns, German officials and an industry chief said.
"We saw a huge spike of sales numbers after January," said Ingo Meinhard, head of the German association for gunsmiths and weapons dealers.

The association expected purchases of "so-called deterrents and defensive small arms" to at least double in 2016 following the Cologne attacks, Meinhard told NBC News.

"CS gas spray, stun guns and pepper spray are especially in great demand," he added.
Two weeks after the mass incidents on New Year's Eve, the number of criminal complaints reached 676 on Friday — including 347 sexual offenses, Cologne prosecutor Ulrich Bremer said. Five suspects are in investigative custody.

In addition to defensive sprays, Cologne police said it had already received more than 300 applications from adults wanting to carry imitation handguns and so-called gas pistols.

This was compared to 408 licenses for these weapons issued during all of 2015, police spokeswoman Daniela Lindemann said.
Cologne prosecutors are now offering a reward of 10,000 euros ($11,000) for information leading to the arrest or identification of those who committed the sexual assaults and robberies on New Year's Eve.
 
It's also a solution that may very well be illegal, as it at first glance violates Art 3 GG.

It could be. I was honestly just using the pool discussion as a jumping off point for addressing some of the things Nuu was saying about racism and how to handle the sexual assault situation. I didn't mean to focus so much on this pool specifically. And when I was asking him for better solutions, I was being genuine. Despite that, morally I would be ok with a temporary restriction on refugees, but I can't speak to the legality of it.

Regardless, the real question is "What do we do now?" The citizens of these countries deserve to feel safe, but how do we achieve that? Will deportations of the apprehended criminals be enough to establish a trust? And how do we move forward with integration when we can't even hold public gatherings without strict security enforcement? The expectations going into this were unrealistic, and now both sides (citizens and refugees) will have to take a hit. The honeymoon is over.

The problem is more complex. We wouldn't be facing such problems if politics had taken a realistic stance towards migration, if they had worked towards a reasonable European plan in the past decade, if they had properly financially supported local solutions and if they had prepared properly for migration.

No one gave a flying fuck about this.

I couldn't agree more.
 
I cannont believe I am actually arguing about this topic. Once again people like to play liberal fine when things aren't challenged, but once they are they do a 360 turn.

It's not entirely comparable to the Latin America situation though, because here we have small countries (USA is huge) receiving a very large and fast influx of people who are culturally very different (Latin Americans aren't THAT different from Americans) over a short period of time.

Size doesn't have anything to do with anything. What does that have to do with BANNING people from going to a service? Not to mention the USA immigration problem is far worse in some states than others. Yet you don't see the border states banning immigrants, legal or illegal, from their businesses.

Another core tenet of liberalism is establishing a safe space for people who need protection from oppression, and women getting sexually assaulted and raped en masse means that you need to take measures to make sure this doesn't happen.

So should America ban blacks and latinos from pools too? I mean blacks and latinos are far more likely to sexually assault people than whites?

As I said earlier in this thread, two aspects of liberalism are being pitted against in this situation and there isn't a right answer, but to bring it back on topic, I don't think the answer that involves covering up and normalizing rape is the right one.
There is nothing "liberal" about banning people from a service.

I think he is saying that you cannot ban someone from access simply due to their race, religion or political affiliation, just because such people have caused problems in the past.
I already typed up a long reply to him, but you said what I said in a single sentence.

I completely agree, but I would consider this to be more of an immediate situation. If people from the refugee center have been committing assaults at the pool, then setting a restriction in place to ensure safety is the best immediate solution. It's not a great solution, but it's better than letting another assault take place in the short term.

No it is a terrible solution. You DO NOT ban people from a service. Whether they are black, muslim, speak spanish, people who live in ghettos, and immigrants, etc. The United States crime rate makes the European ghettos seem like a paradise, yet nobody is going to try to ban blacks, immigrants, or former intimates from stores regardless of the rate they harass other customers.

