It's again that time of the year ... or Muslim bashing!

Well, how many clear cases have there been in cologne in the first place?

Bis zum 10. Februar wurden 1054 Strafanzeigen wegen Vorfällen in der Kölner Innenstadt während der Silvesternacht aufgenommen. In 454 Fällen handelte es sich dabei um Sexualdelikte, darunter waren auch mindestens drei Anzeigen wegen Vergewaltigung.[38] Zwei Drittel der Sexualdelikte und Diebstähle waren nach Auswertungen der Polizei im Hauptbahnhof und auf dem Bahnhofsvorplatz begangen worden, eine weitere auffällige Häufung von Delikten wurde im Bereich der Hohenzollernbrücke festgestellt. Mehr als hundert Anzeigen waren bereits bis zum Neujahrsmorgen eingegangen, ab dem 4. Januar war nach ersten Presseberichten ein massiver Anstieg der Anzeigen zu verzeichnen. Insgesamt ging die Polizei bis dahin von 1108 Opfern und Geschädigten aus.[39]

Nach Angaben der Staatsanwaltschaft Köln gab es mit Stand 16. Juni 2016 durch die Vorfälle in der Silvesternacht insgesamt 1.276 mutmaßliche Opfer. In Köln lagen 1.182 Anzeigen zur Silvesternacht vor, 497 davon wegen sexueller Übergriffe, die 648 Opfer betrafen. 284 Personen seien nach Anzeigenlage sowohl Opfer eines sexuellen Übergriffs als auch eines Eigentumsdelikts geworden. 5 Anzeigen wegen vollendeter Vergewaltigung und 16 wegen versuchter Vergewaltigung lagen vor. Von den 183 Beschuldigten galten 55 als Marokkaner, 53 als Algerier, 22 als Iraker, 14 als Syrer und 14 als Deutsche. 73 Beschuldigte waren Asylsuchende, 36 zur Tatzeit illegal in Deutschland, 11 hatten eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis. Bei den Übrigen war der Status ungeklärt. Acht Beschuldigte befanden sich zu diesem Zeitpunkt in Untersuchungshaft.[40]
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexue...2015/16#Strafanzeigen_und_Tatverd.C3.A4chtige​

It says that there have been 5 reported cases of rape and 16 with attempted rape from 497 sexual assaults of which 284 also reported property crime.

Cologne was terrible, without any questions and there have been many immigrants involved.

What the incident really highlighted though, is the inefficiency of the authorities. The police has been underbudged and undestaffed for decades and the management of criminal immigrants is a huge problem and I do not understand why it's not easier to send criminal imigrants back to their nation of origin. A lot has to be improved here, there is no question about that.

But cologne, it seems, had also a lot to do with gangs runing around and using the oportunity to simply steal stuff.
Is that really enough to create a rather bitter debate over immigration and refugees in general? Particularly in the manner as how we've seen it on the net and certain Facebook communities? I mean in Germany alone 40% of the females are subject to sexual harassment, every day. And that was never really much of a topic for the last few decades and it took cologne to start a new debate here, but it is focused solely on immigrants and refugees. That's why I brought up the Oktoberfest, where sexual attacks happen regulary, maybe not on the scope like in Cologne (I havn't compared the numbers), but it happens and it doesn't really bother anyone really. At least I can't remember that there was ever a huge debate about the sexual attacks on the Oktoberfest or other large festivals, not like about Cologne.

I have the opinion that sexual attacks, harassment and rape should always be a concern and it shouldn't take 'refugees' or 'immigrants' to set the focus on it and starting a debate, because we suddenly have someone to blame who's coming from the outside.

Of course, next to that we can ALWAYS as well talk about what the correct treatment is for criminal immigrants and/or refugees, particularly if the intention is to prevent something like that from happening in the future. But that kind of debate should be a rational one, or as we can see right now, it will hit a lot of wrong people, people that are actually very well adapted in to our culture and society but have to leave Germany now, because Afghanistan has been declared a 'safe' country of origin, a touchy subject however since at least 1/3 of the people they are sending back are criminals, and consideirng how severe the crime is I do think that sending people back should be a consideration, but the way how they do it now, seems rather problematic in my opinion.
 
https://apnews.com/a6a67fb761304e3cae7497faa32dcdc9

Threats into Jewish centers were made by an...Israeli hacker.

http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-mosul-civilians-airstrike-20170324-story.html

Where's the outrage?

