|
Yeah, the ~5 million refugees about 20 years ago never happened.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:20 |
|
|
Private Speech posted:It's pretty much the same as Trump saying that "Mexicans are rapists, thieves ... and some I assume are good people!" and using that as argument to cut off any immigration from Mexico into the US. There's literally zero reason whatsoever (beyond "common sense") to think that ISIS and other assorted loons would find it harder to perpetrate attacks if the borders were closed, given that they haven't really even used the fact that the borders are open right now in any of their attacks so far. https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...5415_story.html quote:The vast majority of migrants were genuinely fleeing war and poverty. But over the past six months, more than three dozen suspected militants who impersonated migrants have been arrested or died while planning or carrying out acts of terrorism. They include at least seven directly tied to the bloody attacks in Paris and Brussels. quote:In early September, just a few weeks before the four men landed on Leros, they were invited to attend a secret meeting in a central Syrian city controlled by the Islamic State. LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 14:17 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:This isn't really true and it's not true because America has had to integrate massive waves of new immigrant populations over its history and Europeans nations as a whole have not. - If Germans and Poles are not counted as foreigners in Switzerland then I'm not counting Italians and Mexicans in the US either. You see, for an arbitrary definition of "foreign born", every country in the world has at the same time more and also less foreigners than any other country in the world.  - If you want to bring history into that whole discussion for some reason, it's not going to look much better for the US either. Germany did the Huguenots, the Slavs, the Huns, some Romans and also Neanderthals. All are now peaceful, integrated parts of the Federal Republic of Germany. Proud model Germans.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:- If Germans and Poles are not counted as foreigners in Switzerland then I'm not counting Italians and Mexicans in the US either. You see, for an arbitrary definition of "foreign born", every country in the world has at the same time more and also less foreigners than any other country in the world. Yes, truly the Poles are why they banned minarets.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
Huh. But still, unless we refused all refugees from the region it would be hard to stop anyone using that route into europe - and inevitably there are other routes as well, particularly when the terrorists have fake ids etc. as these did.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Yes, truly the Poles are why they banned minarets. But can we at least agree they are the reason for Brexit? I mean c'mon!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
The thing is, these terrorists don't need to take the refugee route. Being European nationals they can instead pass into, for example, Algeria, take an airplane to France, and commit their acts of terror. They are instead taking a riskier route where they have a chance of dying on the way in order to leave a paper trail that will discredit the refugees and increase tensions between them and their host countries. You could build a hundred-meter tall wall in the middle of the sea and completely cut off the refugees from Europe, and that would not stop the terrorists, because they do not rely on the refugee route to return to Europe, they are using it to achieve a different goal altogether.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:The thing is, these terrorists don't need to take the refugee route. Being European nationals they can instead pass into, for example, Algeria, take an airplane to France, and commit their acts of terror. They are instead taking a riskier route where they have a chance of dying on the way in order to leave a paper trail that will discredit the refugees and increase tensions between them and their host countries. You could build a hundred-meter tall wall in the middle of the sea and completely cut off the refugees from Europe, and that would not stop the terrorists, because they do not rely on the refugee route to return to Europe, they are using it to achieve a different goal altogether.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Yes, truly the Poles are why they banned minarets. I think the whole minaret ban was about Swiss being fed up with poles. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:The thing is, these terrorists don't need to take the refugee route. Being European nationals they can instead pass into, for example, Algeria, take an airplane to France, and commit their acts of terror. They are instead taking a riskier route where they have a chance of dying on the way in order to leave a paper trail that will discredit the refugees and increase tensions between them and their host countries. You could build a hundred-meter tall wall in the middle of the sea and completely cut off the refugees from Europe, and that would not stop the terrorists, because they do not rely on the refugee route to return to Europe, they are using it to achieve a different goal altogether. This is dumb reasoning, they are not using their loving passports because they want to travel incognito. They could use their passports but then their entry might be registered (especially for flights) and the authorities could have put one of them on some watchlist, risking their mission. They can travel as refugees incognito for whatever part of their journey and when it would be more convenient and low risk to use their passport they can do that too. That they happen to discredit refugees is just a bonus from the safest way to travel (safe for their mission, not their persons). Also, just checking UNHCR data for 2015 there were a million refugees over the Mediterranean and 4000 dead/missing persons, the great majority of deaths happening on the long journey from North Africa to Italy/Crete. This constitutes a 0,004% risk of death, something I'm sure a loving suicidebomber at the peak of their physical fitness would find agreeable in return for arriving incognito to inside the border of schengen. Zudgemud fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:The thing is, these terrorists don't need to take the refugee route. Being European nationals they can instead pass into, for example, Algeria, take an airplane to France, and commit their acts of terror. They are instead taking a riskier