After a few incidents a place dependent on people visiting to have fun like a swimming pool will start getting into financial problems due to dropping visitor numbers.

So we should shut down all kinds of services when a small group makes trouble? I like to live in a place were my swimming pools don't need constant security please. Although the situation might be a bit overblown here and the town is trying to sent a message that the people in charge of the refugee center need to take their complaints serious.

If the swimming pool shuts down due to people being afraid of refugees, Muslims, blacks, whatever then it shuts down. That is the price you pay for liberty. You can't have certain rights and then take them away when it is convenient. You are literally making the exact same arguments America had in the 1950s about blacks, what the border states had about Mexican migrants in the 1900s.
 
No it is a terrible solution. You DO NOT ban people from a service. Whether they are black, muslim, speak spanish, people who live in ghettos, and immigrants, etc. The United States crime rate makes the European ghettos seem like a paradise, yet nobody is going to try to ban blacks, immigrants, or former intimates from stores regardless of the rate they harass other customers.
There is no proof in any of the articles that the ban is enforced by skin color. Maybe it is done by only letting citizen in now and a check for an ID card. Or maybe they just cancelled the discount program for refugees they had going.

And I don't think the US has much to teach to Europe about racism and such. They are different continents with different issues. Sometimes the US seems to do certain things better, sometimes the other way around.

If the swimming pool shuts down due to people being afraid of refugees, muslims, blacks, whatever then it shuts down. That is the price you pay for liberty. You can't have certain rights and then take them away when it is convenient. You are literally making the exact same arguments America had in the 1950s about blacks, what the border states had about Mexican migrants in the 1900s.
So instead of going to the social services that run the refugee center and say "hey guys, we have trouble recently with people coming from here, can you make sure to keep it in check please or we need to cancel our arrangements for them" you rather shut down services instead of working towards a solution.

This also reminded me of a thing I ran into as a kid. We had a supermarket in town were all the kids went during breaks and in turn a lot of stuff was stolen. They hired a security guy to block the kids from coming in during those hours. I never stole anything, but I could still see why they did that. Should the store have done nothing about having stuff stolen every time because of age discrimination?
 
I cannont believe I am actually arguing about this topic. Once again people like to play liberal fine when things aren't challenged, but once they are they do a 360 turn.
180 :p

No it is a terrible solution. You DO NOT ban people from a service. Whether they are black, muslim, speak spanish, people who live in ghettos, and immigrants, etc. The United States crime rate makes the European ghettos seem like a paradise, yet nobody is going to try to ban blacks, immigrants, or former intimates from stores regardless of the rate they harass other customers.

I really don't think your examples are comparable to what is happening. I think we just have to agree to disagree on this one.
 
I cannont believe I am actually arguing about this topic. Once again people like to play liberal fine when things aren't challenged, but once they are they do a 360 turn.



Size doesn't have anything to do with anything. What does that have to do with BANNING people from going to a service? Not to mention the USA immigration problem is far worse in some states than others. Yet you don't see the border states banning immigrants, legal or illegal, from their businesses.



So should America ban blacks and latinos from pools too? I mean blacks and latinos are far more likely to sexually assault people than whites?


There is nothing "liberal" about banning people from a service.


I already typed up a long reply to him, but you said what I said in a single sentence.



No it is a terrible solution. You DO NOT ban people from a service. Whether they are black, muslim, speak spanish, people who live in ghettos, and immigrants, etc. The United States crime rate makes the European ghettos seem like a paradise, yet nobody is going to try to ban blacks, immigrants, or former intimates from stores regardless of the rate they harass other customers.





If the swimming pool shuts down due to people being afraid of refugees, Muslims, blacks, whatever then it shuts down. That is the price you pay for liberty. You can't have certain rights and then take them away when it is convenient. You are literally making the exact same arguments America had in the 1950s about blacks, what the border states had about Mexican migrants in the 1900s.

I didn't say we should ban people. I'm just saying it's a complicated situation where no one has a great answer because two core values are clashing. That's all I said. That, and the fact that the Latin American comparison is asinine.

