Sweden Riots

dr.fuzzenstein

Bootlegger wrote: »

I don't believe for one second you wouldn't be insulted if someone refused to shake your hand.

You know, I can shake your hand with a manly grip, look you straight in the eye, smile and say "how are you?" and every single nuance of it will be dripping an unsaid "fcuk you".
Or I can say that for whatever reason I cannot shake your hand, but I'm delighted to meet you and convey utter sincerity.
And you will be happy with the first one and insulted at the second one?
Seems you're bad at reading people and intentions.

Edit:
Not you in particular, more a general point

SnakePlissken

Greentopia wrote: »

I would be cautious of going to places like Rinkeby, Angered, Biskopsgården on my own, but Swedes don't generally go to these areas tbh.

That you openly admit that there are 3 major suburbs located in Sweden where the native populace feel too intimidated to enter, yet still argue Sweden has no major issues with their lax immigration policies, simply highlights your disconnect from the truth... it's ludicrous to be quite frank.

That not one poster can give a single positive to native swedes, either economically or societally, from their self destructive policies, embarrasses those on the wrong side of the debate.

dr.fuzzenstein

SnakePlissken wrote: »

That you openly admit that there are 3 major suburbs located in Sweden where the native populace feel too intimidated to enter, yet still argue Sweden has no major issues with their lax immigration policies, simply highlights your disconnect from the truth... it's ludicrous to be quite frank.

That not one poster can give a single positive to native swedes, either economically or societally, from their self destructive policies, embarrasses those on the wrong side of the debate.

I have been to these suburbs.
They are considered bad, but I have to say that they look very nice, tidy and clean.
Compare that to some of the worst areas in Dublin, which look, well, not nice.
I had no problem in Husby or Kista and quite frankly would hesitate to enter some bad areas in Dublin.
And I'm sure more cars get burnt in Dublin than in all of Sweden. So quite frankly, the Irish don't get to point the finger at Sweden here.

RandomName2

dav3 wrote: »

Your first hand experience doesn't matter. The only way you can get a real grasp of what is happening over there, is if you're watching 19 hour long youtube videos of red faced americans, with steam coming out of their ears, screaming about no-go zones in Sweden. All the rest is fake news.

Like a comitted flat-Earther, it is incredible the amount of contortion that has to be done to defend a position that is easily disprovable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerable_area

Now this presents a number of options to you.

You could

1. Say that wikipedia can be edited by anyone. Bonus points if you mention alt-right or Russians.
2. Dispute the relevance of the details. This gives the additional benefit of getting bogged down in minute. You're also more likely to trip up an opponent.
3. Ignore this altogether and talk about unrelated, easily disparageable material in order to discredit your opponent's argument (you've just done this though, so it could get repetitive).
4. Say that there's nothing wrong with any of this, and that people having a hang-up with anything related to vulnerable areas are merely bigoted (that's been the primary line used in relation to the handshake issue).
5. Ascribe this to an entirely economic problem, with any overlap with immigration being entirely coincidental.

RandomName2

Bootlegger wrote: »

What on earth was the point of importing these people if the end result was to create no go zones?

How this improve Sweden?

Two answers.

1. Picking and choosing immigrants based upon skills can greatly improve your society and economy. Numbers will be limited, because you're only seeking to plug deficits in your country's knowledge base, and the integration of foreign cultures can improve one's own.

2. Taking in people who are from poorer countries is the 'right thing to do'. If you are setting yourself up as the most moralistic country in the world, then you have to put your money (social welfare) where your mouth is, and welcome anybody who arrives at your shores. Not doing so could make Swedes appear, and perhaps even become, more unpleasant.

Guess which of these two motives has produced the problems being faced.

malinheader

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I have been to these suburbs.
They are considered bad, but I have to say that they look very nice, tidy and clean.
Compare that to some of the worst areas in Dublin, which look, well, not nice.
I had no problem in Husby or Kista and quite frankly would hesitate to enter some bad areas in Dublin.
And I'm sure more cars get burnt in Dublin than in all of Sweden. So quite frankly, the Irish don't get to point the finger at Sweden here.

Your at it again.first priests now our capital city. I will say again we have enough problems of our own so do you think it is wise adding to the problem.

Roger Hassenforder

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I dont consider it an intrusion, thats not to say others don't.



