Migration Megathread

Sand · 14-04-2019 9:41pm

MrFresh wrote: »

An hour a week with a social worker? The proposal was for 25-30 hours a week in a class from the age of 1. You ask what Denmark can do. They can go back to giving free Danish classes to immigrants instead of charging for them because since they started charging the uptake in classes has gone down, to nobody's surprise. So you might see why I have an issue with them claiming the children need these classes when they are simultaneously withdrawing funding for things that are working already.

Danish school kids spend 30-35 hours in class per week. Total, for all subjects. All the Danish proposal is that children from certain areas are compelled to be enrolled in daycare in a Danish language environment which runs for at least 30 hours. The Danes are in fact going one better than your demand to offer free Danish language classes, and are instead forcing parents to put their children in those Danish classes. It is an attempt, how ever effective, to ensure all children receive a Danish education.

Danish language classes continue to be free for refugees and family members who have entered Denmark in a family reunification mechanism. Immigrants are supposed to be able to support themselves. That is the myth anyway. In reality, the Danes have to pay for the immigrants too.

Your political views have inflicted this generational problem upon the Danes, those now living and those not even born yet. They are attempting to cope with these completely avoidable problems after the utopian promises of mass migration and multiculturalism have been shown to be lies. There is no magical solution, but you're not really in a position to criticise.

MrFresh · 14-04-2019 9:54pm

Sand wrote: »

Danish school kids spend 30-35 hours in class per week. Total, for all subjects. All the Danish proposal is that children from certain areas are compelled to be enrolled in daycare in a Danish language environment which runs for at least 30 hours. The Danes are in fact going one better than your demand to offer free Danish language classes, and are instead forcing parents to put their children in those Danish classes. It is an attempt, how ever effective, to ensure all children receive a Danish education.

How is it better? How do I integrate better when my child is learning a language I am not? Odd that you mentioned one hour a week with a social worker when you seem to know that wasn't the case.

Sand wrote: »

Danish language classes continue to be free for refugees and family members who have entered Denmark in a family reunification mechanism. Immigrants are supposed to be able to support themselves. That is the myth anyway. In reality, the Danes have to pay for the immigrants too.

You're missing the point. How is it not economically viable to provide free language classes to immigrants but it is to force their children into "daycare" for 30 hours a week.

Sand wrote: »

Your political views have inflicted this generational problem upon the Danes, those now living and those not even born yet. They are attempting to cope with these completely avoidable problems after the utopian promises of mass migration and multiculturalism have been shown to be lies. There is no magical solution, but you're not really in a position to criticise.

I'm pretty sure the powers that be in Denmark have not based their policies on my political views.

Sand · 14-04-2019 10:59pm

MrFresh wrote: »

How is it better? How do I integrate better when my child is learning a language I am not? Odd that you mentioned one hour a week with a social worker when you seem to know that wasn't the case.

About an hour long civics class is all it will amount too. They have to teach them other subjects as well in the total time. I'm not defending the policy as I believe it will be resented and resisted. However, you're in no position to criticise the Danes attempts to cope with the predicament your views have placed them in.

You're missing the point. How is it not economically viable to provide free language classes to immigrants but it is to force their children into "daycare" for 30 hours a week.

Immigrants are supposed to be economically self-sustaining. They immigrate into Denmark to work, or to join family who are working. To work in Denmark you either need to know Danish or you have to learn it. Immigrants who come to Denmark not knowing the language and without the means or interest in learning it are not an economic benefit to Denmark. Even where refugees are offered free Danish classes, up to 44% of those registered fail to show up.

Free or not, the reality is Denmark's problem with alienated, foreign enclaves will not be resolved by language classes or daycare. It's going to be an enduring problem that will take centuries to resolve.

I'm pretty sure the powers that be in Denmark have not based their policies on my political views.

Not anymore, but the damage is already done.