Also you might want to look up basic geometry.
 
I meant a 360 turn guys:
360moonwalk372.gif


There is no proof in any of the articles that the ban is enforced by skin color. Maybe it is done by only letting citizen in now and a check for an ID card. Or maybe they just cancelled the discount program for refugees they had going.

I explained before that it just isn't about skin color.

And I don't think the US has much to teach to Europe about racism and such. They are different continents with different issues. Sometimes the US seems to do certain things better, sometimes the other way around.

But things do have a lot of parallels. History repeats itself. The Soviet revolutions may have been exclusive to Eastern Europe, the rise of Fascism may have been exclusive to Western Europe, the American Civil Rights Movement may have been exclusive to America, yet around the world you see plenty of events in the world that, while not be the exact same, draw parallels.


So instead of going to the social services that run the refugee center and say "hey guys, we have trouble recently with people coming from here, can you make sure to keep it in check please or we need to cancel our arrangements for them" you rather shut down services instead of working towards a solution.

This also reminded me of a thing I ran into as a kid. We had a supermarket in town were all the kids went during breaks and in turn a lot of stuff was stolen. They hired a security guy to block the kids from coming in during those hours. I never stole anything, but I could still see why they did that. Should the store have done nothing about having stuff stolen every time because of age discrimination?
I don't see how this is relevant to what I have said. Especially since one of my suggestions was hiring more security guards.

I really don't think your examples are comparable to what is happening. I think we just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Fair enough. I'll just end the thread with this because I feel we won't get anywhere.
 
I don't see how this is relevant to what I have said. Especially since one of my suggestions was hiring more security guards.
It's not serving a customer because they are part of a certain group. Although I had little problem with it and racism based on ethnicity is a lot worse of course.

But agree to disagree then like someone else said. I hope we can fix all this stuff so people don't feel the need to resort to these measures, because it is certainly not something that I want to see more of.
 
An English and less questionable source is reporting on the pool ban.

Reuters: "German town bars asylum seekers from pool after harassment complaints"
A western German town has barred adult male asylum seekers from its public indoor swimming pool after receiving complaints that some women were sexually harassed there.

It was the latest sign of social tensions related to the arrival last year of 1.1 million migrants in Germany, followed by sex assaults on women by young male asylum seekers and migrants during New Year's Eve celebrations in the city of Cologne.

The deputy mayor of Bornheim, a town of 48,000 some 30 km south of Cologne, said on Friday that a difficult decision was taken to send a clear message that breaching German cultural norms was a red line that should not be crossed.

"There have been complaints of sexual harassment and chatting-up going on in this swimming pool ... by groups of young men, and this has prompted some women to leave (the premises)," Markus Schnapka told Reuters.

"This led to my decision that adult males from our asylum shelters may not enter the swimming pool until further notice."

He did not say how the ban would be enforced. German media say asylum seekers, who get no funds from the state, must present an identification document to be admitted to pools at a discounted rate.

Schnapka said his town had begun a campaign in local asylum seekers' shelters to teach the occupants about gender equality and respect for women.


Regarding the carnival parade:
On Thursday, a carnival parade planned for next month in Rheinberg, a town north of Cologne, was canceled after organizers said they would not be able to provide a security plan for the event on Feb. 8 as required by police.

German media reports said the decision arose partly from the fact that the parade route would have run near an asylum shelter with 500 residents. Rheinberg Mayor Frank Tatzel denied this when contacted by Reuters.
 
Tolerance ends when there is no tolerance shown toward me.
The biggest problem Germany and Sweden face, is lack of defending their own values (constitutional rights, laws etc.) in fear of appearing xenophobic or racist. Which in turns paints them as weak in the minds of perpetrators. Making blank statements and covering up "refugee" incidents do more harm in the long run. It creates more problems than it solves. Every incident should be punished to make a clear message that with rights to becoming part of society there comes an obligation to.
 