So is getting drunk and hugging strangers, should i just accept this as a way if life when in Dublin? If i refuse to let some drunken gobsh1te hug me and talk crap in my ear for an hour does that mean i am also not intergrating?

No it's not, dont cod yourself.
I'd refuse to let some drinker gobsh1t3 blather in my ear. They're the rude ones.
I'm not aware of any culture where this is a norm. Where its the "done thing".
You might enlighten me?
A handshake, on the other hand...

And if you really think refusing a handshake due to bigotry, is comparable to not letting a drunk person blather in your ear, you have serious issues.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Bootlegger wrote: »

Do I move to Japan and refuse to bow? No because it's their culture and it's up to me to respect it if I want to live there.

If I offer you my hand and you refuse to shake it then you have insulted me. If you are a fresh off the boat Muslim and you don't understand the culture, fine, but after awhile you need to start integrating.

Amazing how liberals, who preach gender equality and secularism, fold instantly when it comes to Islam.

Do all liberals preach secularism? I would have thought many support freedom to be religious or irreligious, as is your wont.

dav3

RandomName2 wrote: »

Now this presents a number of options to you.

I'll go with option 6.

Laugh at you. Then feel sorry for you. Then laugh at you again. Then feel disappointed with you for not posting a 19 hour long YouTube video.

Roger Hassenforder

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Do all liberals preach secularism? I would have thought many support freedom to be religious or irreligious, as is your wont.

That's what secularism is.
No wonder youre confused!

(Lovin how you glossed over the equal rights)

SnakePlissken

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And please show evidence that a handshake is a "recognised form of respect".

And this is why these "debates" on Boards go absolutely no where.

When certain posters will not concede even the most obvious of statements, we're simply not dealing with reason or maturity.

Greentopia

SnakePlissken wrote: »

That you openly admit that there are 3 major suburbs located in Sweden where the native populace feel too intimidated to enter, yet still argue Sweden has no major issues with their lax immigration policies, simply highlights your disconnect from the truth... it's ludicrous to be quite frank.

That not one poster can give a single positive to native swedes, either economically or societally, from their self destructive policies, embarrasses those on the wrong side of the debate.

I didn't say they were too intimidated to enter, I can't speak for how others feel, I said I would be wary of going there. I wouldn't mind during the day, but after dark I wouldn't because I don't know the areas. Would say the same about any highly populated suburb anywhere in Europe quite frankly including many parts of Dublin.

I'd go to Angered any time day or night and feel safer than going to somewhere like Rialto or Finglas, that I can promise you, never mind somewhere that looks like a Syrian war zone that's full of white native Irish- places like Southhill or Moyross in Limerick. The worst places Sweden have to offer pale in comparison to the social deprivation, poverty and hopelessness of these places.

Can you rephrase your second paragraph please?, I want to be sure I understand it.

jmreire

Bootlegger wrote: »

I don't believe for one second you wouldn't be insulted if someone refused to shake your hand.

While a Muslim woman may or not shake hands with you, depending on her belief and disposition, if you refuse to shake hands with a Muslim man, he will be offended and will feel insulted.. So it can be shaky ground if you are not familiar with Islamic custom's.

arybvtcw0eolkf

I see the German's are realizing the folly of letting the enemy in behind the lines.

Germany is considering reintroducing conscription again.

Time to slam that border shut now!.

SnakePlissken

Greentopia wrote: »

Can you rephrase your second paragraph please?, I want to be sure I understand it.

Name one positive the mass inmigration of uneducated young males who do not wish to learn the native language or integrate into Swedish society has brought ?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

That's what secularism is.
No wonder youre confused!

(Lovin how you glossed over the equal rights)

I wasn’t confused about that. That’s not glossing over. Many liberal support gender equality. Indeed. That poster contended in the same breath that liberals preach secularism. Some do, some don’t. Many liberals support people’s right to be religious OR secular. There’s no party line on preference for secularism. So I don’t see any conflict or hypocrisy.

Being religious OR irreligious is secularism? What do you mean? They are two different things. Which one is secularism? Both? Could you clarify what you mean?

malinheader

Greentopia wrote: »

I didn't say they were too intimidated to enter, I can't speak for how others feel, I said I would be wary of going there. I wouldn't mind during the day, but after dark I wouldn't because I don't know the areas. Would say the same about any highly populated suburb anywhere in Europe quite frankly including many parts of Dublin.