Midlife · 15-04-2019 12:44am

I'd say that if you fast forward 20 or so years Sweden and Denmark will have gotten it right.

Fund and demand integration, no ghettos, sustainable numbers coming in etc.

Time will tell I guess.

There's obviously problems there stemmming from the sheer volume of people coming in but I have a feeling they'll deal with them well long term.

Midlife · 15-04-2019 12:47am

MrFresh wrote: »

How is it better? How do I integrate better when my child is learning a language I am not? Odd that you mentioned one hour a week with a social worker when you seem to know that wasn't the case.

You don't really but your children do. They're the real target.

MrFresh · 15-04-2019 3:00pm

Sand wrote: »

About an hour long civics class is all it will amount too. They have to teach them other subjects as well in the total time. I'm not defending the policy as I believe it will be resented and resisted. However, you're in no position to criticise the Danes attempts to cope with the predicament your views have placed them in.

Immigrants are supposed to be economically self-sustaining. They immigrate into Denmark to work, or to join family who are working. To work in Denmark you either need to know Danish or you have to learn it. Immigrants who come to Denmark not knowing the language and without the means or interest in learning it are not an economic benefit to Denmark. Even where refugees are offered free Danish classes, up to 44% of those registered fail to show up.

Free or not, the reality is Denmark's problem with alienated, foreign enclaves will not be resolved by language classes or daycare. It's going to be an enduring problem that will take centuries to resolve.

Not anymore, but the damage is already done.

I think you vastly overestimate the influence I have and have had on the Danish people.

Midlife wrote: »

You don't really but your children do. They're the real target.

And targeting them in such a way is ineffectual if their parents aren't on board.

Midlife · 15-04-2019 3:46pm

MrFresh wrote: »

And targeting them in such a way is ineffectual if their parents aren't on board.

I'm not so sure.

Pretty much everyone I know from Ireland has parents who are far stricter in terms of their Catholicism then they are.

I mean we could talk about the most effective way to integrate but surely we can't fault the Danes for putting efforts in place. I don't know the ins and outs of it but I'd be fairly confidant these classes are not the sum-total of their efforts.

I'd imagine avoiding religioous based school and promoting secularism in everyday life is a pretty sensible approach.

Midlife · 15-04-2019 3:50pm

Sand wrote: »

Immigrants are supposed to be economically self-sustaining. They immigrate into Denmark to work, or to join family who are working. To work in Denmark you either need to know Danish or you have to learn it. Immigrants who come to Denmark not knowing the language and without the means or interest in learning it are not an economic benefit to Denmark. Even where refugees are offered free Danish classes, up to 44% of those registered fail to show up.

That's very specific.

I think people who argue this on economics are guilty of not being cynical enough.

Does anyone really think that countries like Sweden and Denmark would take people in if it wasn't in their own interest?

MrFresh · 15-04-2019 4:33pm

Midlife wrote: »

I'm not so sure.

Pretty much everyone I know from Ireland has parents who are far stricter in terms of their Catholicism then they are.

They didn't get that way from their education though.

Midlife wrote: »

I mean we could talk about the most effective way to integrate but surely we can't fault the Danes for putting efforts in place. I don't know the ins and outs of it but I'd be fairly confidant these classes are not the sum-total of their efforts.

I'd imagine avoiding religioous based school and promoting secularism in everyday life is a pretty sensible approach.

I aboslutely can fault them if their attempts are overly authoritarian.

Midlife · 15-04-2019 4:57pm

MrFresh wrote: »

They didn't get that way from their education though.

No, they got it from being exposed to a progressive society that had eclipsed their parent's stanceon many things.

Religion is backwards, secularism and education is the solution.

I agree with you that it depends on how it's imposed but I see nothing wrong at all with having mandatory educational outcomes, provided it's for everyone.

fly_agaric · 15-04-2019 10:21pm

Midlife wrote: »

That's very specific.

I think people who argue this on economics are guilty of not being cynical enough.

Does anyone really think that countries like Sweden and Denmark would take people in if it wasn't in their own interest?

I don't know about Denmark, but AFAIR Sweden has in the recent past taken huge numbers (relative to its population) of UN refugees from destitute and wartorn countries. I really struggle to see how such people would ever be of any benefit to Sweden.

The obvious reason for doing it would be that Swedish voters and their politicians thought it was the the correct/moral thing for the government to do to help these people (like protecting the environment, giving untied aid to help develop poorer countries, not staring wars, managing the economy prudently!). It is funny in a dark kind of way that they can't even get credit for that choice, there must have been some (more cynical) ulterior/"real" objective all along!

Midlife · 15-04-2019 11:32pm

fly_agaric wrote: »

I don't know about Denmark, but AFAIR Sweden has in the recent past taken huge numbers (relative to its population) of UN refugees from destitute and wartorn countries. I really struggle to see how such people would ever be of any benefit to Sweden.

The obvious reason for doing it would be that Swedish voters and their politicians thought it was the the correct/moral thing for the government to do to help these people (like protecting the environment, giving untied aid to help develop poorer countries, not staring wars, managing the economy prudently!). It is funny in a dark kind of way that they can't even get credit for that choice, there must have been some (more cynical) ulterior/"real" objective all along!

Not cynical enough!!

Sweden plannned some time ago (the pensions department are cited as origin of the plan) to bring in 115,000 people per year.

I'm sure they feel good about helping people and that shouldn't be discounted but I'm not niaive enough to think that a nation with enough population, a sufficient birth rate and no demographic issue down the road is going to welcome numbers like that in.

Sand · 20-04-2019 3:58pm

Midlife wrote: »

I'd say that if you fast forward 20 or so years Sweden and Denmark will have gotten it right.

Fund and demand integration, no ghettos, sustainable numbers coming in etc.

Time will tell I guess.

There's obviously problems there stemmming from the sheer volume of people coming in but I have a feeling they'll deal with them well long term.

20 or so years ago people would be saying the same thing. 20 years from now, they will be saying the same thing. If you want to understand the true timescale of the problem, 410 years after the Ulster Plantation there is still ethnic conflict and bitterness in Northern Ireland and the ethnic division dominates politics in that region.

There are consequences to the policy of mass migration which Sweden, Denmark and others pursued for decades. The consequences are entirely self-inflicted. They cannot be avoided.

Midlife wrote: »

Does anyone really think that countries like Sweden and Denmark would take people in if it wasn't in their own interest?

That question could be unwrapped. Do governments always make decisions in the interests of the entire country, or more often in the interests of specific interest groups? At no point was mass migration in the interests of Europeans, but still that policy was pursued. An entire private-public industry has built up to support, service, mediate and regulate mass migration and its consequences. The stakeholders in that industry will of course advocate for more migration, and more spending on migration because it is their livelihood. They will lobby in the same way big oil, big pharma or tobacco companies will regardless of the impact on the rest of society.

Even apart from all that, governments can be mistaken about what is in their countries interests. Ideology can lead countries to pursue disastrous policies despite all contrary evidence. History is littered with examples of the same. The policy of mass migration into Europe, taken against the interests of Europeans by their own governments, will be remembered as just another example of that.

splashuum · 21-04-2019 11:07pm

After the horrific attacks on Christians today, given the mass Muslim migration we have seen, should we be worried that that an Islamic attack of this magnitude could hit Europe sooner rather than later?

Timberrrrrrrr · 22-04-2019 1:01am

splashuum wrote: »

After the horrific attacks on Christians today, given the mass Muslim migration we have seen, should we be worried that that an Islamic attack of this magnitude could hit Europe sooner rather than later?

No

bigpink · 22-04-2019 1:49am

splashuum wrote: »

After the horrific attacks on Christians today, given the mass Muslim migration we have seen, should we be worried that that an Islamic attack of this magnitude could hit Europe sooner rather than later?