Schoolgirls report abuse by young asylum seekers

The four boys attended the Schlossstrasse middle school in Salzburg. It was only in the wake of the widely reported New Year sexual assaults in Cologne that one of the victims, aged 14, made a complaint to police.

That resulted in the four youngsters, aged 14, 15 and 16, being suspended. Only one of them had a residence permit.

According to a report in the Kronen Zeitung newspaper, three female students say they were assaulted and groped by the boys for months.

Last Wednesday an attack on one girl was reportedly so severe that it came to the attention of the school headmistress Eva Szalony, who made a complaint to police.

She said the allegations were "a complete shock" and that the school is now investigating why the girls had suffered for so long without reporting the abuse.

She said that the male pupils had all come to Austria as unaccompanied minors from Syria and Afghanistan and she believed them to be happy and grateful for being allowed to live in Austria and attend school, adding that "they were integrating themselves very well".

Police have now confirmed they are investigating allegations of sexual assault, grievous bodily harm and threats.

I... Think this is the thread for this? Figured it'd fit in here better than in a new thread.
 
It starts to look a bit like just reporting sad news all the time, but it seems every day something new is coming out regarding intolerance, high crime or attacks.

Men tried to stone two transsexual women in Dortmund
http://www.bild.de/regional/ruhrgeb...-strasse-gesteinigt-werden-44171194.bild.html

Elisa: "They threw us around. One said, you must be stoned whores'. And that they then did. "

Luckily there was a police car just driving by who could arrest the three attackers right away. One was already well known to police.

This stuff is really unacceptable and we should not let people who think doing this is OK free in society. I know not all of Europe is as open to the LGTB community and we sadly still have some major steps to take, but I would have thought in countries like Germany this would not happen.
 
As a liberal, I feel let down by the liberal-left. The way politicians and media in that spectrum have dealt with this issue has been a disaster. I am and remain a supporter of taking in political refugees who have struggled to come to our borders. And the behavior of the liberal-left makes me doubt that they are prepared to deal with this crisis. Examples of its failures have already been posted in this thread.

Their main failure has been the unwillingness or inability to name and address the core issue. We are letting huge numbers of people into our society who come from a comparatively regressive cultural background. Most of them are not used to the lack of oppressive modesty and the fact that women can dress and act as freely as they wish without being slut-shamed. Many of them may naturally think that this is an invitation to treat women as they wish. This analysis should be obvious and uncontroversial to liberal-minded people who are aware of the decades of feminist struggles to change these chauvinistic attitudes in our own societies. How could we expect that people from cultural backgrounds that did not have this level of social activism and progression would—on average—behave according to such modern values? Obviously, rape is generally sanctioned in their own culture as well, and the majority of Afghans, Iraqis, Syrians, Albans, etc., act like the decent human beings that they are, just like people in our own societies did decades and centuries ago, before we had our own feminist evolution. But it is equally obvious that their cultural background will lead to *comparatively* more chauvinism and mistreatment of women.

However, the liberal-left—at least the part that I sampled over the last days by reading articles and listening to statements—has bend over backwards to refuse to accept this sober and obvious analysis. Their motivation seems to be an irrational desire to not be confused with racists, as well as a desire to not play into racist narratives who claim that all refugees are problematic, that their behavior is inherent to their ethnic group, or that rape is socially/religiously accepted by them; all of which is obviously untrue. But why do we have to focus on that conversation? Why do we even have to have it like that? Why can’t we just treat these people like Holocaust deniers and focus on the actual issue without the fear of being mistaken for racists? For instance, I have read very little about how we plan to address the issue of cultural integration and education going forward.

A failure to do so has dire consequences for potential victims of sexual assault in the future, for the treatment of refugees in our countries, and for the general political landscape in Europe going forward. The liberal-left does not realize that they are hurting liberal causes. While many tens of thousands of refugees on their way to Germany are literally eating grass to survive, they are allowing the right in this country to rise in the polls, just because they are making themselves unelectable with all their bullshit. They are in large parts to blame for the scary rise of the right in Europe.

