Advertisement
by Alyakia » Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:40 pm
by Alyakia » Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:44 pm
Quintium wrote:Gravlen wrote:What, exactly, is absurd about this?
Finally, this law stuff is going to pay off in my endless internet arguments."...terrorist offences are intentional acts which, given their nature or context, may seriously damage a country or an international organisation when committed with the aim of:
• seriously intimidating a population, or
• unduly compelling a government or international organisation
to perform or abstain from performing an act, or
• seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political,
constitutional, economic or social structures of a
country or an international organisation."
Let's examine a speech given by Nigel Farage in the European Parliament - in fact, nearly any speech he has made in the European Parliament. Is it an intentional act? Yes, it is an intentional act. Could it seriously damage an international organisation? Yes, it could seriously damage an international organisation. Is this done to seriously destabilize or destroy 'the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of (...) an international organisation'? Yes, it is. Do you see the problem here? The problem here is that the definition extends not just to violent actions, but to any intentional action (including speech) which is meant to and could result in the destabilization or destruction of the European Union or any country (not just member states).
Under this definition, it is defensible when practical to brand political opposition to a certain idea or a certain government as terrorism. For example, one of the reasons why European Union member states arrested dozens of Kurdish activists a few years ago was because those activists were getting in the way of the Turkish government, and the Turkish government wanted them to take action. In my country, fifty-five people who hadn't committed any crimes against my country or our legal order were arrested for political crimes.
And, well, with a definition like that, as well as a lot of ideological zealots in office who are hell-bent on picking low-hanging fruits, you're going to see some really unlikely things being branded terrorism.Gravlen wrote:Maybe you meant the 2013 report? If you did, you have failed to notice that the English Defence League is not mentioned under terrorism, but rather violent right-wing extremism, while Génération Identitaire remains unmentioned (Same as with the 2014 report).
TE-SAT 2013, which deals with terrorism in the year 2012. That's the one I meant. I did not mention the 2014 report at all, so I have no idea where you got that idea from.
Anyway, I will direct you to it. Page 37, under Chapter 5.A phenomenon that has developed recently on social media is a movement, established initially in France, which opposes multiculturalism and French social politics. The movement uses the Lambda symbol as a logo. It has received significant positive feedback and to date has been replicated in Belgium, Germany and Austria. This movement advocates a national, racially-defined identity to counteract a perceived demographic imbalance caused by increasing immigration.

by Eldslandet » Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:53 pm
Alyakia wrote:Catholic Federalized States wrote:
Having a Muslim minority increases terrorism without an argument.
The more muslims you have, the more terrorist attacks you have.
Finland? Zero muslims, zero terrorist attacks. Coincidence? No.
Poverty?
Poland? Poor, lots of poverty, zero muslims, zero terrorist attacks.
Abortion bombings?
Poland? 97% Catholic, zero abortion bombings, abortion legal.
France? 10% Muslims - terrorist attacks.
UK? 10% Muslim - terrorist attacks.
Denmark? Sweden? terrorist attacks.
Bosnia? 50% Muslim - war.
the UK was pretty much free of terrorism until the muslims came

by Eastfield Lodge » Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:56 pm

by Sun Wukong » Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:56 pm

by Catholic Federalized States » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:02 pm
Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:Lovely to see this has gone from a discussion about shootings to "BAN MUSLIMS."

by The Alma Mater » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:06 pm
Alyakia wrote:17.32 Suspected Copenhagen gunman was 22, born and raised in Denmark: TV
did anyone post this btw

by Quintium » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:11 pm
Alyakia wrote:do you have an actual provable example of people that haven't planned/attempted/committed terrorist attacks being labelled under planned/attempted/committed terrorist attacks or are you just insisting they're counting you as terrorists for some reason because they mentioned you

by The Empire of Pretantia » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:11 pm
Catholic Federalized States wrote:The Empire of Pretantia wrote:I need a source on that prison population.
Yes, you have more criminals as the population increases. He didn't say it increases disproportionately.
The number of mosques also disproportionately correlate with the number of violent crimes. The population density does not explain the disproportionate number of crimes committed by muslim-heavy départements.
And don't bother about "profiling" arguments.

by The Alma Mater » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:14 pm
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Catholic Federalized States wrote:
The number of mosques also disproportionately correlate with the number of violent crimes. The population density does not explain the disproportionate number of crimes committed by muslim-heavy départements.
And don't bother about "profiling" arguments.
I don't speak French. Get me English sources.


by Gauthier » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:15 pm

by Quintium » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:27 pm
Alyakia wrote:Suspected Copenhagen gunman was 22, born and raised in Denmark

by Alyakia » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:28 pm

by Catholic Federalized States » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:28 pm
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Catholic Federalized States wrote:
The number of mosques also disproportionately correlate with the number of violent crimes. The population density does not explain the disproportionate number of crimes committed by muslim-heavy départements.
And don't bother about "profiling" arguments.
I don't speak French. Get me English sources.

by Quintium » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:41 pm
Catholic Federalized States wrote:I'm sorry, France, being a French-speaking country, generally does not release statistics in English.
Use Google Translate.

by Catholic Federalized States » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:48 pm
Quintium wrote:Catholic Federalized States wrote:I'm sorry, France, being a French-speaking country, generally does not release statistics in English.
Use Google Translate.
It's already been covered, right? The Telegraph in Britain has reported on this issue, and so have the Washington Post and the Economist. And apparently, the latter has based its figure of '60%' on a parliamentary report. And while the Dutch government is not too keen on gathering these statistics either, I've seen figures of anywhere between 30 and 60 percent for the Netherlands as well. But never mind, we're not allowed to see sociological trends if they do not fit the dominant political narrative in Europe.

by The Alma Mater » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:51 pm
Quintium wrote:Catholic Federalized States wrote:I'm sorry, France, being a French-speaking country, generally does not release statistics in English.
Use Google Translate.
It's already been covered, right? The Telegraph in Britain has reported on this issue, and so have the Washington Post and the Economist. And apparently, the latter has based its figure of '60%' on a parliamentary report. And while the Dutch government is not too keen on gathering these statistics either, I've seen figures of anywhere between 30 and 60 percent for the Netherlands as well. But never mind, we're not allowed to see sociological trends if they do not fit the dominant political narrative in Europe.

by The Black Forrest » Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:15 pm
Catholic Federalized States wrote:Finland? Zero muslims, zero terrorist attacks. Coincidence? No.

by Quintium » Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:23 pm
The Alma Mater wrote:http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?VW=T&DM=SLNL&PA=82321NED&LA=NL

by Catholic Federalized States » Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:24 pm
The Black Forrest wrote:Catholic Federalized States wrote:Finland? Zero muslims, zero terrorist attacks. Coincidence? No.
Muslims have been in Finland since the time of the Tartars.
They were about .2% of the population in 2004.
The Finns have Muslims fighting in Syria....
http://yle.fi/uutiset/security_intellig ... ts/7676854

by The Alma Mater » Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:45 pm
Quintium wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?VW=T&DM=SLNL&PA=82321NED&LA=NL
Let's see what we have there. As you can see, there were 42,700 prisoners in the Netherlands in 2013. Of those, only 15,660 were Dutch. 19,010 of them were non-western migrants. That means: 36.7% of Dutch prisoners are Dutch, and 44.5% were non-western migrants. The Turks and the Moroccans are not the only Muslim groups we have here, and 11% are 'non-western, other'. What's more, 9.7% are from Suriname, where 13.9% of the population is Muslim. If you add up all Muslims, you'd come frighteningly close to the lower estimate of 30%.

by The Empire of Pretantia » Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:46 pm
The Alma Mater wrote:The Empire of Pretantia wrote:I don't speak French. Get me English sources.
One 2 second google later:
http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/ ... ther-unity
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... isons.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02560.html
Yes, they are not government sources. But those are - surprisingly - in French
Catholic Federalized States wrote:The Black Forrest wrote:
Muslims have been in Finland since the time of the Tartars.
They were about .2% of the population in 2004.
The Finns have Muslims fighting in Syria....
http://yle.fi/uutiset/security_intellig ... ts/7676854
"Zero" does not literally mean zero. The same way "zero unemployment" does not literally mean zero unemployment, just unemployment under 4%.
The number of Muslims in Finland is very disproportionate to their population in relation to other European nations, like their number of terrorist attacks and violent crimes.

by Mike the Progressive » Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:51 pm
Zeinbrad wrote:Time for more all Muslims are terrorists in waiting bullcrap.

by Catholic Federalized States » Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:58 pm
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:
One 2 second google later:
http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/ ... ther-unity
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... isons.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02560.html
Yes, they are not government sources. But those are - surprisingly - in French
OK, now I believe him. Sort of.Catholic Federalized States wrote:
"Zero" does not literally mean zero. The same way "zero unemployment" does not literally mean zero unemployment, just unemployment under 4%.
The number of Muslims in Finland is very disproportionate to their population in relation to other European nations, like their number of terrorist attacks and violent crimes.
So because they're not reported by international news, means Finland doesn't have much violent crime.
Quintium wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?VW=T&DM=SLNL&PA=82321NED&LA=NL
Let's see what we have there. As you can see, there were 42,700 prisoners in the Netherlands in 2013. Of those, only 15,660 were Dutch. 19,010 of them were non-western migrants. That means: 36.7% of Dutch prisoners are Dutch, and 44.5% were non-western migrants. The Turks and the Moroccans are not the only Muslim groups we have here, and 11% are 'non-western, other'. What's more, 9.7% are from Suriname, where 13.9% of the population is Muslim. If you add up all Muslims, you'd come frighteningly close to the lower estimate of 30%.

by Herskerstad » Sun Feb 15, 2015 3:03 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Duvniask, Elwher, Fractalnavel, Google [Bot], Greater Cesnica, Greater Miami Shores 3, Gun Manufacturers, Luziyca, New Stonen, Serrus, Tinhampton, Valyxias
Advertisement