Deffo look at the Uk no go Muslim areas.See it in Limerick women being made to walk behind men

Hedgelayer · 22-04-2019 2:13am

splashuum wrote: »

After the horrific attacks on Christians today, given the mass Muslim migration we have seen, should we be worried that that an Islamic attack of this magnitude could hit Europe sooner rather than later?

I wondered about that, I was watching star war's and the emperor said execute order 66....

That's when all the storm troopers turned on the jedi....

Could this possibly happen on a street or in a western city?

Dannyriver · 22-04-2019 11:39am

bigpink wrote: »

Deffo look at the Uk no go Muslim areas.See it in Limerick women being made to walk behind men

I live here and you re right , you can t even go to the shop without falling over women being made to walk behind men. My mother even said it to me today she said Danny I was just down the shops and everywhere you look there are women being made to walk behind men. I think its high time we were suspicious fearful and downright scared of this women walking behind men epidemic in Limerick.

Help!!!! · 22-04-2019 12:04pm

So in the last week
Sri Lankan attack
Another church in Paris set on fire ( Not Notre Dame but have you seen the new footage of the person on the roof before the fire )
A man attacked a church, fired a firework at congregation while mass was going on, he was overpowered
Muslims rioted in Denmark because some right wing nutjobs were throwing a Quran around & may have covered it in bacon
These & the hundreds of churches set on fire & monuments, statues broken around Europe
Some part of Italy they are covering crosses with black sheets so as not to offend others
We have Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs living around Ireland & Europe but when theres any trouble its usually a Muslim
Do you really think Ireland will get away with the same sh!te?

oscarBravo · 22-04-2019 1:58pm

Help!!!! wrote: »

...when theres any trouble its usually a Muslim

Yup. A young journalist murdered by a Muslim terrorist in Derry; a teenager stabbed by a Muslim in Armagh; ATMs being ripped out of walls by Muslims driving stolen diggers; Muslim terrorist sympathisers openly marching in the streets of Dublin; firearms seized from Muslim drug dealers in a house search in Tallaght; Muslims planting hoax bombs in Derry; Muslims firing shots in residential areas in Clonsilla and Dundalk.

It would be a grand peaceful wee country if it wasn't for those feckin Muslim troublemakers alright.

James Brown · 22-04-2019 2:49pm

Help!!!! wrote: »

So in the last week
Sri Lankan attack
Another church in Paris set on fire ( Not Notre Dame but have you seen the new footage of the person on the roof before the fire )
A man attacked a church, fired a firework at congregation while mass was going on, he was overpowered
Muslims rioted in Denmark because some right wing nutjobs were throwing a Quran around & may have covered it in bacon
These & the hundreds of churches set on fire & monuments, statues broken around Europe
Some part of Italy they are covering crosses with black sheets so as not to offend others
We have Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs living around Ireland & Europe but when theres any trouble its usually a Muslim
Do you really think Ireland will get away with the same sh!te?

You carpet bomb a section of people for whatever good intentioned and profitable reason you may have, some of them will be peeved and no mistake. Now if these people have no military they'll resort to guerrilla tactics and 'terrorism'. Some like minded people descended from such regions will take up 'the cause'. Every action has a re-action. We do not have happy go lucky people, minding their own business deciding one day to bomb a restaurant. We have Christians burning down black churches and massacring parishioners, school children, movie goers. All these 'terrorists' have their own reasoning. This is common sense but sadly needs repeating, we cannot, in decent society, treat people differently based on ethnicity or religion. We should however be looking at catching these criminals and seeking to address the problems causing these actions, be it mental health or some cause. On that point, when it's a white Christian it's obviously a mental health issue, but if it's a Muslim, it's the entire religion. Odd that.

Timberrrrrrrr · 22-04-2019 3:05pm

Help!!!! wrote: »

So in the last week
Sri Lankan attack
Another church in Paris set on fire ( Not Notre Dame but have you seen the new footage of the person on the roof before the fire )
A man attacked a church, fired a firework at congregation while mass was going on, he was overpowered
Muslims rioted in Denmark because some right wing nutjobs were throwing a Quran around & may have covered it in bacon
These & the hundreds of churches set on fire & monuments, statues broken around Europe
Some part of Italy they are covering crosses with black sheets so as not to offend others
We have Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs living around Ireland & Europe but when theres any trouble its usually a Muslim
Do you really think Ireland will get away with the same sh!te?

Jaysus you obviously have no clue! You read this on some gobsh/tes fb or twitter?

The covering of crosses is a christian lenten tradition :rolleyes:

https://aleteia.org/2016/03/19/why-do-we-cover-crucifixes-and-statues-during-lent/

Help!!!! · 22-04-2019 3:09pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You carpet bomb a section of people for whatever good intentioned and profitable reason you may have, some of them will be peeved and no mistake. Now if these people have no military they'll resort to guerrilla tactics and 'terrorism'. Some like minded people descended from such regions will take up 'the cause'. Every action has a re-action. We do not have happy go lucky people, minding their own business deciding one day to bomb a restaurant. We have Christians burning down black churches and massacring parishioners, school children, movie goers. All these 'terrorists' have their own reasoning. This is common sense but sadly needs repeating, we cannot, in decent society, treat people differently based on ethnicity or religion. We should however be looking at catching these criminals and seeking to address the problems causing these actions, be it mental health or some cause. On that point, when it's a white Christian it's obviously a mental health issue, but if it's a Muslim, it's the entire religion. Odd that.

No never said its a whole religion but why do we never hear people saying the same about the Sikhs, Buddhists, Hindus?
Why is it a 'artist' can stick Jesus in a box of piss & its acceptable & Christians dont riot
A couple of idiots throw the Quran around theres dozens immediately rioting.
We are always told it is only a handful of extremists but they always seem to show when someone draws a cartoon or throws a book

Help!!!! · 22-04-2019 3:17pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Jaysus you obviously have no clue! You read this on some gobsh/tes fb or twitter?

The covering of crosses is a christian lenten tradition :rolleyes:

https://aleteia.org/2016/03/19/why-do-we-cover-crucifixes-and-statues-during-lent/

Nope

"The crosses on graves in an Italian cemetery in Pieve di Cento have been covered with black cloth so as not to offend those who may come from another religion"

James Brown · 22-04-2019 3:19pm

Help!!!! wrote: »

No never said its a whole religion but why do we never hear people saying the same about the Sikhs, Buddhists, Hindus?
Why is it a 'artist' can stick Jesus in a box of piss & its acceptable & Christians dont riot
A couple of idiots throw the Quran around theres dozens immediately rioting.
We are always told it is only a handful of extremists but they always seem to show when someone draws a cartoon or throws a book

You are inferring it and in this comment also.
You do, by the way just not covered so much in western media. There's always one set of fools willing to attack another and vice versa based on the different.
They can protest actions which insult their religion, isn't that what the good fight is all about, freedom? There are Christians who protest the funerals of American servicemen. If a group of Muslims did it it would make world wide news. Think about that.
Western profiteering drives many of these issues IMO. It's easier to blame a symptom than lose money addressing the cause.
I live near and work with some Muslims. We have no issues, that's not to say some Muslims aren't terrorists and people from my ethnicity/culture aren't tearing up some Muslim majority countries. Do you see where I'm going? To get back on thread topic, immigration should be based on the individual.

Timberrrrrrrr · 22-04-2019 3:22pm

Help!!!! wrote: »

Nope

"The crosses on graves in an Italian cemetery in Pieve di Cento have been covered with black cloth so as not to offend those who may come from another religion"

Link to this please

Help!!!! · 22-04-2019 3:32pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Link to this please

Heres some but I'm sure there not reliable:rolleyes:

https://www.rt.com/news/456057-italy-church-hides-crosses-offends/

https://www.skyhinews.com/opinion/opinion-hamilton-anti-semitism-a-dachau-memoir%EF%BB%BF/

https://neonnettle.com/news/7083-crosses-covered-up-in-italian-cemetery-to-avoid-offending-other-religions-

Odhinn · 22-04-2019 4:10pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Link to this please

I've searched and - oddly - it only appears on far right/anti-muslim sites.

Timberrrrrrrr · 22-04-2019 4:13pm

Odhinn wrote: »

I've searched and - oddly - it only appears on far right/anti-muslim sites.

Just finished looking myself and to say the sites reporting it are somewhat dubious would be putting it mildly.

Dannyriver · 22-04-2019 4:21pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Just finished looking myself and to say the sites reporting it are somewhat dubious would be putting it mildly.

Yes the modus operendi of far right news sites, Find an isolated incident , twist its narrative to suit your views , treat the isolated incident as if it is indicative of the majority. The far right audience then dispense of critical thinking faculties in order to consolidate their prejudicial views. and around and around we go .

Help!!!! · 22-04-2019 4:41pm

Dannyriver wrote: »

Yes the modus operendi of far right news sites, Find an isolated incident , twist its narrative to suit your views , treat the isolated incident as if it is indicative of the majority. The far right audience then dispense of critical thinking faculties in order to consolidate their prejudicial views. and around and around we go .

So the crosses are not covered so as not to offend other religions?
It is not an isolated incident plenty examples all over Europe, including Ireland where Christian relics are covered or taken out of buildings so not to offend others not to mention the dozens of churches set on fire, statues destroyed etc
& by the way the 'left' are pretty good at spinning incidents to suit their own views & are jumped on by their left wing audience
Or even not reporting on them so it doesn't affect their views

Brian? · 22-04-2019 5:02pm

Help!!!! wrote: »

So the crosses are not covered so as not to offend other religions?
It is not an isolated incident plenty examples all over Europe, including Ireland where Christian relics are covered or taken out of buildings so not to offend others not to mention the dozens of churches set on fire, statues destroyed etc
& by the way the 'left' are pretty good at spinning incidents to suit their own views & are jumped on by their left wing audience
Or even not reporting on them so it doesn't affect their views

The crosses were covered during lent due to the tradition of covering them during lent. Do you accept that or not?

MrFresh · 22-04-2019 5:26pm

Brian? wrote: »

The crosses were covered during lent due to the tradition of covering them during lent. Do you accept that or not?

Clearly his Christianity is under attack. Don't you think a real Christian such as him would know about such a tradition if it existed?

It does seem this is another case of "fake news" though.

Help!!!! · 22-04-2019 5:41pm

Brian? wrote: »

The crosses were covered during lent due to the tradition of covering them during lent. Do you accept that or not?

It was not said they were covered for lent, in fact some Italian politicians called it out. I would think they might know if it was for lent or not

Help!!!! · 22-04-2019 5:43pm

MrFresh wrote: »

Clearly his Christianity is under attack. Don't you think a real Christian such as him would know about such a tradition if it existed?

It does seem this is another case of "fake news" though.

Well when the piece said that some Christian politicians called out the covering of the crosses I would like to think they might have an idea if covered for lent.
Also the crosses are covered in churches not in graveyards so its not a tradition

Eric Cartman · 22-04-2019 6:16pm

whatever about an actual muslim takeover , when new zealand happened every outlet called them muslims at prayer , made reference to islam etc...

the sri lanka attack and theyre called 'easter worshippers' I have no idea why theres a concerted effort to downplay christianity in the media, especially for victims , by the same media that regularly call muslims 'asian' or avoid using the word muslim whenever they have caused something, but its always in the headline when theyre the victims.