When the only responses to these challenges are either denial or racism, then we have a problem.
 
Yeah, more proof the Left Wing can just be as bad as the right.

All these double standards are fricken sickening....

The far right is an angry, blunt instrument.

The far left will literally try everything in their power to convince you that 2+2=5. Even now they simply cannot admit that they got it disastrously wrong.
 
Schoolgirls report abuse by young asylum seekers



I... Think this is the thread for this? Figured it'd fit in here better than in a new thread.

The woman who reported it had a good Hungarian name. My people don't play that shit. I lived in Austria for 2 years. Beautiful countryside. Great skiing. When I went back a couple of years back I noticed a big Muslim immigrant population in Vienna. Hopefully everyone integrates well.
 
What's pathetic is the police putting in practise something that is not being driven by the need to you know police. This is not a reaction to the treatment of minorities. It's a reaction to their own political paranoia.
 
It starts to look a bit like just reporting sad news all the time, but it seems every day something new is coming out regarding intolerance, high crime or attacks.

Men tried to stone two transsexual women in Dortmund
http://www.bild.de/regional/ruhrgeb...-strasse-gesteinigt-werden-44171194.bild.html



Luckily there was a police car just driving by who could arrest the three attackers right away. One was already well known to police.

This stuff is really unacceptable and we should not let people who think doing this is OK free in society. I know not all of Europe is as open to the LGTB community and we sadly still have some major steps to take, but I would have thought in countries like Germany this would not happen.

They tried to stone someone? Oh boy.


This policy is dumb. Once these PC rules become well known to the public, I think most people will simply assume certain types of immigrants are responsible for certain crimes and the stigma against them will occur anyway. It annoys me to no end, how the left want to hide truths like these though.
 
This policy is dumb. Once these PC rules become well known to the public, I think most people will simply assume certain types of immigrants are responsible for certain crimes and the stigma against them will occur anyway. It annoys me to no end, how the left want to hide truths like these though.
Pretty much. The thought when reading about a crime will be "probably an immigrant again." Not helping anything to hide stuff like this. Should we also hide gender and age from reporting then? As long as the don't mention the names or addresses, the press should be free to report who commits a crime.
 
Man I'm becoming increasingly disillusioned with the left because of all this shit. The right are a bunch of hate mongering cowards who love to play up the us vs them and the left have seemingly lost touch with reality because their heads are so far up their asses.

What am I to do? Everyone sucks.
 
Man I'm becoming increasingly disillusioned with the left because of all this shit. The right are a bunch of hate mongering cowards who love to play up the us vs them and the left have seemingly lost touch with reality because their heads are so far up their asses.

What am I to do? Everyone sucks.

One side wants to get rid of migrants, one side will ignore crimes caused by migrants. If that's the case I'm going with self preservation buddy.
 
Tonight we are asking the public to please be on the lookout for this person:

4qUJCB3.png


This person is considered ARMED and EXTREMELY DANGEROUS.

If you see anybody fitting this description, please shamefully reflect on your racist, sexist, xenophobic tendencies. Thank you.

Of course you made the stickman black, you filthy racist.
 
No wonder 8 out of 10 in the Swedish police force have thought about quitting.

Bad pay
Leadership acting like political commissars instead of being leaders
Can no longer perform their duties in many suburbs of that nation
Understaffed, understaffed, understaffed.
The highest ranking police chief isn't even a policeman, but a filthy elite politician.
 
Man I'm becoming increasingly disillusioned with the left because of all this shit. The right are a bunch of hate mongering cowards who love to play up the us vs them and the left have seemingly lost touch with reality because their heads are so far up their asses.

What am I to do? Everyone sucks.


I'm a pretty liberal guy, but how the left has been handling this entire ordeal has been pretty disgusting. It makes me think some of the goofy caricatures the right have about the left have some truth to it.
 