I'd go to Angered any time day or night and feel safer than going to somewhere like Rialto or Finglas, that I can promise you, never mind somewhere that looks like a Syrian war zone that's full of white native Irish- places like Southhill or Moyross in Limerick. The worst places Sweden have to offer pale in comparison to the social deprivation, poverty and hopelessness of these places.

Can you rephrase your second paragraph please?, I want to be sure I understand it.

You should give Ireland a miss in future. Sweden sounds ideal for you.

Timberrrrrrrr

Bootlegger wrote: »

You are tying yourself in knots to justify ****ty behaviour just because the person is Muslim. Amazing. Imagine being such a loser that you would refuse to shake hands with an interviewer!

I couldn't give a tiny shiney sh1te what religion anyone is! If i had my way ALL religion would be banned because the world would be a much better place without it, i just think the faux outrage from the usual anti muslim brigade here on boards over a fecking handshake has dragged thier petty arguments down to a new low!

Lads ye were in the gutter befire but now have decended to the sewers with this laughable pettiness!

Are you really saying you have no issue with people moving to different countries and refusing to learn the customs and culture?

Its custom/culture in ireland to celebrate easter/christmas/paddys day, should everyone be forced to do that?

Its irish culture to get sh1t faced drunk at the weekends (and most midweek nights), should everyone be forced to partake?

Not every custom HAS to be adhered to you know! Ive lived in france where its custom to have a glass of wine with dinner, i never partook in that particular custom and no one blinked an eye.

They also give wine to young children at mealtimes something i would never do but hey its their custom right so we should all allow our children to drink alcohol from.a young age!

RandomName2

dav3 wrote: »

I'll go with option 6.

Laugh at you. Then feel sorry for you. Then laugh at you again. Then feel disappointed with you for not posting a 19 hour long YouTube video.

Okay, so you went for number 3.

It was just as tired and repetitive as I expected.

Come on, if you're going to go for ad-hominem go for the jugular! Say something cutting in the hope that the conversation gets totally sidetracked. That's the only way you're going to be able to provide a distraction.

dav3

RandomName2 wrote: »

Okay, so you went for number 3.

It was just as tired and repetitive as I expected.

Come on, if you're going to go for ad-hominem go for the jugular! Say something cutting in the hope that the conversation gets totally sidetracked. That's the only way you're going to be able to provide a distraction.

Option 7: Still laughing.

Btw if anyone is interested in the upcoming Swedish elections they can view the always up-to-date opinion polls below

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Swedish_general_election,_2018

As we can all see, the far-right are having a bit of a meltdown. Although there's still time for a few more "masked men" burning out cars, so you can't write them off just yet.

You can also view the percentage that certain coalitions are on. Including the Left Party who are currently on 9.5% compared to 5.7% in the last election, and are described as...

The Left Party (Swedish: Vänsterpartiet, V) is a socialist and feminist political party in Sweden. The party originated as a split from the Swedish Social Democratic Party in 1917, as the Swedish Social Democratic Left Party (Sveriges socialdemokratiska vänsterparti, SSV), and became the Communist Party of Sweden in 1921. In 1967, the party was renamed Left Party - the Communists; it adopted its current name in 1990. The party has never been part of a government at the national level.

Roger Hassenforder

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I wasn’t confused about that. That’s not glossing over. Many liberal support gender equality. Indeed. That poster contended in the same breath that liberals preach secularism. Some do, some don’t. Many liberals support people’s right to be religious OR secular. There’s no party line on preference for secularism. So I don’t see any conflict or hypocrisy.

Being religious OR irreligious is secularism? What do you mean? They are two different things. Which one is secularism? Both? Could you clarify what you mean?

in fairness, if you dont support gender equality, I dont think you'd be regarded as liberal... you might convince me otherwise?


here it is again:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Do all liberals preach secularism? I would have thought many support freedom to be religious or irreligious, as is your wont.

I'll repeat. thats what secularism is, freedom to practise your religon as you see fit (as long as others arent negatively impacted)
liberals would subscribe to that position.
if you didnt subscribe, you wouldnt be "liberal£.

or are we talking about "preaching"
Some liberals do "preach" about stuff.
Some dont.

You really are making absolutely no sense.