And now US forces have admitted they did it. Will there be some judgements passed as a result of this admission of guilt? Some trials at the Hague international criminal court for war crimes?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/re...-air-strike-Mosul-district-dozens-killed.html
 
Last edited:
Crni Vuk said:
Of course, next to that we can ALWAYS as well talk about what the correct treatment is for criminal immigrants and/or refugees, particularly if the intention is to prevent something like that from happening in the future. But that kind of debate should be a rational one, or as we can see right now, it will hit a lot of wrong people, people that are actually very well adapted in to our culture and society but have to leave Germany now, because Afghanistan has been declared a 'safe' country of origin, a touchy subject however since at least 1/3 of the people they are sending back are criminals, and consideirng how severe the crime is I do think that sending people back should be a consideration, but the way how they do it now, seems rather problematic in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Deporting criminals, their families, or their supporters seems to be perfectly reasonable to me. More so, Germany should do the same with Balkanian criminals too, since Balkan countries have been acknowledged to be safe as well!

Especially those imported Balkanian Germans constantly bragging of strong western economy and too generous restructural funds. I think they need to go back where they came from and help rebuilding Balkanian economy a little, since that would teach them there wouldn't have been any miraclous economy boom in the west without Marshall plan backed by Americans after WW2.
 
valcik said:
Deporting criminals, their families, or their supporters seems to be perfectly reasonable to me. More so, Germany should do the same with Balkanian criminals too, since Balkan countries have been acknowledged to be safe as well!

Especially those imported Balkanian Germans constantly bragging of strong western economy and too generous restructural funds. I think they need to go back where they came from and help rebuilding Balkanian economy a little, since that would teach them there wouldn't have been any miraclous economy boom in the west without Marshall plan backed by Americans after WW2.
Click to expand...
I never had a problem with deporting criminals, depending on the situation and crime though. I guess we can both agree that sending someone back to Syriah for a speeding ticket might be a bit to harsh. But a rapist? Or some other serious crime? After they served a sentence in jail, sending them back to where they come from should be an option in my opinion and of course just as you say, people from regions that are stable/safe. Sending criminal immigrants back should be easier, that's a reasonable argument in my opinion.

But it just seems a bit strange to always talk about integration and that people have to adabt and learn our culture etc. and than you see someone deported who's neither a criminal nor an issue, actually has a job and is very well integrated in to the comunity, speaking the language and so on. Just because some politican has to prove something.

A little side note, it seems the Marshal Plan didn't have such an enormous boost to the European economy, there has been a lot of research and while it is very difficult to clearly say how and where the Marshal plan really helped, it seems that the effect was not that huge. Some sources say it contributed between 5 and 10%, depending on the region and nation.
 
Last edited:
From what little I understand about Islam, the Quran doesn't directly advocate violence against non-believers, but its verses can easily be taken out of context for any radical groups' agenda. It's a shame really, cause the tenets of Islam on paper make it to be a prolific Abrahamic faith, its just mutated into a fucking ugly thing over the years. And it ain't a "Blame the Middle East, they're the radicals" kind of thing, Indonesia is also going down that dark road. Look up the "Ahok blasphemy trial" on Google, a Christian Indonesian politician is being tried for blasphemy in Indonesia because he criticized Muslim politicians for threatening hell to citizens if they voted for a non-Islamic leader.
You could argue that "Islamophobia" is just another one of those global scapegoats, like the Jews. But every time I read about the migrant rapes in Sweden, and how lenient the punishments the Swedish government doles to the culprits, my head can't comprehend how this can sit well with anyone involved (i.e. the victim and her/his families).

Personally, for me, if Islam were to coexist peacefully with the rest of the world, they need to fucking get rid of that Sharia law bullshit and the hijabs. Burn Islam to the ground and have a new Islam rise from the ashes.
 
Last edited:
Crni Vuk said:
But, talking about religion and racism, I think the nazis have easily proven, how it can be tied together and if enough people parrot it, it becomes a 'fact'. They classified Jews as a race, and even in the 1930s some people thought that was bogus, but that didn't keep the authorities from reating it like a race. I remember this documentary about the Wannenseeconference, and a secretary asked one of the nazi officials about the 'Rassengesetze' which classify Germans by 'blood' and that it doesn't make sense since judaism is a 'religion'. The answer the official gave was basicaly, don't worry my dear, I don't understand it either, and I have spend years to make those laws. And everyone in the room laughed.
Click to expand...
Judaism is not a missionary religion; it does not seek converts. Thus Jewish is used interchangeably to refer to someone who is of Jewish ancestry or Jewish faith because people of Jewish faith are rarely not of Jewish ancestry. The term agnostic Jew is used to refer to Jews that don't practice Judaism. Treating Muslims as a race is like treating Christians as a race. Then you have the retarded argument that certain people treat Muslims as race, none of them being Muslims. First of all, that is just assuming the worst of the general population. Second, that doesn't change the definition of the word. I don't plan to have racists redefine a word or a hand gesture. Third, here are some entries in the New York Times Manual of Style and Usage.
P_20170205_010343_1.jpg

P_20170508_232705_1.jpg

P_20170508_232210_1.jpg

But you are just going call me Nazi.
 