I don't get it. There has to be more to this. Are there examples of police reports in Sweden prior to this new directive being enforced? Police descriptions everywhere tend to follow a fairly standard format. Skin colour is on a list of common attributes used to describe people. From missing persons to a person of interest to alleged criminals.

When a person is arrested, police usually limit the description to name, age, and location. Anything more would be unnecessary. For public advisory/assistance scenarios, like when a suspect is on the loose, a full description would be required to be useful and effective. Otherwise, what's the point?

Here are two examples of press releases from Toronto Police Services.

TPS description when a person is arrested:
On Tuesday, January 5, 2016, Mike Di Giulio, 39, of Toronto, was arrested.
Seeking public assistance for identification, TPS description of a suspect:
The man is described as 30-40, with a medium build, olive complexion, and short black hair. He was wearing glasses, a black coat, dark khaki-style pants, black shoes, and a black bag slung over his shoulder.

If Swedish Police follow the same format, I don't understand how it could be perceived as racist.
 

OK, this is going to far.

Please appear racists if you have to protect your civilians.

This whole debacle is really embarrassing. As much as I want immigrants seekers to feel welcomed and safe from oppression, EU should had policies in place for ore safer way of accepting those asylum seekers

And I say this as someone, whos parents immigrated to EU from Africa.
 

I don't think this applies to cases where the police issues a public search warrant, so what's the big deal? Also, this seems to be about alleged criminals. Not about convicted criminals.

I'm a pretty liberal guy, but how the left has been handling this entire ordeal has been pretty disgusting. It makes me think some of the goofy caricatures the right have about the left have some truth to it.

"I'm a pretty liberal guy, but"

I've heard this a lot, and it's usually not true. Maybe you shouldn't just look at right wing media, then you would see a much more differentiated picture. But this would also require that people don't demonize liberal media outlets because they take their job seriously and actually research a story (which takes time), instead of printing rumors from social media which are often inaccurate or just plain wrong.

No wonder 8 out of 10 in the Swedish police force have thought about quitting.

Bad pay
Leadership acting like political commissars instead of being leaders
Can no longer perform their duties in many suburbs of that nation
Understaffed, understaffed, understaffed.
The highest ranking police chief isn't even a policeman, but a filthy elite politician.

Source?

On a side note: I find it pretty sad how such threads often turn out. People posting horror story after horror story from tabloids or without much context, people get outraged and post "smh" "omg" "wtf" "how can they do this". But when you take a closer look, there is usually much more to those stories, especially if you look at original sources. And by only posting selected stories this creates a very distorted version of reality. It seems people just aren't that much interested in an objective discussion about this topic, but are just waiting for the next horror story to confirm their preconceived opinion.
 
As a liberal, I feel let down by the liberal-left. The way politicians and media in that spectrum have dealt with this issue has been a disaster. I am and remain a supporter of taking in political refugees who have struggled to come to our borders. And the behavior of the liberal-left makes me doubt that they are prepared to deal with this crisis. Examples of its failures have already been posted in this thread.

Their main failure has been the unwillingness or inability to name and address the core issue. We are letting huge numbers of people into our society who come from a comparatively regressive cultural background. Most of them are not used to the lack of oppressive modesty and the fact that women can dress and act as freely as they wish without being slut-shamed. Many of them may naturally think that this is an invitation to treat women as they wish. This analysis should be obvious and uncontroversial to liberal-minded people who are aware of the decades of feminist struggles to change these chauvinistic attitudes in our own societies. How could we expect that people from cultural backgrounds that did not have this level of social activism and progression would—on average—behave according to such modern values? Obviously, rape is generally sanctioned in their own culture as well, and the majority of Afghans, Iraqis, Syrians, Albans, etc., act like the decent human beings that they are, just like people in our own societies did decades and centuries ago, before we had our own feminist evolution. But it is equally obvious that their cultural background will lead to *comparatively* more chauvinism and mistreatment of women.