James Brown · 22-04-2019 6:21pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

whatever about an actual muslim takeover , when new zealand happened every outlet called them muslims at prayer , made reference to islam etc...

the sri lanka attack and theyre called 'easter worshippers' I have no idea why theres a concerted effort to downplay christianity in the media, especially for victims , by the same media that regularly call muslims 'asian' or avoid using the word muslim whenever they have caused something, but its always in the headline when theyre the victims.

Only as it relates to a targeted attack on Muslims. I've seen numerous reports related to the attacks on Christians celebrating Easter or at Easter services. When the Jewish synagogue was attacked same thing.
We don't read Christian man stabs partner or passerby, so why should it read Muslim man unless relevant to the story?
There's many an instance were the Muslim attacker is evil and the white Christan guy had issues but was a great kid as we look at video games or something to explain it away.

Eric Cartman · 22-04-2019 6:29pm

Dannyriver wrote: »

Because the US and western forces didn t invade India or Tibet murdering 100s of thousands of innocent civilians. As someone succinctly put it earlier when you decide to carpet bomb peoples homelands you ll always get some extremists who'll fight back. Have you heard about the British oppression of Ireland and the rise of the IRA?

You would imagine by that logic that Jamaicans and Indians should be blowing up england en masse, or south africans. Or how about the terrorist problem the US have with the Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese ? , why is it that only countries with a majority islamic faith are insistent on this international revenge.

Eric Cartman · 22-04-2019 6:37pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Only as it relates to a targeted attack on Muslims. I've seen numerous reports related to the attacks on Christians celebrating Easter or at Easter services. When the Jewish synagogue was attacked same thing.
We don't read Christian man stabs partner or passerby, so why should it read Muslim man unless relevant to the story?
There's many an instance were the Muslim attacker is evil and the white Christan guy had issues but was a great kid as we look at video games or something to explain it away.

and ofcourse it wasn't anyone, but there are outlets that called them 'easter worshippers' that are happy to call them 'muslims' when they are the victims. Media outlets have style guides and so those type of things should be consistent. In this case it feels like some either believed that them being christians was irrelevant or wilfully excluded it.

ancapailldorcha · 22-04-2019 6:38pm

Mod: Enough of the one-liners, link dumps and lazy generalisations please. A few posts have been deleted.

Dannyriver · 22-04-2019 6:52pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

You would imagine by that logic that Jamaicans and Indians should be blowing up england en masse, or south africans. Or how about the terrorist problem the US have with the Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese ? , why is it that only countries with a majority islamic faith are insistent on this international revenge.

I thought we were talking about terrorists ....Which 'countries of majority islamic faith are insistent on International revenge'

Eric Cartman · 22-04-2019 6:57pm

Dannyriver wrote: »

I thought we were talking about terrorists ....Which 'countries of majority islamic faith are insistent on International revenge'

youre just being pedantic, you know i didn't mean everyone from those places, but its always a first or second gen migrant from one of those islamic countries. If it was 'revenge' for what happened to their countries then surely there would be evidence of many of these other countries radicalising and committing terrorist acts in the US and UK.

Dannyriver · 22-04-2019 7:07pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

youre just being pedantic, you know i didn't mean everyone from those places, but its always a first or second gen migrant from one of those islamic countries. If it was 'revenge' for what happened to their countries then surely there would be evidence of many of these other countries radicalising and committing terrorist acts in the US and UK.

Im not talking about revenge, the US led coalition forces have a huge vested interest in majority Muslim countries in the middle east due to vital economic interests, its common knowledge for instance that they interfere continuously in the internal workings of these countries. Of course there ll be extremists who'll fight back. Do you think if western powers got out of the middle east that terrorism from Muslim extremists would still continue?

Eric Cartman · 22-04-2019 7:09pm

Dannyriver wrote: »

Im not talking about revenge, the US led coalition forces have a huge vested interest in majority Muslim countries in the middle east due to vital economic interests, its common knowledge for instance that they interfere continuously in the internal workings of these countries. Of course there ll be extremists who'll fight back. Do you think if western powers got out of the middle east that terrorism from Muslim extremists would still continue?