Do you want to argue what Jews are or what the Nazis actually saw in them? It doesn't matter how many definitions you throw around, nationalism and antisemitism of the early 19th century used almost the exact same arguments against jews and judaism that you see today against Islam. That's a historical fact. Stuff like "They will outbreed us" and "they are people following a violent religion which doesn't belong to Europe".

If you're trying to explain to me that religion is not a race, then you're preaching to the chor, because I know that and I agree with that. Doesn't stop people from throwing all 'muslims' in the same basket, not making a difference between the different schools inside of Islam while they demand that people keep the 'diversity' of christianity in mind.

The point is, that you can declare any religion or any group as a problem if you're looking deep enough, regardless how well assimilated or adabted those people are in a society, and this goes for any group or minority. I hate Islam, as Idea but I don't hate muslims.

I detest religions in general, be it Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity or Islam. They all work on the principle of superstition, that you throw out reason and logic, while accepting anything 'supernatural'. Are some ideas worse than others? Absolutely. But the basic principle is the same.
 
www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkbmByiWM9E
Uneducated moslem full of false sense of self-importance claiming very funny shit as „Jesus war ein Moslem!” in Munich. This has nothing to do with any ideology, this is great example of stupidity, ignorance, and complete obliviousness of his own history on very personal level.
 
Reminds me of those who claim Moses was christian. This kind of stuff always confuses me, how in the name of fuck can people believe in something yet know so very little?
 
Because the whole purpose of religion is to foster obedience without proof, AKA, FAITH. The reason why the two main religions have been so successful has a direct correlation with how it was spread. Islam and Christianity for example, used whatever force was necessary.

Religion also is vague on purpose, as in there is often no single established meaning.

Lastly, it adds into the US vs THEM mentality. One does not necessarily need to know the ins and outs of said religion. One merely needs to follow basics and dogma and voila, one instantly belongs.

I will never understand why religion was able to co opt the golden rule, or, how it manages to still stay so relevant in many parts of the world. For fucks sakes, treat others as you would have done unto you is basic common fucking sense.
 
I guess people love stability and rituals, and religion can do just that. I mean taky any of the big ones, like Islam and Christianity and it is full of stuff that you can or can't do, songs to sing and this event and it is an endless string of ceremonies ... I mean people really crave such stuff, when ever you replace religion with some other ideology, be it fascism or communism or what ever, they do the same, it's just called a military parade or a congress or what ever.


I love how this guys starts a discussion:
"How are you guys doing today?" "Pretty good. I'm an atheist"

I had a discussion with an old school mate over facebook, who kinda found his way to god or something and he's always posting prayers and shit. We got in a discussion, all pretty civil, but it kinda ended with "I believe that it is right, because the book says it. How I know the book is right? Because I am a believer!". I simply don't understand it, because I lack the spirit to do it. Well, I take that as compliment actually.
 
Well, religion has always been used as a shield to justify a persons own righteousness. Now, I am a selfish, pro-US hegemony motherfucker, but at least I am honest about it. Thing is, people often do not want to admit they are selfish, so they cloak their own ambitions or those of the state under the trappings of religion and god.

I mean, its not that I want to make money hand over fist. I do not want to lead, I do not want to be influential or effect heads of state. GOD wants me to have money. God wants me to lead. GOD doesn't mind that I am influential or effect heads of state.

God wants me to push HIS religion, a religion that coincidentally, demands that it be spread, otherwise non-believers will go to hell. In order to sell this religion better, besides the hell issue, I am going to steal a common sense idea and take it as my own.

Teach somebody a skill so they can make a living? Turn it into a Jesus fish parable. Don't be a murdering, raping asshole. Let us give God or Jesus credit for a golden rule. Do not fuck too much, eat too much, be too greedy, be too lazy, be too hateful, be too envious or prideful. this should be common sense but we will call it the seven deadly sins.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top