However, the liberal-left—at least the part that I sampled over the last days by reading articles and listening to statements—has bend over backwards to refuse to accept this sober and obvious analysis. Their motivation seems to be an irrational desire to not be confused with racists, as well as a desire to not play into racist narratives who claim that all refugees are problematic, that their behavior is inherent to their ethnic group, or that rape is socially/religiously accepted by them; all of which is obviously untrue. But why do we have to focus on that conversation? Why do we even have to have it like that? Why can’t we just treat these people like Holocaust deniers and focus on the actual issue without the fear of being mistaken for racists? For instance, I have read very little about how we plan to address the issue of cultural integration and education going forward.

A failure to do so has dire consequences for potential victims of sexual assault in the future, for the treatment of refugees in our countries, and for the general political landscape in Europe going forward. The liberal-left does not realize that they are hurting liberal causes. While many tens of thousands of refugees on their way to Germany are literally eating grass to survive, they are allowing the right in this country to rise in the polls, just because they are making themselves unelectable with all their bullshit. They are in large parts to blame for the scary rise of the right in Europe.

When the only responses to these challenges are either denial or racism, then we have a problem.

Albania and Afghanistan are counted as secure countries. They have no refugee rights.

Iraqis and Syrians have refugee rights and they barely pop up in the crime statistics.

The biggest group making trouble, adressed to death in the media, are guys from Maghreb. Problem is known for years and they have no refugee rights.

The issue is the inability of enforcing the rules.
 
Gemüsepizza;192449430 said:
I don't think this applies to cases where the police issues a public search warrant, so what's the big deal? Also, this seems to be about alleged criminals. Not about convicted criminals.
The big deal is that it is again an limitation on information given to the public considering crimes. It does not help to improve trust between the public and police and politicians, which is already pretty bad. Ethnicity is a pretty basic description of someone, together with age and sex, so why can't it be said? It only sounds like political reasons to try and sweep issues under the rug.
 
The big deal is that it is again an limitation on information given to the public considering crimes. It does not help to improve trust between the public and police and politicians, which is already pretty bad. Ethnicity is a pretty basic description of someone, together with age and sex, so why can't it be said? It only sounds like political reasons to try and sweep issues under the rug.

The police is tasked to protect the population, innocent people, the victims of crime and the people who are alleged criminals. Information about the ethnicity of alleged criminals will not help in protecting the population, on the contrary, it will make life more dangerous for people of those ethnicities. Not revealing this information immediately makes sense, it is pragmatic. It is only "political" in the sense, that there are political parties who want to protect people as good as possible. How is this a bad thing?
 
Gemüsepizza;192450306 said:
The police is tasked to protect the population, innocent people, the victims of crime and the people who are alleged criminals. Information about the ethnicity of alleged criminals will not help in protecting the population, on the contrary, it will make life more dangerous for people of those ethnicities. Not revealing this information immediately makes sense, it is pragmatic. It is only "political" in the sense, that there are political parties who want to protect people as much as possible. How is this a bad thing?

Not revealing the identity/individual makes sense, but when it is an organized group of people with a specific background, not revealing basic information buts people in harm.
 
Gemüsepizza;192450306 said:
The police is tasked to protect the population, innocent people, the victims of crime and the people who are alleged criminals. Information about the ethnicity of alleged criminals will not help in protecting the population, on the contrary, it will make life more dangerous for people of those ethnicities. Not revealing this information immediately makes sense, it is pragmatic. It is only "political" in the sense, that there are political parties who want to protect people as much as possible.
I think we have pretty different views on this then. I see it as a basic description and not as being racist. They are not giving out names or addresses which can put an individual in harms way for retaliation or something.

In any case, considering the current situation we have, the people you are afraid will make live more dangerous for other groups will probably now just think "must be a foreigner" when reading about crime. It doesn't help when the feeling is already there among a part of the population that most crime is committed by immigrants. It might actually have the opposite effect.