route where they have a chance of dying on the way in order to leave a paper trail that will discredit the refugees and increase tensions between them and their host countries. You could build a hundred-meter tall wall in the middle of the sea and completely cut off the refugees from Europe, and that would not stop the terrorists, because they do not rely on the refugee route to return to Europe, they are using it to achieve a different goal altogether. Many if not most European born terrorist sympathizer are tracked to some degree. The hard part isn't getting in or out, the hard part is getting in again without raising a lot of red flags. The fact that there is now a legal way to enter Europe without needing papers but simply by rollling up a random name and background, is a big bonus if you want to shake off your trackers. Not masses of migrants claiming to be refugees are the problem, but rather the dismantling of the border regime due to overload. Of course, since many refugees have psychic problems (they guess that about 40% of the Syrians are damaged goods), they are more susceptible to Islamic propaganda after they already have entered Europe, thanks to the intar-webs. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Yup. All these loving terrorists had been under surveillance but they were too incompetent/unwilling to actually stop them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:I do think there's something to this argument, but it's really loving cynical the way the open borders types transitioned seamlessly from "the refugees are peace-loving people who'd obviously never hurt us, how dare you do a racism by warning that their presence may be a risk?" to "seriously guys, these refugees are a ticking time bomb that might go off any second now if we offend them and they turn to ISIS." I don't know who exactly you're talking about so it's kinda hard for me to say anything to that, but it's been my position since becoming aware of the logic of Jihadist terrorism. Or terrorism in general. People who come to the West explicitly to commit attacks aren't actually refugees though. They're not fleeing persecution, and indeed very often they are the very persecution that the people around them are fleeing from. The whole point of the exercise is to make us think of those agents as being members and representatives of the refugees in their violent acts, which they most loving certainly are not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Go find out what happens to people accused of being Daesh on the refugee trail and you'll get some measure of what the refugees in general think of these fuckwits.
lollontee fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Riso posted:Yup. All these loving terrorists had been under surveillance but they were too incompetent/unwilling to actually stop them. For the Brussels cell that went on a killing spree in Nov. 15, this was exactly the case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
I've got a hunch that those using IS as reason to not accept refugees wouldn't be that enthusiastic about the situation even without the looming threat of IS-terrorism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
Fox Cunning posted:I've got a hunch that those using IS as reason to not accept refugees wouldn't be that enthusiastic about the situation even without the looming threat of IS-terrorism. As Zizek points out again and again, pathological mistrust is still pathological even if the object of mistrust is indeed doing what the subject suspects him of doing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
See, the problem is that keeping tracks of known terrorists require personnel, which means public sector jobs, which means the antichrist. Holy Austerity says that a country should have exactly 0 public sector jobs and so all public function employees must be allowed to retire without replacement until the country is finally made efficient. Only then will the Markets, in their infinite wisdom, confer their blessings upon our nations. Terrorism happens because there's too much state, really.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Friendly Humour posted:As Zizek points out again and again, pathological mistrust is still pathological even if the object of mistrust is indeed doing what the subject suspects him of doing. That sure is a convenient perspective to take on one's opponents. Even if they're right, they were arguing in bad faith! Or better yet, actually crazy. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:The thing is, these terrorists don't need to take the refugee route. Being European nationals they can instead pass into, for example, Algeria, take an airplane to France, and commit their acts of terror. They are instead taking a riskier route where they have a chance of dying on the way in order to leave a paper trail that will discredit the refugees and increase tensions between them and their host countries. You could build a hundred-meter tall wall in the middle of the sea and completely cut off the refugees from Europe, and that would not stop the terrorists, because they do not rely on the refugee route to return to Europe, they are using it to achieve a different goal altogether. I didn't know Iraq was part of the EU now, that might explains some things. Fox Cunning posted:I've got a hunch that those using IS as reason to not accept refugees wouldn't be that enthusiastic about the situation even without the looming threat of IS-terrorism. I've always been in favour of accepting refugees but they need to be vetted or no thanks. How can you be enthusiastic about this situation? You'd have to live in a completely remote place safe from... oh wait! I can do the same thing by the way "I've got a hunch that those using mass murders as a reason to apply gun control wouldn't be that enthusiastic about the situation even without the looming threat of mass shooting". Kurtofan fucked around with this message at 17:38 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:See, the problem is that keeping tracks of known terrorists require personnel, which means public sector jobs, which means the antichrist. Holy Austerity says that a country should have exactly 0 public sector jobs and so all public function employees must be allowed to retire without replacement until the country is finally made efficient. Only then will the Markets, in their infinite wisdom, confer their blessings upon our nations. It's pretty hard to keep these idiots from blowing up when they can communicate with Saudi Arabia using a $3 Android app that offers unbreakable encryption. poo poo is hosed up and the NSA/American government is primarily to blame for this cause they created a huge market for these apps. (I know that PGP has existed for decades, but it was rarely used in those circles due to poor tech proficiency. These people are literally morons and that's probably one of the reason why you can talk them into blowing up so easily.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Guys I'm not racist. *bans swimwear because it's what those Muslims wear.* http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/08/12/489777580/french-resort-city-bans-muslim-bathing-suit