Absolutely yes.

I think a lot of it is fuelled from radical hate preachers and the mosques are where this is occuring, an interpretation (some of it correct, some twisted) of the qur'an by radical imams is to blame. Leaving the US aside, you have attacks on german christmas markets, malmo sweden has become crime riddled, some boroughs of east london have signs up saying 'sharia controlled zone' . This isnt to do with interference by the US in arab lands.

Dannyriver · 22-04-2019 7:12pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Absolutely yes.

So correct me if I'm wrong you don t see a connection between what the west has done in the middle east since world war 2 and the problems with extremist terrorism?

Ultimate Seduction · 22-04-2019 7:13pm

They kill in the name of the Religion not in revenge.

Eric Cartman · 22-04-2019 7:16pm

Dannyriver wrote: »

So correct me if I'm wrong you don t see a connection between what the west has done in the middle east since world war 2 and the problems with extremist terrorism?

I see a connection and fully believe that it has been a contributing factor, but I think the cat is out of the bag now, it may have begun as revenge for US interests in those countries but the target list has expanded to all 'christian' countries, the 'legitimate' reasons long forgotten by most. I don't think for one second that if all the americans left the middle east that it would stop a hate preacher in tower hamlets radicalising a bunch of 16 year old boys and telling them its ok to throw acid in the face of women or blow up a church.

James Brown · 22-04-2019 7:32pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

and ofcourse it wasn't anyone, but there are outlets that called them 'easter worshippers' that are happy to call them 'muslims' when they are the victims. Media outlets have style guides and so those type of things should be consistent. In this case it feels like some either believed that them being christians was irrelevant or wilfully excluded it.

I heard reports they believed it was Jihadis too. I sensed no cover up in any way you describe. Sri Lanka has had bitter fighting.

Ultimate Seduction wrote: »

They kill in the name of the Religion not in revenge.

Not quite. They kill claiming the west is at war with Muslims. Sadly pretty much every nation uses patriotism or religion to lull people into killing when it's rarely anything to do with either patriotism or religion, (protecting country/freedom to worship) IMO.

22-04-2019 7:44pm

Ultimate Seduction wrote: »

They kill in the name of the Religion not in revenge.

Interesting, but do they actually? For decades the British claimed the conflict in the North, and Ireland generally before it, was "religious". As far as I, and everybody I know, is concerned it has always been a colonial conflict, no matter how many times outsiders have conveniently claimed it to be beyond political solution by defining it as "religious".

Similarly, to what extent are these "Islamic fundamentalists" motivated by religious belief, and to what extent are they motivated by the desire for a scapegoat for the massive socio-economic inequalities, repression and backwardness of their societies? Undoubtedly, there will be the Paisleys of Islam, but are the majority of them in that category?

Eric Cartman · 22-04-2019 7:44pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I heard reports they believed it was Jihadis too. I sensed no cover up in any way you describe. Sri Lanka has had bitter fighting.

Not quite. They kill claiming the west is at war with Muslims. Sadly pretty much every nation uses patriotism or religion to lull people into killing when it's rarely anything to do with either patriotism or religion, (protecting country/freedom to worship) IMO.

Im not proclaiming a cover up by any stretch , Im saying that some media outlets when talking about islam , if theyre the victims make it headline worthy relevant, if theyre the perpetrators theyll use words like 'asian' , whereas with this story, the christians being victims was downplayed to 'easter worshipers' It changes the context of the story from an attack motivated by hate and intollerance to just some people killed just some people for some unknown reason, they might tread into it further on in the article, but in todays low attention span world, many would come away from reading it without knowing its a targetted attack on people of the christian faith on one of the most significant days in the christian calander.

Migration Megathread

Comments