RandomName2

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I couldn't give a tiny shiney sh1te what religion anyone is! If i had my way ALL religion would be banned because the world would be a much better place without it,

Jesus, that's a bit extreme. Communist much?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

i just think the faux outrage from the usual anti muslim brigade here on boards over a fecking handshake has dragged thier petty arguments down to a new low!

Lads ye were in the gutter befire but now have decended to the sewers with this laughable pettiness!

Are you including me in that? Because I think it was fine her not giving a handshake. Her choice. My only argument is that a potential employer should be free to not hire her because of it. Nobody, besides endoftheroad, has even bothered trying to argue against the position.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Its custom/culture in ireland to celebrate easter/christmas/paddys day, should everyone be forced to do that?

Look, if you choose to go to a place, and then choose to engage in a particular activity, don't be surprised if people expect you to accept the social norms that go along with that event.

If you go choose to go to a church, don't be surprised if people get offended if you are openly drinking a can of larger. If you choose to go on public transport, don't be surprised if people get offended if you don't make space for someone who is disabled. If you choose to go to a funeral, don't be surprised if people get offended if you refuse to shake the next of kin's hand.

The woman that is being talked about here chose to go to Sweden. Sweden turns out not to be a Muslim country. Then she chooses to apply for a job, and when accepted for an interview, and she chose to go to it. The interviewer offers her his hand and he is offended when she chooses to refuse it. Imagine her shock at this turn of events.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Not every custom HAS to be adhered to you know! Ive lived in france where its custom to have a glass of wine with dinner, i never partook in that particular custom and no one blinked an eye.

If you refused the double-kiss greeting with a look of 'ugh' I think that an eye would indeed be blinked.

Mahogany Gaspipe

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

If i had my way ALL religion would be banned

Okay, so obviously you're not a fan of free speech/choice/belief?
For you, The Rights of the individual bow to the collective I imagine?

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Not every custom HAS to be adhered to you know!

But wait, you don't feel Customs worthy of censorship, so there is some permitted free choice!

Please tell me how this works exactly?

Timberrrrrrrr

Bootlegger wrote: »

Incredible, you're actually saying that people don't need to make even the basic attempt to fit in with their host culture. To give an example, if a person moves to Japan and refuses to bow, is that ok? What if they refuse to take off their shoes when entering their guests' home? I'm not talking about eating sushi or drinking sake, I'm talking about learning and respecting the cultural norms of a culture that you have chosen to live in.

Have you ever been to japan? I have and in the 7 weeks i was there i didnt bow, i (ironically) shook hands.

I don't know, you seem to struggle with the concept of shaking hands, so maybe you genuinely can't comprehend these things.

No problem with the concept of a handshake, just don't get the outrage from the anti muslim crowd who have jumped on this issue as if its the start of the fabled apocalypse.

RandomName2

dav3 wrote: »

Option 7: Still laughing.

I'm counting on you to use the same type of deflection the next time you are so easily fact-checked.

dav3 wrote: »

As we can all see, the far-right are having a bit of a meltdown.

That is interesting, but I haven't seen any explanation for it. I'm not expecting one from you.. or one that has any merit at least, but I am interested in the cause.

dav3 wrote: »

Although there's still time for a few more "masked men" burning out cars, so you can't write them off just yet.

There hasn't been any appreciable bounce due to the first round of car burning by immigrant gangs, so I'm not sure that another round would make much impact.

Timberrrrrrrr

Mahogany Gaspipe wrote: »

Okay, so obviously you're not a fan of free speech/choice/belief?
For you, The Rights of the individual bow to the collective I imagine?

So you are ok with isis belief that it's ok to chop the head of a non believer?

People can believe what they want, i believe the world would be a better place without religion.

But wait, you don't feel Customs worthy of censorship, so there is some permitted free choice!

Please tell me how this works exactly?

Free choice is fine as long as no one is hurt.

blinding

Why do muslims keep coming to Christian Countries and not wanting to integrate to the societies they are moving to ? Why are they not moving to Muslim Countries ?

JPCN1

blinding wrote: »

Why do muslims keep coming to Christian Countries and not wanting to integrate to the societies they are moving to ? Why are they not moving to Muslim Countries ?

Better welfare for one.

warsaw2018

We should be copying the Scandinavian model

Member when everyone used to say that 10 years ago

JPCN1

warsaw2018 wrote: »

We should be copying the Scandinavian model

Member when everyone used to say that 10 years ago

Sadly we are. Only the bad bits though.