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
Sure Europeans ban swimwear indicative to minority groups but honestly, how dare you bring that up while America still has racial issues. -Europeans
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
I mean Saudi Arabia would ban Western refugees from wearing swimwear they'd be comfortable in too, but it wouldn't be because of race. France genuinely does value secularism as a national characteristic, and while this law is a particularly clumsy overreach in that regard that wouldn't even be remotely constitutional in the US, there are reasons to oppose the burka beyond racism. Again, I'm not defending the law, but viewing everything through the lens of race can sometimes miss that there are other factors at play as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:I mean Saudi Arabia would ban Western refugees from wearing swimwear they'd be comfortable in too, but it wouldn't be because of race. France genuinely does value secularism as a national characteristic, and while this law is a particularly clumsy overreach in that regard that wouldn't even be remotely constitutional in the US, there are reasons to oppose the burka beyond racism. Again, I'm not defending the law, but viewing everything through the lens of race can sometimes miss that there are other factors at play as well. In this case it's probably just racism though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:Sure Europeans ban swimwear indicative to minority groups but honestly, how dare you bring that up while America still has racial issues. -Europeans Doctor Malaver posted:Generally speaking, if you show something racist in European country A and use it to say "Europe's racist" then somebody from European country B will be offended and will object. BUT if you make a separate claim that country B is racist, they won't object. So it's not racism denial as much as not wanting to be linked with other countries' poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Considering we just had someone say "France isn't racist, it's just their culture!" I don't think that's accurate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Considering we just had someone say "France isn't racist, it's just their culture!" I don't think that's accurate. That doesn't mean you have to lump the other countries with France and their racism. My country has its own racist poo poo, thank you very much.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
drilldo squirt posted:Guys I'm not racist. *bans swimwear because it's what those Muslims wear.* That's one city and the ban is going to be overturned. computer parts posted:Considering we just had someone say "France isn't racist, it's just their culture!" I don't think that's accurate. Cannes isn't the whole of France.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Considering we just had someone say "France isn't racist, it's just their culture!" I don't think that's accurate. I'm American and even if my country's Constitution allowed such a ban, I wouldn't be in favor of it. There are valid reasons to dislike the burka as both a symbol and form of oppression though. Like we worry about images of thin models on magazines, but nope, worrying about the effect having a bunch of people show up who think women have to be physically hidden from the world might have on our feminist values at all is now forbidden. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Aug 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:Cannes isn't the whole of France. And I'm going to guess that the burqa ban wasn't passed by a unanimous vote either, so was it really France that was at fault?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Like literally, you're getting into "Supreme Court Bribery" standards of proof in order to say "yeah those dudes are racist". I cannot think of a single situation - the system of slavery in the antebellum period included - that would meet that standard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Andrast posted:In this case it's probably just racism though. Nope. It's adherence to enlightenment, anticlericalism and the republican values of '89.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Here's a handy tip. Whenever you want to say "Europeans are...", imagine that you are saying "Black people are..." or "Muslims are..."
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:Nope. It's adherence to enlightenment, anticlericalism and the republican values of '89. Yeah, racism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Let's be honest here. If anyone else but a muslim were to go swimming in full clothing we'd call him a retard. Interestingly I've seen these "burkini" things are banned for hygienic reasons in indoor pools.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
Riso posted:Let's be honest here. How about you let these people swim in peace instead of implying a foreigner is mentally challenged for not wearing the Master-Race Standard Issue Bathing Attire
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
I might think that swimming in full clothing is idiotic but that still doesn't mean it should be outlawed just because brown people do it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Andrast posted:I might think that swimming in full clothing is idiotic but that still doesn't mean it should be outlawed just because brown people do it. It shouldn't be outlawed period, but it should be stigmatized as an instrument of women's oppression. I imagine most of us agree that Christian practices that oppress women should be called out, but liberals don't know what to do anymore when disadvantaged minority groups also act as oppressors, so they construct bullshit narratives about the liberation from male gaze the burka offers the women who obviously choose to wear it on their own without any hint of coercion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 00:20 |
|
|
a big reason iranian women lashed out against feminism after the revolution was the shah's wife had pushed women's lib heavily and thus it was seen as some kind of western plot you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:27
|
|