And it does sound like police will not report the ethnicity and such of people involved in crime. So when a group of people assaults somebody and are not caught yet, they will not inform the public of basic knowledge about the attackers.

And I think it is a bit naive of you to not see the political motives in such moves. See Germany where they did not want the public to know crime from North Africans was on the rise, out of fear of a changing public perception - http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschl...hwiegen-ueber-Gewalt-durch-Nordafrikaner.html

Leading NRW Interior politicians were informed as early as October 2014 about offenses by groups of North African men who lived in refugee camps in North Rhine-Westphalia. In order not to alarm the population, they did not go public with this information.
Also free Democrat Joachim Stamp in 2014 warned colleagues, such incidents could "quickly be used by interested parties according to mood". We must "be happy" about "the current sensible media coverage to the increasing numbers of refugees".
 
I think we have pretty different views on this then. I see it as a basic description and not as being racist. They are not giving out names or addresses which can put an individual in harms way for retaliation or something.

In any case, considering the current situation we have, the people you are afraid will make live more dangerous for other groups will probably now just think "must be a foreigner" when reading about crime. It doesn't help when the feeling is already there among a part of the population that most crime is committed by immigrants. It might actually have the opposite effect.

The way the police have handled the situation I s a good example of regressive leftism and why it is a bad thing.
 
Not revealing the identity/individual makes sense, but when it is an organized group of people with a specific background, not revealing basic information buts people in harm.

How does the ethnicity help to determine that?

I think we have pretty different views on this then. I see it as a basic description and not as being racist. They are not giving out names or addresses which can put an individual in harms way for retaliation or something.

Then you are being naive. There has been violence against random migrants in the last few weeks. This is not about the specific suspects, but about protecting other members of these ethnicities.

In any case, considering the current situation we have, the people you are afraid will make live more dangerous for other groups will probably now just think "must be a foreigner" when reading about crime. It doesn't help when the feeling is already there among a part of the population that most crime is committed by immigrants. It might actually have the opposite effect.

I don't believe that. This might be the case with people who already had a racist world view, but not with normal people.

And it does sound like police will not report the ethnicity and such of people involved in crime. So when a group of people assaults somebody and are not caught yet, they will not inform the public of basic knowledge about the attackers.

This is absurd. If the police issues a public search warrant, they will release all the necessary information. But this is a good example of how one news headline makes certain people assuming things which are not true.

And I think it is a bit naive of you to not see the political motives in such moves. See Germany where they did not want the public to know crime from North Africans was on the rise, out of fear of a changing public perception - http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschl...hwiegen-ueber-Gewalt-durch-Nordafrikaner.html

I still don't see the problem. This was made to protect innocent people. There were massive amounts of criminal investigations happening behind the scenes. They did not ignore the crimes.

The way the police have handled the situation I s a good example of regressive leftism and why it is a bad thing.

Really? Why exactly is it a bad thing? What is bad about protecting innocent people?
 
Gemüsepizza;192450987 said:
How does the ethnicity help to determine that?

Then you are being naive. There has been violence against random migrants in the last few weeks. This is not about the specific suspects, but about protecting other members of these ethnicities.

I don't believe that. This might be the case with people who already had a racist world view, but not with normal people.

This is absurd. If the police issues a public search warrant, they will release all the necessary information. But this is a good example of how one news headline makes certain people assuming things which are not true.

I still don't see the problem. This was made to protect innocent people. There were massive amounts of criminal investigations happening behind the scenes. They did not ignore the crimes.

Really? Why exactly is it a bad thing? What is bad about protecting innocent people?
You do not see the problem of police and politicians withholding information because they fear releasing that information will change the opinion of the people about an issue? This is pretty basic democracy and free press at work. Release the facts and do what the people want according with the existing laws. That in this case that information does not support your views is irrelevant.
 
I don't see the problem when police and politicians don't want to release information about on-going investigations, to protect innocent people. Again, this is about alleged criminals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom