This is getting ridiculous.
Today I read a story in the [Swedish Radio, state owned news outlet] of a poor Eritrean subjected to a terrible injustice. He is being deported back to Eritrea, and being that he is a draft dodger he risks being tortured by the Eritrean government. He was sentenced to three years in prison "for a crime" [sic] in 2006, with the addition of deportation after serving out the sentence. This was of course unacceptable, since we cannot treat this poor man so inhumanely. Amnesty got involved, as did several politicians. The Swedish ambassador to Eritrea spoke out on the case and stated that there would be no problem deporting him since the risk of torture was vastly exaggerated and merely used as an excuse for asylum.
Naturally, the ambassador is a horrible racist and a terrible human being, yada yada.
The batik witches won the day and the deportation order was rescinded.
Score one for the bleeding heart multiculturalists.
Now here's the kicker, and you won't actually find this part in the news story.
The crime he was imprisoned for was rape. One savage enough to get more than just a slap on the wrist. A few months after he was released from prison he celebrated by gracing another woman with some surprise-sex, and is now hiding from the police, location unknown.
Thank god we didn't deport him.
It would've been a serious violation of his human rights.
[/s]
three years and a deportation order for "savage" (not sure what that means in this context) rape? i thought sweden was a feminist haven.
Quote from: Slargos on June 28, 2011, 03:48:36 PM
Naturally, the ambassador is a horrible racist and a terrible human being, yada yada.
Wait claiming an African country does not systematically torture is racist?
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 03:51:35 PM
three years and a deportation order for "savage" (not sure what that means in this context) rape? i thought sweden was a feminist haven.
http://www.thelocal.se/19102/20090427/ :hmm:
Quote from: Valmy on June 28, 2011, 03:52:18 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 28, 2011, 03:48:36 PM
Naturally, the ambassador is a horrible racist and a terrible human being, yada yada.
Wait claiming an African country does not systematically torture is racist?
That is the level of public discourse in Sweden.
1. Making such outrageous claims is something you'd do if you want this guy deported.
2. Wanting a poor black man deported means you are a racist.
3. Rince. Repeat.
rape league? where do i join
:sadblsuh:. But really, that sucks. haven't read the article yet, but is it because more cases are reported, or just more women are raped?
Who would think Slargos is against rape? I mean it is the only way he gets any.
What would be a penalty faced by an ethnic Swede? Would he face a higher penalty or about the same for the same crime? If it is the latter, I cannot see how having this guy serve the time AND then be deported on top of that be just. :huh:
article says that more rapes being reporting wouldn't really change the numbers, but that rapes are reported differently in sweden. wonder what the numbers would look like if they matched how rapes are reported in other countries.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 03:54:08 PM
rape league? where do i join
:sadblsuh:. But really, that sucks. haven't read the article yet, but is it because more cases are reported, or just more women are raped?
I really can't say.
The official line is of course that "willingness to report crime" has risen, but that's the excuse for all rising statistics when it comes to violent crime, when in truth if you ask people they are less likely to report crimes today than they used to be since there is a wide spread belief (and rightly so, the statistics speak for themselves; clearance rates are abysmal) that the police can't really do anything anyway.
Last time my car was broken into the officer responding to my call laughed at me and asked whether I wanted to come down to the station to fill out a form "for the insurance company".
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 03:58:12 PM
article says that more rapes being reporting wouldn't really change the numbers, but that rapes are reported differently in sweden. wonder what the numbers would look like if they matched how rapes are reported in other countries.
Considering Sweden charged Assange with "rape" because he took off his condom during the intercourse, I'm a little wary of the Swedish definition of "rape".
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 03:57:10 PM
What would be a penalty faced by an ethnic Swede? Would he face a higher penalty or about the same for the same crime? If it is the latter, I cannot see how having this guy serve the time AND then be deported on top of that be just. :huh:
i think deportation of crimnals (obviously not citizens) is very just. you're not in a country by right, but be that's countries pleasure. you show that you can't be a good potential citizen (rapists rarely are), then countries should have the right and duty to kick your ass out.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 03:59:56 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 03:57:10 PM
What would be a penalty faced by an ethnic Swede? Would he face a higher penalty or about the same for the same crime? If it is the latter, I cannot see how having this guy serve the time AND then be deported on top of that be just. :huh:
i think deportation of crimnals (obviously not citizens) is very just. you're not in a country by right, but be that's countries pleasure. you show that you can't be a good potential citizen (rapists rarely are), then countries should have the right and duty to kick your ass out.
I disagree. If you are in a country legally, then I don't agree that you should be treated as a second class person.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 03:59:49 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 03:58:12 PM
article says that more rapes being reporting wouldn't really change the numbers, but that rapes are reported differently in sweden. wonder what the numbers would look like if they matched how rapes are reported in other countries.
Considering Sweden charged Assange with "rape" because he took off his condom during the intercourse, I'm a little wary of the Swedish definition of "rape".
you're Assange loves clouds your judgement :D. although, ya, it shouldn't have been rape. Fraud and assault or something (or is is battery. i forget which one is the actual physical thing. Battery or assault?)
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 03:57:10 PM
What would be a penalty faced by an ethnic Swede? Would he face a higher penalty or about the same for the same crime? If it is the latter, I cannot see how having this guy serve the time AND then be deported on top of that be just. :huh:
In theory, all sentences of a certain level (minimum of 2 years, IIRC) carries with them deportation but AFAIK it's only used very sparingly (to the tone of 2-3% of the cases where it would be applicable) so even without knowing the details of the incident in question, it's safe to say it wasn't pretty.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:00:57 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 03:59:56 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 03:57:10 PM
What would be a penalty faced by an ethnic Swede? Would he face a higher penalty or about the same for the same crime? If it is the latter, I cannot see how having this guy serve the time AND then be deported on top of that be just. :huh:
i think deportation of crimnals (obviously not citizens) is very just. you're not in a country by right, but be that's countries pleasure. you show that you can't be a good potential citizen (rapists rarely are), then countries should have the right and duty to kick your ass out.
I disagree. If you are in a country legally, then I don't agree that you should be treated as a second class person.
You're not treated as a second class citizen. You had your day in court. There are requirements to enter a country on a visa. Rapists would not pass mustard. Why should they be allowed to stay after the fact if they wouldn't have been allowed in under the same circumstances?
The problem with Swedes is that they are insane. Their "middle ground" is almost always taking two idiotic, opposite extremes and hoping they'd even out. :P
Its a sticky situation. It would be very dickish and a major disregard for human rights to deport someone who has such a valid reason to be a refguee. But then he is a crook, not exactly the nicest guy himself, not the sort you really want hanging around the country...but legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
The government is stuck really, no easy way out of it.
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PM
Its a sticky situation. It would be very dickish and a major disregard for human rights to deport someone who has such a valid reason to be a refguee. He is a criminal, not exactly the nicest guy himself, not the sort you really want hanging around the country...but legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
The government is stuck really, no easy way out of it.
Indeed.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:00:57 PMI disagree. If you are in a country legally, then I don't agree that you should be treated as a second class person.
Non-citizens are de factor second class persons in all countries of the world though. They may not vote, they can often not work for the government or even work at all, can have their legal residency revoked in certain conditions etc. Do you disagree with the notion of distinct citizen rights in addition to human rights that are applicable for all humans?
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PM
but legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
Uhm, no.
Even if he was right that he'd get screwed in his home country. That's not swedens problem. he broke a swedish law and since he's not a citizen there shoudl be the option to kick him out. if he doesn't want to go home see if anotehr nation will take him. Of course i don't mean all crimes. i'm not for deporting jay walkers, but some crimes should come with that outcome. you have proven you would not be a good citizen and thus shouldn't have the luxury of staying.
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PM
Its a sticky situation. It would be very dickish and a major disregard for human rights to deport someone who has such a valid reason to be a refguee. He is a criminal, not exactly the nicest guy himself, not the sort you really want hanging around the country...but legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
The government is stuck really, no easy way out of it.
:lol:
Hah. No.
Legally speaking, there's no issue with deporting him. It's already been determined that he doesn't face an imminent threat of torture should he be deported and the crime he's committed is well within the range where deportation becomes a possibility.
The only reason he's still here is that the usual suspects (Amnesty, a couple of crazy politicians and a gaggle of journalists) created their typical circus.
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PM
Its a sticky situation. It would be very dickish and a major disregard for human rights to deport someone who has such a valid reason to be a refguee.
WTF no it wouldn't.
Quote from: Tyr
But then he is a crook, not exactly the nicest guy himself, not the sort you really want hanging around the country...but legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
What a bizarre outlook.
Quote from: Zanza on June 28, 2011, 04:06:35 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:00:57 PMI disagree. If you are in a country legally, then I don't agree that you should be treated as a second class person.
Non-citizens are de factor second class persons in all countries of the world though. They may not vote, they can often not work for the government or even work at all, can have their legal residency revoked in certain conditions etc. Do you disagree with the notion of distinct citizen rights in addition to human rights that are applicable for all humans?
Yes, but the rights not to be deported to a country where you face inhuman treatment (i.e. refugee rights) are human rights, not citizen rights. I don't see why they should be conditional upon you not committing a crime (any more than a right not to be tortured is, for example).
or as a comprimise i' say it's ok if a criminal doesn't want to go back that he gets to stay in jail :D
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:06:47 PM
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PM
but legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
Uhm, no.
Even if he was right that he'd get screwed in his home country. That's not swedens problem. he broke a swedish law and since he's not a citizen there shoudl be the option to kick him out. if he doesn't want to go home see if anotehr nation will take him. Of course i don't mean all crimes. i'm not for deporting jay walkers, but some crimes should come with that outcome. you have proven you would not be a good citizen and thus shouldn't have the luxury of staying.
Clearly the Swedish justice system has not seen his crime serious enough, if he only got 3 years in prison.
Btw, noone has answered my original question - would an ethnic Swede get a greater penalty for the same crime?
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:10:54 PM
or as a comprimise i' say it's ok if a criminal doesn't want to go back that he gets to stay in jail :D
Wasn't that what happened? I thought he served his time.
It's a no-brainer: deport.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:11:01 PM
Btw, noone has answered my original question - would an ethnic Swede get a greater penalty for the same crime?
What do you mean?
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:11:44 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:10:54 PM
or as a comprimise i' say it's ok if a criminal doesn't want to go back that he gets to stay in jail :D
Wasn't that what happened? I thought he served his time.
No, i mean you stay in jail. After three* years you get to decide stay in jail, or go back to your home nation.
*which still throws me. But slarg hate the darkies so maybe this was a date rape (still bad) and not a "savage" rape
Regardless, what really gives me gray hairs in all this isn't really the rapist nigger, nor is it that these people who lobbied to let him stay are more or less responsible for the second rape or at least morally culpable. It's the fact that we, as a nation, still let our media get away with slanting the story to the point that up is actually down.
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PMbut legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
Why would you be innocent? You are still guilty and will have a criminal record.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:13:33 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:11:44 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:10:54 PM
or as a comprimise i' say it's ok if a criminal doesn't want to go back that he gets to stay in jail :D
Wasn't that what happened? I thought he served his time.
No, i mean you stay in jail. After three* years you get to decide stay in jail, or go back to your home nation.
That's idiotic.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:13:33 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:11:44 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:10:54 PM
or as a comprimise i' say it's ok if a criminal doesn't want to go back that he gets to stay in jail :D
Wasn't that what happened? I thought he served his time.
No, i mean you stay in jail. After three* years you get to decide stay in jail, or go back to your home nation.
*which still throws me. But slarg hate the darkies so maybe this was a date rape (still bad) and not a "savage" rape
Its Sweden, he probally called her a slag and touched her boob.
How did this topic grow so?
Quote from: Zanza on June 28, 2011, 04:14:50 PM
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PMbut legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
Why would you be innocent? You are still guilty and will have a criminal record.
There is a concept of striking off your criminal record. It also exists in Germany.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:13:33 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:11:44 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:10:54 PM
or as a comprimise i' say it's ok if a criminal doesn't want to go back that he gets to stay in jail :D
Wasn't that what happened? I thought he served his time.
No, i mean you stay in jail. After three* years you get to decide stay in jail, or go back to your home nation.
*which still throws me. But slarg hate the darkies so maybe this was a date rape (still bad) and not a "savage" rape
I don't know the details, but trust me when I say that you simply don't get that much prison time over something simple like Assange-rape [unless of course you're the kind of person they will take any excuse to imprison, like, you know, Assange :P ]
And 3 years for rape is a lot.[/u]
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:09:43 PM
Yes, but the rights not to be deported to a country where you face inhuman treatment (i.e. refugee rights) are human rights
He had his chance. He blew it. He should have no such right.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:09:43 PMYes, but the rights not to be deported to a country where you face inhuman treatment (i.e. refugee rights) are human rights, not citizen rights. I don't see why they should be conditional upon you not committing a crime (any more than a right not to be tortured is, for example).
Fair enough. I agree that conscientious objection to military service is indeed a human right.
So, by getting 3 years, he got a rather harsh penalty by Swedish standards, right?
Why would he be penalized further?
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:14:56 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:13:33 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:11:44 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:10:54 PM
or as a comprimise i' say it's ok if a criminal doesn't want to go back that he gets to stay in jail :D
Wasn't that what happened? I thought he served his time.
No, i mean you stay in jail. After three* years you get to decide stay in jail, or go back to your home nation.
That's idiotic.
love you too :P
I said it was a compromise :D . My prefered solution would be to deport. I'm a first generation canadian and i have family here on Visa's, but if they raped/killed/"serious offence" i'd want them the hell out. being a guest in a country (which is what you are) means (or should mean) that you can wear out your welcome.
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:16:05 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:09:43 PM
Yes, but the rights not to be deported to a country where you face inhuman treatment (i.e. refugee rights) are human rights
He had his chance. He blew it. He should have no such right.
As I said you don't lose your human rights that way. But thanks for playing. Sorry you lose. Reality wins.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
So, by getting 3 years, he got a rather harsh penalty by Swedish standards, right?
Why would he be penalized further?
:lol:
I see. You're just fucking with me.
Fair enough.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:15:41 PM
Quote from: Zanza on June 28, 2011, 04:14:50 PM
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PMbut legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
Why would you be innocent? You are still guilty and will have a criminal record.
There is a concept of striking off your criminal record. It also exists in Germany.
Yes, but that's not immediately. You'll have to wait 10 or more years depending on the severity of the crime.
Quote from: Slargos on June 28, 2011, 04:17:53 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
So, by getting 3 years, he got a rather harsh penalty by Swedish standards, right?
Why would he be penalized further?
:lol:
I see. You're just fucking with me.
Fair enough.
Not per se. I'm just arguing from a principle: asylum seekers do not lose their human rights because they were convicted of a crime - the penalty served by the standard application of criminal law should be enough. Not my fault your criminal justice system is a joke though. If your reality is fucked up, you get fucked up results by applying sound principles. But that does not mean the principle itself is faulty.
Quote from: Zanza on June 28, 2011, 04:19:23 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:15:41 PM
Quote from: Zanza on June 28, 2011, 04:14:50 PM
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:03:19 PMbut legally once you've done the time for a crime you're then innocent.
Why would you be innocent? You are still guilty and will have a criminal record.
There is a concept of striking off your criminal record. It also exists in Germany.
Yes, but that's not immediately. You'll have to wait 10 or more years depending on the severity of the crime.
Actually, I'm fairly sure it is much less than that, and 10 years is probably the top end not the low end. Unless your system is vastly different from the Polish one which I doubt.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:17:25 PM
As I said you don't lose your human rights that way. But thanks for playing. Sorry you lose. Reality wins.
As I said. There's no such human right. Really good try though.
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:21:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:17:25 PM
As I said you don't lose your human rights that way. But thanks for playing. Sorry you lose. Reality wins.
As I said. There's no such human right. Really good try though.
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
Go raise another man's kids, cretin. You are too dumb to participate.
While I think that foreign criminals can and should be deported depending on the case, this situation has another dimension than just his crime, namely what happens to him in his home country. If this guy was from say Finland, it wouldn't be a question. But he isn't, so he might face serious human right violations in his home country. It's certainly worth considering whether extending the welcome despite his crime is a better position to take than exposing him to the risk of punishment for conscientious objection in his native country.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
So, by getting 3 years, he got a rather harsh penalty by Swedish standards, right?
Why would he be penalized further?
see, this is where our views diverge. i don't see it as penalization, i see it as no longer meeting the criteia of a landed immigrant. Some where on his questionaire for a Visa was a variant of "Please select one: are you a rapist [Y] [N]". Since he is now a rapist he doesn't qualify for the Visa. He has lost his privledge and should be kicked out.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:23:46 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
So, by getting 3 years, he got a rather harsh penalty by Swedish standards, right?
Why would he be penalized further?
see, this is where our views diverge. i don't see it as penalization, i see it as no longer meeting the criteia of a landed immigrant. Some where on his questionaire for a Visa was a variant of "Please select one: are you a rapist [Y] [N]". Since he is now a rapist he doesn't qualify for the Visa. He has lost his privledge and should be kicked out.
This would be true if he wasn't an asylum seeker.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:21:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:17:25 PM
As I said you don't lose your human rights that way. But thanks for playing. Sorry you lose. Reality wins.
As I said. There's no such human right. Really good try though.
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
right to seek, not a right to receive, right?
QuoteGo raise another man's kids, cretin. You are too dumb to participate.
uncalled for and low even for you.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
Does it specifically mention Sweden there?
If he thinks that Sweden is abusing his human rights he is free to seek asylum in a different country. In fact I encourage it.
Glad to see Marti has mellowed with old age.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:25:30 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:21:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:17:25 PM
As I said you don't lose your human rights that way. But thanks for playing. Sorry you lose. Reality wins.
As I said. There's no such human right. Really good try though.
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
right to seek, not a right to receive, right?
Idiot.
Quote from: derspiess on June 28, 2011, 04:25:37 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
Does it specifically mention Sweden there?
Idiot.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
Inapplicable. He wasn't being persecuted.
Even if he had been, though, he sought and enjoyed his asylum. Then he decided to destroy it.
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:26:00 PM
If he thinks that Sweden is abusing his human rights he is free to seek asylum in a different country. In fact I encourage it.
Idiot.
Quote from: katmai on June 28, 2011, 04:26:16 PM
Glad to see Marti has mellowed with old age.
Sorry, can't stand idiots.
LOL another Mart meltdown. Bye thread coming up?
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:26:28 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:25:30 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:21:32 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:17:25 PM
As I said you don't lose your human rights that way. But thanks for playing. Sorry you lose. Reality wins.
As I said. There's no such human right. Really good try though.
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
right to seek, not a right to receive, right?
Idiot.
i love it when you talk dirty to me. show me your feet... slowly. That's the stuff :wub:
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:27:52 PM
LOL another Mart meltdown. Bye thread coming up?
I didn't meltdown. I just don't see a point in discussing it with people who are trolling (or at too dumb to realise they are).
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:27:52 PM
LOL another Mart meltdown. Bye thread coming up?
the first one was fun. after that it's like waking up christmas day knowing your present is an empty box
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:23:46 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
So, by getting 3 years, he got a rather harsh penalty by Swedish standards, right?
Why would he be penalized further?
see, this is where our views diverge. i don't see it as penalization, i see it as no longer meeting the criteia of a landed immigrant. Some where on his questionaire for a Visa was a variant of "Please select one: are you a rapist [Y] [N]". Since he is now a rapist he doesn't qualify for the Visa. He has lost his privledge and should be kicked out.
Only americans do shit like that.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:23:46 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
So, by getting 3 years, he got a rather harsh penalty by Swedish standards, right?
Why would he be penalized further?
see, this is where our views diverge. i don't see it as penalization, i see it as no longer meeting the criteia of a landed immigrant. Some where on his questionaire for a Visa was a variant of "Please select one: are you a rapist [Y] [N]". Since he is now a rapist he doesn't qualify for the Visa. He has lost his privledge and should be kicked out.
I'd agree 100% were he just an immigrant.
As said though he's an assylum seeker, he is in genuine trouble if he gets sent back.
I really don't know what the answer is here.Its iffy both ways.
Quote from: Viking on June 28, 2011, 04:30:33 PM
Only americans do shit like that.
It's not too late for you to learn.
Quote from: Viking on June 28, 2011, 04:30:33 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:23:46 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:16:58 PM
So, by getting 3 years, he got a rather harsh penalty by Swedish standards, right?
Why would he be penalized further?
see, this is where our views diverge. i don't see it as penalization, i see it as no longer meeting the criteia of a landed immigrant. Some where on his questionaire for a Visa was a variant of "Please select one: are you a rapist [Y] [N]". Since he is now a rapist he doesn't qualify for the Visa. He has lost his privledge and should be kicked out.
Only americans do shit like that.
and god bless them for it.
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:32:25 PM
Quote from: Viking on June 28, 2011, 04:30:33 PM
Only americans do shit like that.
It's not too late for you to learn.
Nah, we are not into settling for less. :console:
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
Go raise another man's kids, cretin. You are too dumb to participate.
There are no rights because even rights are contingent.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
If a right to asylum trumps right to security of person who's rights win out? If everybody has a right to "liberty" then aren't prisons breaches of human rights in and of themselves? Doesn't that suggest that they are contingent simply on the grounds that everybody that signed the declaration, including those who wrote it continue using imprisonment as punishment?
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:31:44 PM
I'd agree 100% were he just an immigrant.
As said though he's an assylum seeker, he is in genuine trouble if he gets sent back.
1. If the original post is the real story he's more of a fugitive from justice.
2. Who cares? It's trouble he got himself into.
Quote from: Viking on June 28, 2011, 04:35:04 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
Go raise another man's kids, cretin. You are too dumb to participate.
There are no rights because even rights are contingent.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
If a right to asylum trumps right to security of person who's rights win out? If everybody has a right to "liberty" then aren't prisons breaches of human rights in and of themselves? Doesn't that suggest that they are contingent simply on the grounds that everybody that signed the declaration, including those who wrote it continue using imprisonment as punishment?
His claim was that right to seek asylum is not a human right.
I somehow get the feeling that Mart is talking about what he thinks human rights are and not about what they in fact are. :hmm:
Asylum is subjective, so these issues are difficult. Is he fleeing persecution or prosecution? Depends on who you ask, of course.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:33:53 PM
Nah, we are not into settling for less. :console:
:huh:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft0.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcTHpS-h4qGXdlvn1nkOvMguQCOgjUkW9XOfa8aaPWG_EsrH2fJq&hash=b621c6cc3f056d63f59b74b20c40c4168c2b0c5b)
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:35:49 PM
1. If the original post is the real story he's more of a fugitive from justice.
2. Who cares? It's trouble he got himself into.
1: From fucked up crooked justice. Eritrea is a messed up place, the army there is not like doing your national service in European countries, they keep people in the army for absolutely years and basically treat them like slaves.
2: International law. Decency. Its basically saying "OK, under Swedish law we sentance you to 3 years in prison....and due to your circumstances another year in prison on top of that resulting in your being tortured to death"
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:38:05 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:33:53 PM
Nah, we are not into settling for less. :console:
:huh:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft0.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcTHpS-h4qGXdlvn1nkOvMguQCOgjUkW9XOfa8aaPWG_EsrH2fJq&hash=b621c6cc3f056d63f59b74b20c40c4168c2b0c5b)
That's not fair. i know some very nice poles. Then again they left poland, so there is that.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:36:18 PM
Quote from: Viking on June 28, 2011, 04:35:04 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
Go raise another man's kids, cretin. You are too dumb to participate.
There are no rights because even rights are contingent.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
If a right to asylum trumps right to security of person who's rights win out? If everybody has a right to "liberty" then aren't prisons breaches of human rights in and of themselves? Doesn't that suggest that they are contingent simply on the grounds that everybody that signed the declaration, including those who wrote it continue using imprisonment as punishment?
His claim was that right to seek asylum is not a human right.
Rechecked, you are right. I thought he was making the case that human rights are not absolute and can be abrogated.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:40:24 PM
Quote from: Maximus on June 28, 2011, 04:38:05 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:33:53 PM
Nah, we are not into settling for less. :console:
:huh:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ft0.gstatic.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcTHpS-h4qGXdlvn1nkOvMguQCOgjUkW9XOfa8aaPWG_EsrH2fJq&hash=b621c6cc3f056d63f59b74b20c40c4168c2b0c5b)
That's not fair. i know some very nice poles. Then again they left poland, so there is that.
I was making a personal attack.
You know, a hot young boyfriend > Roseanne with kids.
Are we 100% sure that it wasn't gay rape btw?
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:40:24 PM
That's not fair. i know some very nice poles. Then again they left poland, so there is that.
Even if they stay there that's ok with me. But unless they're some sort of rabid nationalist they must know they're settling for less.
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:42:50 PM
Are we 100% sure that it wasn't gay rape btw?
OMG Slargos! We have been so insensitive. :(
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:42:36 PM
I was making a personal attack.
You know, a hot young boyfriend > Roseanne with kids.
oh, ok. you should be more clear with your personal attacks :P
Although to be fair i don't know how much Max wants a hot young boyfriend.
Dude had his day in court and lost his liberty (for 3 years) and right to stay in Sweden afterwards. I don't see how his human rights had been ignored if he had been deported. Neither liberty nor asylum are absolute human rights AFAIK.
On the personal level since the guy himself didn't think that staying in Sweden was important (or he wouldn't have raped) it's amusing that other people feel for him.
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:50:09 PM
Dude had his day in court and lost his liberty (for 3 years) and right to stay in Sweden afterwards. I don't see how his human rights had been ignored if he had been deported. Neither liberty nor asylum are absolute human rights AFAIK.
On the personal level since the guy himself didn't think that staying in Sweden was important (or he wouldn't have raped) it's amusing that other people feel for him.
Do we know it was a rape rape?
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:51:07 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:50:09 PM
Dude had his day in court and lost his liberty (for 3 years) and right to stay in Sweden afterwards. I don't see how his human rights had been ignored if he had been deported. Neither liberty nor asylum are absolute human rights AFAIK.
On the personal level since the guy himself didn't think that staying in Sweden was important (or he wouldn't have raped) it's amusing that other people feel for him.
Do we know it was a rape rape?
3 years usually means nasty, sadistic rape.
Edit: Maybe some weaseling: at least it's not cuddly-wuddly Assange rape but real rape.
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:52:43 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:51:07 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:50:09 PM
Dude had his day in court and lost his liberty (for 3 years) and right to stay in Sweden afterwards. I don't see how his human rights had been ignored if he had been deported. Neither liberty nor asylum are absolute human rights AFAIK.
On the personal level since the guy himself didn't think that staying in Sweden was important (or he wouldn't have raped) it's amusing that other people feel for him.
Do we know it was a rape rape?
3 years usually means nasty, sadistic rape.
Oh, you wacky Swedes! :lol:
Swedish sentences are ridiculously low. They are the result of decades of "criminals are victims" mentality.
Ya, you guys really neeed to reform that stuff.
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:56:57 PM
Swedish sentences are ridiculously low. They are the result of decades of "criminals are victims" mentality.
Unless you actually beat up the burglar in your house, in which case you'll find yourself in for 21 years.
Not going to read whole thread. What Hillary said on the first page.
I win!
Quote from: Viking on June 28, 2011, 04:58:41 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:56:57 PM
Swedish sentences are ridiculously low. They are the result of decades of "criminals are victims" mentality.
Unless you actually beat up the burglar in your house, in which case you'll find yourself in for 21 years.
Indeed. The Swedish criminal law sector is horrible. One reason may be the decades of negative selection. I have never heard about an intelligent Swede going into law, much less into criminal law. The whole sector is ruled by pink "we must understand the poor poor criminals" persons of indeterminate gender and no dress sense.
What is the purpose of a state and government, if not to provide security and a high quality of life to its citizens? If you think the concepts of states and citizenship has an validity at all, why should someone who terrorizes a country's citizens and is convicted of such in a fair court of law not be removed from the country?
In other words, the duty of a state to protect its citizens' well being should be far higher than its duty to protect the rights of people in distant countries, particular when doing the later greatly reduces the ability to do the former.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 28, 2011, 05:03:36 PM
What is the purpose of a state and government, if not to provide security and a high quality of life to its citizens? If you think the concepts of states and citizenship has an validity at all, why should someone who terrorizes a country's citizens and is convicted of such in a fair court of law not be removed from the country?
In other words, the duty of a state to protect its citizens' well being should be far higher than its duty to protect the rights of people in distant countries, particular when doing the later greatly reduces the ability to do the former.
That's all well and good, but Mart is having his period and refuses to be reasoned with today.
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:31:44 PM
I'd agree 100% were he just an immigrant.
As said though he's an assylum seeker, he is in genuine trouble if he gets sent back.
Whereas Swedish women are apparently at risk if he stays.
Quote from: garbon on June 28, 2011, 05:17:16 PM
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 04:31:44 PM
I'd agree 100% were he just an immigrant.
As said though he's an assylum seeker, he is in genuine trouble if he gets sent back.
Whereas Swedish women are apparently at risk if he stays.
Lefties generally lack empathy. They can only see what's in front of them at the moment. And now it's a poor man who almost got sent home. The women that he has raped and will rape don't show up on their radar.
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 05:30:33 PM
Lefties generally lack empathy. They can only see what's in front of them at the moment. And now it's a poor man who almost got sent home. The women that he has raped and will rape don't show up on their radar.
Its like that old philisophical question, if by pressing a lever you can stop an out of control train from killing three men by switching it onto a track where it will kill one man will you do it?
Sure, the bodycount is lesser but wheras with the three men you would just be failing to stop their deaths, with the one man you would be killing him yourself.
Criminals going on to commit more crimes happens all the time. The police know as soon as a guy serves his two years he's straight back to business as normal...yet what can they do? The law is the law, they can't keep him locked up.
In this case you've a man who could pose a risk if on streets but, the other alternative is the state pretty much killing him.
I really HATE liberals.
Whjat the fuck, dude.
The guy raped a woman of your own country.
Shoot the mothefucker!
Quote from: Slargos on June 28, 2011, 03:59:02 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 03:54:08 PM
rape league? where do i join
:sadblsuh:. But really, that sucks. haven't read the article yet, but is it because more cases are reported, or just more women are raped?
I really can't say.
The official line is of course that "willingness to report crime" has risen, but that's the excuse for all rising statistics when it comes to violent crime, when in truth if you ask people they are less likely to report crimes today than they used to be since there is a wide spread belief (and rightly so, the statistics speak for themselves; clearance rates are abysmal) that the police can't really do anything anyway.
Last time my car was broken into the officer responding to my call laughed at me and asked whether I wanted to come down to the station to fill out a form "for the insurance company".
I hope you told him you expected Wallender to show the fuck up YESTERDAY!
The fact is that if this Eritrean had raped a homosexual, Marty would be calling for the death penalty. But since he raped a woman, three years in prison means he's entitled to asylum.
Why doesn't some country that's also a signatory to the UDHR take him in? Under the UDHR, you can refuse asylum if there are other countries willing to take him. Surely Poland is looking for a few more rapists. Maybe Marty can sponsor him.
Quote from: Tyr on June 28, 2011, 05:44:48 PM
Criminals going on to commit more crimes happens all the time. The police know as soon as a guy serves his two years he's straight back to business as normal...yet what can they do? The law is the law, they can't keep him locked up.
In this case you've a man who could pose a risk if on streets but, the other alternative is the state pretty much killing him.
He should have thought that through after the first and then after the second offense. Besides, he is quite free to apply for asylum somewhere else.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 03:57:10 PM
What would be a penalty faced by an ethnic Swede? Would he face a higher penalty or about the same for the same crime? If it is the latter, I cannot see how having this guy serve the time AND then be deported on top of that be just. :huh:
That's because you don't understand the concept of a social contract and how it relates to immigration.
I guess that's not surprising. Nobody immigrates
to Poland.
Quote from: Neil on June 28, 2011, 07:41:06 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 03:57:10 PM
What would be a penalty faced by an ethnic Swede? Would he face a higher penalty or about the same for the same crime? If it is the latter, I cannot see how having this guy serve the time AND then be deported on top of that be just. :huh:
That's because you don't understand the concept of a social contract and how it relates to immigration.
I guess that's not surprising. Nobody immigrates to Poland.
Agreed, nobody moves to Poland, Poland moves to you, especially if you are a Prussian, Pommeranian or a Silesian.
By that standard, when I begin living in Poland, there will be no Poles left.
Quote from: Viking on June 28, 2011, 07:47:43 PM
Agreed, nobody moves to Poland, Poland moves to you, especially if you are a Prussian, Pommeranian or a Silesian.
But not really, since the Prussians, Pommeranians and Silesians were all gone by the time the Poles showed up. And who could blame them?
Quote from: Siege on June 28, 2011, 06:36:11 PM
I really HATE liberals.
Whjat the fuck, dude.
The guy raped a woman of your own country.
Shoot the mothefucker!
Um in Euro land Liberals would be calling for this dudes head. Unless you are claiming American Democrats are somehow responsible for Swedish immigration laws.
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:26:38 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 28, 2011, 04:25:37 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
Does it specifically mention Sweden there?
Idiot.
Yeah only an idiot is opposed to women being raped.
Sorry if you commit a violent felony and you are not a citizen your ass is out of here. Go abuse women in somebody else's country.
Well Swedish women need to find some way to become pregnant. European manhood in it's current state just isn't able to do the job. I support this bold if controversial plan to stave off demographic collapse.
So, this Assange dude? I'm not certain that pulling a condom off in the middle of sex wouldn't negate prior consent. It's pretty fucked up in any event.
Quote from: HVC on June 28, 2011, 04:25:30 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 28, 2011, 04:22:55 PM
Go raise another man's kids, cretin. You are too dumb to participate.
uncalled for and low even for you.
There is no blow to low for Marti. He'll whine and cry if you say this kind of shit to him, but he'll dish out the lowest shit with the greatest gusto.
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:27:52 PM
LOL another Mart meltdown. Bye thread coming up?
We wish! :lol: He's like AIDS - he may go into remission, but he's permanent.
Quote from: grumbler on June 28, 2011, 09:14:32 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:27:52 PM
LOL another Mart meltdown. Bye thread coming up?
We wish! :lol: He's like AIDS - he may go into remission, but he's permanent.
:lol:
Quote from: grumbler on June 28, 2011, 09:14:32 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 28, 2011, 04:27:52 PM
LOL another Mart meltdown. Bye thread coming up?
We wish! :lol: He's like AIDS - he may go into remission, but he's permanent.
:thumbsdown:
What is it what Slargos and stories about black men raping white women? It's like an obsession or something.
Quote from: Jacob on June 28, 2011, 10:31:30 PM
What is it what Slargos and stories about black men raping white women? It's like an obsession or something.
Black men get his blood boiling.
Quote from: Jacob on June 28, 2011, 10:31:30 PM
What is it what Slargos and stories about black men raping white women? It's like an obsession or something.
I think he's jealous.
Though whether he wishes he was raping white women or wishes that black men were raping him isn't clear.
You know, my last post was kind of low, and I probably should delete it, but I'm tired of Slargos schtick, so, meh.
Quote from: dps on June 28, 2011, 10:44:41 PM
You know, my last post was kind of low, and I probably should delete it, but I'm tired of Slargos schtick, so, meh.
I thought it was funny. :)
I've just read the first post and the title. My first reaction: who the hell is interested in having a war with you :lol:
Quote from: dps on June 28, 2011, 10:44:41 PM
You know, my last post was kind of low, and I probably should delete it, but I'm tired of Slargos schtick, so, meh.
Hortlund did the Swedish Nazi thing so much better. For one thing, I think Horty actually believed much of what he was saying. He also had the unethical lawyer thing as well (My client in this divorce case is so hot! I've got to figure out a way to fuck her!), so he wasn't a one trick pony. His arguments that Speer was innocent were classic. He kept arguing that Speer didn't know about the concentration camps even after I posted a photo of Speer actually standing in one of them.
Quote from: Jacob on June 28, 2011, 10:31:30 PM
What is it what Slargos and stories about black men raping white women? It's like an obsession or something.
It didn't need to happen. She could've gone her merry way without this burden, but someone went ahead and created a situation where she ran head first (pardon the potential pun) into this guy.
I can see where you wouldn't care, however. Your kind typically does not.
Oh, you make a big show of being very empathetic, but in the end you really aren't. You will pick the option that looks better but is worse 9 times out of 10. The tenth being where you got confused and made the right choice by mistake.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsv.metapedia.org%2Fm%2Fimages%2Fd%2Fd6%2FJenny_Lemon.jpg&hash=d061030bd845d0168be2985aff9fec285e5a53a5)
This is the case that pushed me over the edge.
Three of her attackers were either released immediately or got less than 3 months. The fourth got 2 years of "youth care" which may or may not include actual "incarceration" in a facility for the treatment of young criminals. Think boarding school.
He later went on to rape an 84-year old.
There is some small measure of satisfaction that while looking for this picture I read that he was recently raped himself.
Yes, Jacob, this particular subject gets me going very easily, and I sincerely hope your wife gets raped some day so that I can point and laugh. Or you. Works just as well. For the sake of your sanity I hope the rapists are white so you can cleverly tell me "hah, white people are rapists as well" afterwards. :hug:
:( Well, Slargos won. I am actually upset at his post, though more for the ill-wishing on Jacob than the rest of his blather.
I love this thread. :D
I am happy that the subject amuses you, you sick freak. :hug:
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 01:21:22 AM
I am happy that the subject amuses you, you sick freak. :hug:
I just like you wishing rape on Jacob and his wife. It's rare when someone outclasses me. I tip my hat. :bowler:
Slargos, we know you don't actually care about the victims (except as parts of your sex fantasies). Your only interest is justifying the hatred you spew.
Quote from: Jacob on June 29, 2011, 09:20:34 AM
Slargos, we know you don't actually care about the victims (except as parts of your sex fantasies). Your only interest is justifying the hatred you spew.
I don't think he really has that much hatred. He just finds it amusing for some reason.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 09:30:20 AM
I don't think he really has that much hatred. He just finds it amusing for some reason.
Yeah, he doesn't recognize when a schtick has grown tired and its time for a change. Hell, if he and Neil would just trade their tired schticks, that would at least be a step in the right direction.
Quote from: grumbler on June 29, 2011, 09:40:47 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 09:30:20 AM
I don't think he really has that much hatred. He just finds it amusing for some reason.
Yeah, he doesn't recognize when a schtick has grown tired and its time for a change. Hell, if he and Neil would just trade their tired schticks, that would at least be a step in the right direction.
I don't mind Neil's so much. It's better then the Indian hater one. I wish Marty would get a schtick. I have this terrible feeling that his "shallow idiot", thing is from the heart.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 09:30:20 AMI don't think he really has that much hatred. He just finds it amusing for some reason.
He may not feel it, but he certainly spews it.
But yeah, you get the feeling that Slargos spews his shit primarily as an intellectual excercise (which in turn gives a pretty good picture of how intellectually limited he is).
Quote from: Jacob on June 29, 2011, 09:20:34 AM
Slargos, we know you don't actually care about the victims (except as parts of your sex fantasies). Your only interest is justifying the hatred you spew.
:lol:
You think you're quite clever, I'm sure.
It's not very christian of me, but I do hope you'll some day have to go through what these women did. It would be nicely poetic. :)
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 11:05:18 AM
Quote from: Jacob on June 29, 2011, 09:20:34 AM
Slargos, we know you don't actually care about the victims (except as parts of your sex fantasies). Your only interest is justifying the hatred you spew.
:lol:
You think you're quite clever, I'm sure.
It's not very christian of me, but I do hope you'll some day have to go through what these women did. It would be nicely poetic. :)
Fair enough, I'd like to see you gassed someday.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 11:22:48 AM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 11:05:18 AM
Quote from: Jacob on June 29, 2011, 09:20:34 AM
Slargos, we know you don't actually care about the victims (except as parts of your sex fantasies). Your only interest is justifying the hatred you spew.
:lol:
You think you're quite clever, I'm sure.
It's not very christian of me, but I do hope you'll some day have to go through what these women did. It would be nicely poetic. :)
Fair enough, I'd like to see you gassed someday.
:lol:
You're definitely off my list. :mad:
I'm not sure that's a good thing or a bad thing. :unsure:
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 11:05:18 AM:lol:
You think you're quite clever, I'm sure.
It's not very christian of me, but I do hope you'll some day have to go through what these women did. It would be nicely poetic. :)
There's nothing very christian about you at all. Especially with this whole obsession about rape and torture. You decry it as a horrible thing (to score rhetorical points), yet it's your preferred solution when you're frustrated by your own intellectual shortcomings.
Why would it be poetic if I go through what these women did? Because I think you're a racist scumbag with deteriorating mental health?
I recommend you see some sort of therapist. Your graphic fixation on violence and rape is unhealthy. You might also consider working a bit on your liberal arts, as your understanding of "poetic" is severely lacking.
:lol:
You asinine little prick.
Yes, I am extremely offended by unprovoked violence.
I am even more offended when the criminals weren't even supposed to be in my country to begin with. We have enough violent offenders that it shouldn't be necessary to import more.
This case is a double-whammy. Not only did we take this guy in ostensibly on the premise that we were offering him shelter from violence, and when he abused our hospitality, we allowed him to remain again on "humanitarian" grounds, after which he went ahead and repeated the offense. If he had never been taken in, the first woman wouldn't have been raped. If he had been deported after his first offense, the second woman wouldn't have been raped. That you would rate his "right" more important than the rights of the women he raped offends me tremendously.
You're not a very good person, Jake.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
You're not a very good person, Jake.
And yet you're the one wishing Jacob's wife was raped. :hmm:
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 12:25:46 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
You're not a very good person, Jake.
And yet you're the one wishing Jacob's wife was raped. :hmm:
Given how lightly he treats the subject, I think it would perhaps give him some perspective.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:28:41 PMGiven how lightly he treats the subject, I think it would perhaps give him some perspective.
I'm not treating the subject of rape at all. I'm treating the subject of your ham-fisted propaganda for your 30s era inspired racism and, by extension, your (poor) mental state.
That you would wish harm on my wife as a way to get to me (for posting on the internet) is a pretty good indicator of your profoundly messed up values, not to mention your mental health.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PMYes, I am extremely offended by unprovoked violence.
I am even more offended when the criminals weren't even supposed to be in my country to begin with. We have enough violent offenders that it shouldn't be necessary to import more.
You know, I actually agree with you that the situation in question is severly fucked up, and that what happened is very far from what I understand justice to be (assuming you're reporting the facts accurately, you don't have a good record on that).
QuoteThis case is a double-whammy. Not only did we take this guy in ostensibly on the premise that we were offering him shelter from violence, and when he abused our hospitality, we allowed him to remain again on "humanitarian" grounds, after which he went ahead and repeated the offense. If he had never been taken in, the first woman wouldn't have been raped. If he had been deported after his first offense, the second woman wouldn't have been raped. That you would rate his "right" more important than the rights of the women he raped offends me tremendously.
I haven't rated those rights at all. I haven't made any of the statements you're attributing to me at all. The only comment I've made on the case (which you've brought up previously, including posting the picture of the first victim - do you, by the way, think she appreciates having that image used to score cheap rhetorical point in message board debates?), is to note your obvious obssession with violence, death and dark men raping white women.
This is (yet another) case of you projecting your own fevered political-sexual fantasies onto someone else so you can unleash your frustrated rage on them.
Slargos, you're fucked in the head. You need help.
QuoteYou're not a very good person, Jake.
Perhaps not, but at least I'm a person. That's more than we can say for you given how you post here.
Quote from: Jacob on June 29, 2011, 12:38:59 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:28:41 PMGiven how lightly he treats the subject, I think it would perhaps give him some perspective.
I'm not treating the subject of rape at all. I'm treating the subject of your ham-fisted propaganda for your 30s era inspired racism and, by extension, your (poor) mental state.
That you would wish harm on my wife as a way to get to me (for posting on the internet) is a pretty good indicator of your profoundly messed up values, not to mention your mental health.
Propaganda? I am feeling a most justified anger and frustration at the behaviour of a certain category of Swedish policy makers, and the results of their madness, and you are trivializing it by calling me a liar and claiming I derive some sort of pleasure out of the notion of violence against women.
The events as described in the first post are not up for debate. I can link you the relevant sources in Swedish, if you wish. But you're not interested since you don't care about the people your attitude hurts. In fact, I think the only way you could ever come to empathise with these people is if you suffered the same pain yourself. I may have expressed this "ham-handedly" but, frankly, I don't give a shit.
Jake, lighten up on the mental health department. Your causing collateral damage here.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:49:15 PMPropaganda?
Yeah, propaganda.
Remember how you go on and on about different races, about the threat of dark people and their culture? Remember how you happily admit to admire Nazi Germany and various violent racists? Remember how you make casual denigration of anyone non-white part of your general way of expressing yourself here?
You have a cause and you never fucking shut up about it.
You love this incident, the violence the rape and the graphic evidence, because it allows you to get all frothing at the mouth self-righteous, because you think it proves your fucked hatred is justified and because it is in fact so terrible that maybe you can convince other people to agree with your bullshit.
So yeah, propaganda.
QuoteI am feeling a most justified anger and frustration at the behaviour of a certain category of Swedish policy makers, and the results of their madness, and you are trivializing it by calling me a liar and claiming I derive some sort of pleasure out of the notion of violence against women.
You're right. I'm trivializing your anger and your frustration because they ARE trivial. They're more than trivial. They're pathetic.
QuoteThe events as described in the first post are not up for debate. I can link you the relevant sources in Swedish, if you wish. But you're not interested since you don't care about the people your attitude hurts. In fact, I think the only way you could ever come to empathise with these people is if you suffered the same pain yourself. I may have expressed this "ham-handedly" but, frankly, I don't give a shit.
Too bad you don't give a shit. It's the only thing you have to give.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 12:54:57 PM
Jake, lighten up on the mental health department. Your causing collateral damage here.
Jake doesn't give a fuck about you. As long as he gets what he wants, you're just another warm body to step on.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:57:48 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 12:54:57 PM
Jake, lighten up on the mental health department. Your causing collateral damage here.
Jake doesn't give a fuck about you. As long as he gets what he wants, you're just another warm body to step on.
I don't think you really are a racist. You are something far worse. You're boring.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 12:54:57 PM
Jake, lighten up on the mental health department. Your causing collateral damage here.
Alright, sorry :hug:
I do think Slargos could use some help, but I doubt he'll listen to me anyhow so I'll let it go.
Anyhow, I have to feed the dog and get some lunch. Catch you later.
I need a schtick.
Quote from: Jacob on June 29, 2011, 12:57:36 PM
Yeah, propaganda.
Remember how you go on and on about different races, about the threat of dark people and their culture? Remember how you happily admit to admire Nazi Germany and various violent racists? Remember how you make casual denigration of anyone non-white part of your general way of expressing yourself here?
:lmfao:
I may be coming on a bit strong in that sense, you little race-traitor.
QuoteYou have a cause and you never fucking shut up about it.
And why should I?
QuoteYou love this incident, the violence the rape and the graphic evidence, because it allows you to get all frothing at the mouth self-righteous, because you think it proves your fucked hatred is justified and because it is in fact so terrible that maybe you can convince other people to agree with your bullshit.
See, this is where you are wrong. I would love nothing more than to be proven wrong, and I would love nothing more than for these women (or the other countless victims of unnecessary violence) to not have to suffer what they did. I am, however, just another racist in your eyes and you don't know my motivations nor care to.
Quote
You're right. I'm trivializing your anger and your frustration because they ARE trivial. They're more than trivial. They're pathetic.
See, this is where I simply have to get off the train. I simply cannot fathom how you can watch this misery and ignore it.
Quote
Too bad you don't give a shit. It's the only thing you have to give.
Cute. Witty. Pointless. As is your entire existence.
Quote from: Solmyr on June 29, 2011, 01:02:54 PM
I need a schtick.
You can usually find some lying about in the park or some other place with lots of trees.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 01:34:37 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on June 29, 2011, 01:02:54 PM
I need a schtick.
You can usually find some lying about in the park or some other place with lots of trees.
You don't know where it's been, though. Might have been used by Slargos or Marti.
Quote from: Solmyr on June 29, 2011, 01:02:54 PM
I need a schtick.
Not really. None of the cool kids have them.
Quote from: grumbler on June 29, 2011, 02:19:59 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on June 29, 2011, 01:02:54 PM
I need a schtick.
Not really. None of the cool kids have them.
You shouldn't put yourself down like that. You're plenty cool.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
:lol:
You asinine little prick.
Yes, I am extremely offended by unprovoked violence.
I am even more offended when the criminals weren't even supposed to be in my country to begin with. We have enough violent offenders that it shouldn't be necessary to import more.
This case is a double-whammy. Not only did we take this guy in ostensibly on the premise that we were offering him shelter from violence, and when he abused our hospitality, we allowed him to remain again on "humanitarian" grounds, after which he went ahead and repeated the offense. If he had never been taken in, the first woman wouldn't have been raped. If he had been deported after his first offense, the second woman wouldn't have been raped. That you would rate his "right" more important than the rights of the women he raped offends me tremendously.
You're not a very good person, Jake.
I think you are like me. We are both (somewhat highly) intelligent yet we are both emotional. I'm gay, you are probably insane for some other reason. This means we both react to (actual or perceived) injustice with a sort of "kill them all" attitude, and then when emotions cool off and we are somewhat embarrassed, we try to use our intellect to justify such outbursts post factum by some hateful theory we spin on the spot and do not really believe.
Oh well, I love you, Slarg, you are my reflection, pink shirt and all.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 09:57:00 AM
Quote from: grumbler on June 29, 2011, 09:40:47 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 09:30:20 AM
I don't think he really has that much hatred. He just finds it amusing for some reason.
Yeah, he doesn't recognize when a schtick has grown tired and its time for a change. Hell, if he and Neil would just trade their tired schticks, that would at least be a step in the right direction.
I don't mind Neil's so much. It's better then the Indian hater one. I wish Marty would get a schtick. I have this terrible feeling that his "shallow idiot", thing is from the heart.
Oh fuck off. I like you at times, but then you grow abrasive and annoying. You know I have a schtick and it's the gay thing. We could be friends if we weren't enemies.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 02:28:25 PM
Quote from: grumbler on June 29, 2011, 02:19:59 PM
Quote from: Solmyr on June 29, 2011, 01:02:54 PM
I need a schtick.
Not really. None of the cool kids have them.
You shouldn't put yourself down like that. You're plenty cool.
No kidding. "I'm-an-autistic-person-who-does-not-understand-human-emotion-or-contextual-human-interaction" has served grumby quite well over the years. Shit, I still fall for it at times.
I don't recall Grumbler ever claiming to be autistic. In fact his career choice would suggest otherwise.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
This case is a double-whammy. Not only did we take this guy in ostensibly on the premise that we were offering him shelter from violence, and when he abused our hospitality, we allowed him to remain again on "humanitarian" grounds, after which he went ahead and repeated the offense. If he had never been taken in, the first woman wouldn't have been raped. If he had been deported after his first offense, the second woman wouldn't have been raped. That you would rate his "right" more important than the rights of the women he raped offends me tremendously.
See, I don't really disagree with anything in this paragraph
per se, the problem is your past behavior. Either you're just a racist shit; you lack the intelligence to realize that the problem isn't blacks or Muslims or immingrants, but rather your way-too-lenient justice system; or you're just trolling. I used to assume that you more extreme rants were trolls, but I've increasingly come to believe that the first option is correct.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 02:51:54 PM
I don't recall Grumbler ever claiming to be autistic. In fact his career choice would suggest otherwise.
Well, he is or he pretends to be. His schtick is being a "computer" type of persona, that reads every statement with pure literal-ity and with no concern for context or non-verbal communication. He must be a perfect teacher for people who do not go totally insane when they meet something like this.
Quote from: dps on June 29, 2011, 02:54:06 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
This case is a double-whammy. Not only did we take this guy in ostensibly on the premise that we were offering him shelter from violence, and when he abused our hospitality, we allowed him to remain again on "humanitarian" grounds, after which he went ahead and repeated the offense. If he had never been taken in, the first woman wouldn't have been raped. If he had been deported after his first offense, the second woman wouldn't have been raped. That you would rate his "right" more important than the rights of the women he raped offends me tremendously.
See, I don't really disagree with anything in this paragraph per se, the problem is your past behavior. Either you're just a racist shit; you lack the intelligence to realize that the problem isn't blacks or Muslims or immingrants, but rather your way-too-lenient justice system; or you're just trolling. I used to assume that you more extreme rants were trolls, but I've increasingly come to believe that the first option is correct.
I don't think this is either. As I said, I think Slargos is a good guy but one ultimately ruled by his emotions. So his first reaction when he reads about stories like this is to go on a total crusade. When he calms down, the damage to his image is already done, and he is too proud/vain to admit it, so he follows with his "intellectual theories" that sound like racist bullshit, but they are more an attempt to save the face.
I know that because I am totally like him, only we have different triggers.
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:56:42 PM
Quote from: dps on June 29, 2011, 02:54:06 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
This case is a double-whammy. Not only did we take this guy in ostensibly on the premise that we were offering him shelter from violence, and when he abused our hospitality, we allowed him to remain again on "humanitarian" grounds, after which he went ahead and repeated the offense. If he had never been taken in, the first woman wouldn't have been raped. If he had been deported after his first offense, the second woman wouldn't have been raped. That you would rate his "right" more important than the rights of the women he raped offends me tremendously.
See, I don't really disagree with anything in this paragraph per se, the problem is your past behavior. Either you're just a racist shit; you lack the intelligence to realize that the problem isn't blacks or Muslims or immingrants, but rather your way-too-lenient justice system; or you're just trolling. I used to assume that you more extreme rants were trolls, but I've increasingly come to believe that the first option is correct.
I don't think this is either. As I said, I think Slargos is a good guy but one ultimately ruled by his emotions. So his first reaction when he reads about stories like this is to go on a total crusade. When he calms down, the damage to his image is already done, and he is too proud/vain to admit it, so he follows with his "intellectual theories" that sound like racist bullshit, but they are more an attempt to save the face.
I know that because I am totally like him, only we have different triggers.
I think you're just projecting to be honest Marti.
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 02:59:00 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:56:42 PM
Quote from: dps on June 29, 2011, 02:54:06 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
This case is a double-whammy. Not only did we take this guy in ostensibly on the premise that we were offering him shelter from violence, and when he abused our hospitality, we allowed him to remain again on "humanitarian" grounds, after which he went ahead and repeated the offense. If he had never been taken in, the first woman wouldn't have been raped. If he had been deported after his first offense, the second woman wouldn't have been raped. That you would rate his "right" more important than the rights of the women he raped offends me tremendously.
See, I don't really disagree with anything in this paragraph per se, the problem is your past behavior. Either you're just a racist shit; you lack the intelligence to realize that the problem isn't blacks or Muslims or immingrants, but rather your way-too-lenient justice system; or you're just trolling. I used to assume that you more extreme rants were trolls, but I've increasingly come to believe that the first option is correct.
I don't think this is either. As I said, I think Slargos is a good guy but one ultimately ruled by his emotions. So his first reaction when he reads about stories like this is to go on a total crusade. When he calms down, the damage to his image is already done, and he is too proud/vain to admit it, so he follows with his "intellectual theories" that sound like racist bullshit, but they are more an attempt to save the face.
I know that because I am totally like him, only we have different triggers.
I think you're just projecting to be honest Marti.
I guess only Slargo can tell (and I'm curious of how he responds to my reading of him). I think he is not that bad.
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:42:46 PM
I think you are like me. We are both (somewhat highly) intelligent yet we are both emotional. I'm gay, you are probably insane for some other reason. This means we both react to (actual or perceived) injustice with a sort of "kill them all" attitude, and then when emotions cool off and we are somewhat embarrassed, we try to use our intellect to justify such outbursts post factum by some hateful theory we spin on the spot and do not really believe.
Oh well, I love you, Slarg, you are my reflection, pink shirt and all.
:D
A reasonable analysis up to a point.
When I'm not busy getting riled up over instances like the one described in the opening post, I may not necessarily feel it's prudent to destroy all sub-saharans, but I am still relatively confident that this is a problem deeply rooted in immigrant cultures even if I will grudgingly admit that it might not be a problem of genetics as much as it is a problem of culture.
Regardless, at the root of my anger lies the injustice, not the niggers.
And I'm not embarrassed. I may not always be as liberally outspoken about my views as I am here (it's not very polite, after all, unless specifically asked) but I have never denied holding the opinions that I do.
As long as we're braiding eachother's hair, I should perhaps also note that despite verbiage to the contrary, I really have nothing against you fairy fucks. :P
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 03:01:57 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:42:46 PM
I think you are like me. We are both (somewhat highly) intelligent yet we are both emotional. I'm gay, you are probably insane for some other reason. This means we both react to (actual or perceived) injustice with a sort of "kill them all" attitude, and then when emotions cool off and we are somewhat embarrassed, we try to use our intellect to justify such outbursts post factum by some hateful theory we spin on the spot and do not really believe.
Oh well, I love you, Slarg, you are my reflection, pink shirt and all.
:D
A reasonable analysis up to a point.
When I'm not busy getting riled up over instances like the one described in the opening post, I may not necessarily feel it's prudent to destroy all sub-saharans, but I am still relatively confident that this is a problem deeply rooted in immigrant cultures even if I will grudgingly admit that it might not be a problem of genetics as much as it is a problem of culture.
Regardless, at the root of my anger lies the injustice, not the niggers.
And I'm not embarrassed. I may not always be as liberally outspoken about my views as I am here (it's not very polite, after all, unless specifically asked) but I have never denied holding the opinions that I do.
As long as we're braiding eachother's hair, I should perhaps also note that despite verbiage to the contrary, I really have nothing against you fairy fucks. :P
Fine, fine. I guess if I lived in Sweden I could very well adopt a stance like yours. In Poland, the face of the homophobic, xenophobic, illiberal, chauvinist prejudice is that of a white catholic hillbilly, not that of a muslim, black immigrant.
Quote from: dps on June 29, 2011, 02:54:06 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
This case is a double-whammy. Not only did we take this guy in ostensibly on the premise that we were offering him shelter from violence, and when he abused our hospitality, we allowed him to remain again on "humanitarian" grounds, after which he went ahead and repeated the offense. If he had never been taken in, the first woman wouldn't have been raped. If he had been deported after his first offense, the second woman wouldn't have been raped. That you would rate his "right" more important than the rights of the women he raped offends me tremendously.
See, I don't really disagree with anything in this paragraph per se, the problem is your past behavior. Either you're just a racist shit; you lack the intelligence to realize that the problem isn't blacks or Muslims or immingrants, but rather your way-too-lenient justice system; or you're just trolling. I used to assume that you more extreme rants were trolls, but I've increasingly come to believe that the first option is correct.
Utter nonsense. There isn't
a problem (and you have the gall to call
my intelligence into question when you are so narrowminded). There are
problems.
Leniency in prosecution is a problem for the public sense of justice when pertains to Swedes. For Fresh off the Boat Arabs and Africans, it's additionally a problem in that they are used to far more repressive systems and the moment they realize how lenient ours is it's like releasing a rabid wolf into a pen of freshly hamstrung sheep. And this is merely beginning to scrape the surface of the situation.
You can spout whatever bullshit you'd like about the equal value of all men but when it comes down to business, culture groups like the Somalis produce violent offenders and welfare fraud tremendously out of proportion to their representation in society.
I don't believe it is our responsibility to pay for the upkeep of these people, neither in money nor in blood, no matter what excuses they have.
I don't believe that even one violent crime is an acceptable price for "saving" these people from the atrocities they engineered themselves.
I guess you are right. You convinced me. :lol:
http://www.newsmill.se/artikel/2011/06/27/amnestys-och-sveriges-radios-kampanj-f-r-v-ldt-ktsm-n-exempel-p-ohederlighet
A run-down in Swedish, for anyone interested.
Yowch. A threat where someone showed even less class than Marti? :pinch:
Dude the problem as I see it is a socialist lenient society like in Skandi requires its ethnic cohesion to work well. Otherwise why not just scam the easily scammable system? By bringing in non-Swedes they are destroying the thing that makes their systems work. A Skandi system would fail in the USA in ten seconds because a non-insignificant percentage would do just that (probably...90%).
I appreciate their attempts to be havens for the repressed and blow up their ethnically based identity but um...the whole reason for the state in the first place kind of goes away. But maybe there is a vision of a post-ethnic Sweden that aspires to be like a socialist USA...like Canada! Hell they even play hockey.
Quote from: derspiess on June 29, 2011, 03:45:50 PM
Yowch. A threat where someone showed even less class than Marti? :pinch:
Fuck that, Jacob takes every chance he gets to get personal with me, and it may be a character flaw of mine that I tend to blow up and go for the throat but he's a fucking jackass.
Quote from: Valmy on June 29, 2011, 03:50:00 PM
I appreciate their attempts to be havens for the repressed and blow up their ethnically based identity but um...the whole reason for the state in the first place kind of goes away. But maybe there is a vision of a post-ethnic Sweden that aspires to be like a socialist USA...like Canada! Hell they even play hockey.
I don't doubt for a second that is the planned end-game.
In the words of Reepalu, mayor of Malmö, slightly paraphrased: "Sure, it's going to be tough for a couple of generations, but in the end it will sort itself out" in response to the complaints about the escalating violence in the city.
ME/African culture is vastly inferior to Western culture. The reason Sweden has imported so many people from those areas is that the Social Democrats wanted voters who are totally dependent on the Socialist state.
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 03:55:40 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 29, 2011, 03:45:50 PM
Yowch. A threat where someone showed even less class than Marti? :pinch:
Fuck that, Jacob takes every chance he gets to get personal with me, and it may be a character flaw of mine that I tend to blow up and go for the throat but he's a fucking jackass.
But he keeps his punches above the belt.
Face it Slargy - wishing Jacob's wife gets raped is Marti-level stupid. Just apologize and move on. You're only digging yourself deeper.
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 04:15:30 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 03:55:40 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 29, 2011, 03:45:50 PM
Yowch. A threat where someone showed even less class than Marti? :pinch:
Fuck that, Jacob takes every chance he gets to get personal with me, and it may be a character flaw of mine that I tend to blow up and go for the throat but he's a fucking jackass.
But he keeps his punches above the belt.
Face it Slargy - wishing Jacob's wife gets raped is Marti-level stupid. Just apologize and move on. You're only digging yourself deeper.
No take-backsies. I reserve apologies for unintentional consequences or mistakes. If I'd raped his wife in a fit of fury, I suppose an apology would be in order. As is, I think it would be an object lesson for him.
Though I note that you aren't calling for Raz to apologize for wishing me gassed. I guess it's highly situational-
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:54:53 PM
Well, he is or he pretends to be. His schtick is being a "computer" type of persona, that reads every statement with pure literal-ity and with no concern for context or non-verbal communication. He must be a perfect teacher for people who do not go totally insane when they meet something like this.
I think you're just projecting, to be honest, Marti.
Quote from: grumbler on June 29, 2011, 04:22:18 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:54:53 PM
Well, he is or he pretends to be. His schtick is being a "computer" type of persona, that reads every statement with pure literal-ity and with no concern for context or non-verbal communication. He must be a perfect teacher for people who do not go totally insane when they meet something like this.
I think you're just projecting, to be honest, Marti.
I could've sworn I copyrighted that phrase. Let me see where I left that registration certificate...
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 04:37:13 PM
I could've sworn I copyrighted that phrase. Let me see where I left that registration certificate...
You copyrighted a version of that phrase without punctuation. I used punctuation to get around copyright. :bowler:
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:46:58 PM
Oh fuck off. I like you at times, but then you grow abrasive and annoying. You know I have a schtick and it's the gay thing. We could be friends if we weren't enemies.
Your gay thing is only a manifestation of your most unpleasant quality: Your self-centeredness. This is why you rail against Catholic bigots but seem puzzled when people point out your statements are even more bigoted. You have nothing against bigotry, you just don't like it when someone passes on judgement on your lifestyle. You care nothing for justice, or fairness, or equality. Just your own pleasure. Anything that stands in the way of your personal pleasure is the target of your vitriolic hatred.
And Rax comes out of the crowd and hits Marti with the folding chair!!! This is madness! What a slobberknocker!
The only person I give a pass for with bigotry is Siege. His country is constantly under assault, and it's likely he has family members who live under the constant threat of rocket attack or suicide bomber. In his job, Muslims try to kill him regularly. He's lost good friends to their attacks. I'd like to think if I were in the same situation I could rise above hatred. I'm not sure if I could.
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 05:06:19 PM
And Rax comes out of the crowd and hits Marti with the folding chair!!! This is madness! What a slobberknocker!
Rick Martel deserved it.
/Obscure?
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 04:21:03 PMAs is, I think it would be an object lesson for him.
It's definitely an object lesson, but I don't think it's the lesson you're hoping it to be :lol:
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 05:06:19 PM
And Rax comes out of the crowd and hits Marti with the folding chair!!! This is madness! What a slobberknocker!
Seriously, that was a surprisingly cogent and error-free post by Raz. I am surprised and amused.
Quote from: Jacob on June 29, 2011, 05:16:55 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 04:21:03 PMAs is, I think it would be an object lesson for him.
It's definitely an object lesson, but I don't think it's the lesson you're hoping it to be :lol:
I'd enjoy the thought of your suffering regardless of what you'd learn from it. :hug:
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 05:24:24 PMI'd enjoy the thought of your suffering regardless of what you'd learn from it. :hug:
Whereas I hope that one day you will heal enough that you can take pleasure from things other than your hatred and other people's suffering :hug:
Quote from: Jacob on June 29, 2011, 05:52:45 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 05:24:24 PMI'd enjoy the thought of your suffering regardless of what you'd learn from it. :hug:
Whereas I hope that one day you will heal enough that you can take pleasure from things other than your hatred and other people's suffering :hug:
Patchouli brigade!
(Just trying to revive that memorable CDM coinage of years past...)
Is it really unreasonable for Slargos to by angry about the policies that have caused these crimes to occur? Sure, the stuff with Jacob is a bit extreme, but even then, Jacob is getting the reaction he wants.
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:42:46 PM
I think you are like me. We are both (somewhat highly) intelligent yet we are both emotional. I'm gay, you are probably insane for some other reason.
Oh fuck off, bitch. You might try ever so hard to like and express all of the gay "cultural" signifiers, but you're really one of the least gay people that I know. After all, the term gay gets a little mangled outside of Western countries. So shut the fuck up about your emotional/childish behavior stemming from your sexuality. :rolleyes:
to be fair, whatever else he lacks from the gay subculture, Marti's got the catty part down pretty good :P
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:28:41 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 12:25:46 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 29, 2011, 12:24:45 PM
You're not a very good person, Jake.
And yet you're the one wishing Jacob's wife was raped. :hmm:
Given how lightly he treats the subject, I think it would perhaps give him some perspective.
You realize its not funny, right?
If I were Jacob, I would do a ninja roll and jump through the computer screen and chop your head off with Jacob's chinese eating sticks.
Quote from: Habbaku on June 29, 2011, 05:18:20 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 05:06:19 PM
And Rax comes out of the crowd and hits Marti with the folding chair!!! This is madness! What a slobberknocker!
Seriously, that was a surprisingly cogent and error-free post by Raz. I am surprised and amused.
Marty brings out the worst in me.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 07:54:17 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on June 29, 2011, 05:18:20 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 05:06:19 PM
And Rax comes out of the crowd and hits Marti with the folding chair!!! This is madness! What a slobberknocker!
Seriously, that was a surprisingly cogent and error-free post by Raz. I am surprised and amused.
Marty brings out the worst in me.
so at your best you're error pron and not cogent?
Despite his display here, more often then not Marti's ok. You just have to ignore his outbursts. Kind of like slargos, really :lol:
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:50:34 PM
to be fair, whatever else he lacks from the gay subculture, Marti's got the catty part down pretty good :P
He's terrible at it. His barbs are always weak and ineffectual. To be catty, one actually has to have cutting remarks.
Quote from: garbon on June 29, 2011, 07:56:49 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:50:34 PM
to be fair, whatever else he lacks from the gay subculture, Marti's got the catty part down pretty good :P
He's terrible at it. His barbs are always weak and ineffectual. To be catty, one actually has to have cutting remarks.
my mistake, i thought catty was just synonymous with bitchy.
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:59:00 PM
Quote from: garbon on June 29, 2011, 07:56:49 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:50:34 PM
to be fair, whatever else he lacks from the gay subculture, Marti's got the catty part down pretty good :P
He's terrible at it. His barbs are always weak and ineffectual. To be catty, one actually has to have cutting remarks.
my mistake, i thought catty was just synonymous with bitchy.
Oh it is. But I think that's the same. Bitchy people who can't actually making cutting remarks are deplorable.
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:55:05 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 07:54:17 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on June 29, 2011, 05:18:20 PM
Quote from: Barrister on June 29, 2011, 05:06:19 PM
And Rax comes out of the crowd and hits Marti with the folding chair!!! This is madness! What a slobberknocker!
Seriously, that was a surprisingly cogent and error-free post by Raz. I am surprised and amused.
Marty brings out the worst in me.
so at your best you're error pron and not cogent?
You know it.
Quote from: garbon on June 29, 2011, 08:01:42 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:59:00 PM
Quote from: garbon on June 29, 2011, 07:56:49 PM
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:50:34 PM
to be fair, whatever else he lacks from the gay subculture, Marti's got the catty part down pretty good :P
He's terrible at it. His barbs are always weak and ineffectual. To be catty, one actually has to have cutting remarks.
my mistake, i thought catty was just synonymous with bitchy.
Oh it is. But I think that's the same. Bitchy people who can't actually making cutting remarks are deplorable.
i get it. Although i always assumed "cutting wit" was for bitchy people who made cutting and clever remarks, while bitchy was just for people who insulted and lashed out, but with no real flare or ability.
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:56:06 PM
Despite his display here, more often then not Marti's ok. You just have to ignore his outbursts.
Agreed.
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 08:06:42 PM
i get it. Although i always assumed "cutting wit" was for bitchy people who made cutting and clever remarks, while bitchy was just for people who insulted and lashed out, but with no real flare or ability.
Maybe. But if you do something without flair or ability, what's the point? :(
Quote from: garbon on June 29, 2011, 07:56:49 PM
He's terrible at it. His barbs are always weak and ineffectual. To be catty, one actually has to have cutting remarks.
Cattiness is being rude while maintaining a studied indifference.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 29, 2011, 08:09:20 PM
Quote from: garbon on June 29, 2011, 07:56:49 PM
He's terrible at it. His barbs are always weak and ineffectual. To be catty, one actually has to have cutting remarks.
Cattiness is being rude while maintaining a studied indifference.
MW
Quote2catty
adj
1
: resembling a cat; especially : slyly spiteful : malicious <made several catty comments>
Nothing subtle about what Mart does. Besides to your definition, does Mart really have a studied indifference? I think he just doesn't care. :P
Quote from: garbon on June 29, 2011, 08:15:16 PM
Nothing subtle about what Mart does. Besides to your definition, does Mart really have a studied indifference? I think he just doesn't care. :P
I agree that cattiness doesn't describe Marty at all. Too much of a rageaholic. You're the one that's catty.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 29, 2011, 08:17:07 PM
Quote from: garbon on June 29, 2011, 08:15:16 PM
Nothing subtle about what Mart does. Besides to your definition, does Mart really have a studied indifference? I think he just doesn't care. :P
I agree that cattiness doesn't describe Marty at all. Too much of a rageaholic. You're the one that's catty.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_9h9s8i-2HD8%2FS_Zv_uj4OGI%2FAAAAAAAABTA%2FutywZIA4Jr0%2Fs1600%2Fbilde.jpg&hash=b521a8f04e1146576ec44bc13d5411cbdbd94e61)
Quote from: HVC on June 29, 2011, 07:56:06 PM
Despite his display here, more often then not Marti's ok. You just have to ignore his outbursts. Kind of like slargos, really :lol:
I only know him from here, so have to judge him based on what he does here. And I'd much rather see him leave for good than Slargos. Slargos is just exercising his schtick and enjoying the responses to his trolls. He says shitty stuff, but no one believes that he means it. Mart is just non-humorously abrasive, and intends to be that way when he forgets to pretend to be intelligent and "liberal."
I'd hate to see Martinus go. I assume he is actually an intelligent guy that sometimes says stupid things because he doesn't google his statements for verification before posting. I wish Slargos would cut out the racist crap, but if he did that I'd hate to see him go too.
After eight years of Languish I just assume everybody who is going to leave has already left.
Quote from: Valmy on June 29, 2011, 10:23:39 PM
After eight years of Languish I just assume everybody who is going to leave has already left.
Some people haven't been around for all 8 years.
FB's recent ragequit was a shocker.
Maybe what we need is a "Ragequit pool" thread, kinda like a Death Pool.
Quote from: Valmy on June 29, 2011, 10:23:39 PM
After eight years of Languish I just assume everybody who is going to leave has already left.
It seems as though a lot of people have either quit or greatly reduced posting recently...
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:42:46 PM
I think you are like me. We are both (somewhat highly) intelligent yet we are both emotional. I'm gay, you are probably insane for some other reason. This means we both react to (actual or perceived) injustice with a sort of "kill them all" attitude, and then when emotions cool off and we are somewhat embarrassed, we try to use our intellect to justify such outbursts post factum by some hateful theory we spin on the spot and do not really believe.
Oh well, I love you, Slarg, you are my reflection, pink shirt and all.
You're actually not intelligent, but educated. They are very different. You are educated and you're from a country where not drooling on the floor or rolling around in the garbage black out drunk is a sign of refinement and class. You're what genuinely intelligent people recognize as a pseudo intellectual bitch.
Quote from: Valmy on June 29, 2011, 03:50:00 PM
Dude the problem as I see it is a socialist lenient society like in Skandi requires its ethnic cohesion to work well. Otherwise why not just scam the easily scammable system? By bringing in non-Swedes they are destroying the thing that makes their systems work. A Skandi system would fail in the USA in ten seconds because a non-insignificant percentage would do just that (probably...90%).
I appreciate their attempts to be havens for the repressed and blow up their ethnically based identity but um...the whole reason for the state in the first place kind of goes away. But maybe there is a vision of a post-ethnic Sweden that aspires to be like a socialist USA...like Canada! Hell they even play hockey.
Essentially Scandinavia and other parts of Europe (Germany is fairly bad now too) have essentially had it good for so long in terms of low violent crime rates and general prosperity that their people have become ridiculously soft. They don't believe people are required to be self sufficient and because of Europe's centuries long view of regular people being wards of powerful seigneurs Europeans are highly collectivist. This expresses itself in the form of very lenient criminal justice systems, which people in these countries will tend to argue is the result of a focus on "genuine rehabilitation" Whereas the focus in America is on "punitive revenge."
Long term there is a two fold problem from all this. Firstly Europeans are reproducing at a startlingly low rate. Just as an aside there was an article I read awhile back in which two English women were vacationing in Sweden and they wanted to go to a club to pick up some local men. A woman from the area suggested a club which they went to...when they got there they were very disappointed to find out it was a gay bar and they mentioned that to their friend the next day. Point of fact it wasn't a gay bar at all, Swedish men just came off as homosexual to the English women. Many Swedish men have essentially been raised to think it is inappropriate to express sexual interest in a woman at all because it turns her into a sex object and is immoral. Thus in a few generations countries like Sweden will have very small populations of their historical majority ethnicity, and with very liberal refugee policies that let Muslim immigrants who pop out 10 babies per couple roll on in you will essentially see large portions of Scandinavia and Central Europe essentially fall to an invasion that will be more successful than any that Europeans fought off in heroic battles during the 14th and 15th centuries.
Crushing levels of poverty amongst these immigrants will lead to very large increases in violent crime and societies that have wrist-slaps as the only punishment will mean society will be barely protected from violent criminals.
In America when we had a serious problem with an increase in violent crime from the 1960s up until 1990 or so our response was extremely strict laws and massive amounts of incarceration. That has its positives and its negatives. I personally think things like Three Strikes laws and extremely punitive laws for various sex crimes and crimes of violence are the right move, the U.S. in the 1930s had the death penalty for crimes like rape. Then by the early 1960s rape wasn't treated very differently than it is over in Scandiland, it was like a slap on the wrist. Now we're back where we should be, crimes like that result in extremely lengthy prison sentences and segregate society from that offender essentially until they are so old and frail they cannot reasonably be expected to have the ability to reoffend. The negatives of the American system is you have a large portion of your society incarcerated and that carries with it massive costs for State governments. I think much of that could be alleviated if we would decriminalize various drugs, because that would cut the prison population in half and thus we'd easily be able to afford housing all the violent criminals.
Note that increasingly sophisticated police tactics and increased incarceration are very likely the largest reasons violent crime in America has consistently gone down since the early 1990s. Further, something I've brought up on this forum in years past is while America's homicide rate still seems high compared to many OECD countries, we actually have lower rates of other violent crimes like sexual assault/rape than say, Canada or Australia [I'm basing my recollection off arguments I had here with Malthus and some really stupid Australian woman who used to post here, so forgive me if my memory is incorrect.]
However America was able to respond to its violent crime problem in part because the "right Americans" dramatically outnumbered the miscreants. Note "right Americans" is not a code word for "white Americans" but rather for "middle class and wealthy Americans." White trash is equally as injurious to society as are poverty-stricken urban blacks. Unfortunately the demographics of many European countries suggest that the "right Europeans" will be out numbered. Further some fifty years from now a lot of the Muslims who have taken over these European countries will be extremely bitter--they will have moved in masses to Scandinavia hoping to live the pampered life in welfare state. Unfortunately if your population is 50% radical Muslims who can't function in Western society the welfare state will have collapsed along with everything else, so the Muslims will just be burning things at that point.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on June 29, 2011, 11:22:12 PM
Note that increasingly sophisticated police tactics and increased incarceration are very likely the largest reasons violent crime in America has consistently gone down since the early 1990s.
I was under the impression that this is very much an open argument. One other theory I've heard is that the proportion of men in the 16-35 (or thereabouts) age bracket has gone down relative to the population as a whole. In other words, the rate of violent crime has gone down more or less in proportion to the segment - young males - of the population that is most likely to commit such crimes.
Quote from: OttoVonBismarck on June 29, 2011, 11:22:12 PM
Just as an aside there was an article I read awhile back in which two English women were vacationing in Sweden and they wanted to go to a club to pick up some local men. A woman from the area suggested a club which they went to...when they got there they were very disappointed to find out it was a gay bar and they mentioned that to their friend the next day. Point of fact it wasn't a gay bar at all, Swedish men just came off as homosexual to the English women. Many Swedish men have essentially been raised to think it is inappropriate to express sexual interest in a woman at all because it turns her into a sex object and is immoral.
Do you think it is possible that these women were not picked up because Swedish men had better options? Some English women do not appreciate the significance of the increased competition outside of their island.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 29, 2011, 05:04:26 PM
Quote from: Martinus on June 29, 2011, 02:46:58 PM
Oh fuck off. I like you at times, but then you grow abrasive and annoying. You know I have a schtick and it's the gay thing. We could be friends if we weren't enemies.
Your gay thing is only a manifestation of your most unpleasant quality: Your self-centeredness. This is why you rail against Catholic bigots but seem puzzled when people point out your statements are even more bigoted. You have nothing against bigotry, you just don't like it when someone passes on judgement on your lifestyle. You care nothing for justice, or fairness, or equality. Just your own pleasure. Anything that stands in the way of your personal pleasure is the target of your vitriolic hatred.
What can I say - this is true too.
I'm a complex human being.
Also, I like how the thread has been (at least partially) derailed into talking about me.
:attentionwhore: :cool:
An interesting analysis, Otto. :hmm:
I have always liked Otto. :)
Quote from: Tonitrus on June 29, 2011, 10:32:27 PM
Maybe what we need is a "Ragequit pool" thread, kinda like a Death Pool.
10 quatloos on Ed Anger.
An interesting analysis, Otto, but I think the emphasis placed on fertility rate doesn't follow from the facts. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate), Canada has a lower fertility rate (1.53 births per woman) than Sweden (1.80), which is the lowest in the Scandi countries. Yet Canada doesn't seem to suffer the problems you note.
I'd argue the real issue with immigrants there is that they do0n't become Swedes or whatever, not that they expect to live in the lap of welfare-state luxury. Some who come are refugees, for sure, but these refugees don't identify as potential Swedes (or whatever) and so don't make an effort to fit in - this is just temporary, after all. I'd want to see the results for the second and third generations before I accepted an argument that this represented a permanent change.
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 02:52:45 AM
An interesting analysis, Otto. :hmm:
Too bad he had to insert those anecdotes. Kinda brought it down a peg.
Quote from: grumbler on June 30, 2011, 06:57:09 AM
An interesting analysis, Otto, but I think the emphasis placed on fertility rate doesn't follow from the facts. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate), Canada has a lower fertility rate (1.53 births per woman) than Sweden (1.80), which is the lowest in the Scandi countries. Yet Canada doesn't seem to suffer the problems you note.
I don't think that link really affects Otto's argument in any way, as the stats are by state, not by ethnic group.
At any rate, Canada generally accepts a higher class of immigrant than Sweden. The expense alone keeps the lower classes away, although we're always happy to allow highly trained, middle class members of the Third World come here to do menial labour for low wages.
Yeah 1.80 is almost in the ideal zone (1.9-2.1) and something like 90% of Sweden is still Skandi so maybe the Demographic thing is overblown. At least the baby making part.
Quote from: Neil on June 30, 2011, 08:15:01 AM
I don't think that link really affects Otto's argument in any way, as the stats are by state, not by ethnic group.
True but there are not yet enough non-Skandi's in Sweden to drive the numbers that far up.
Well ok I guess if they literally are producing 10 kids per woman.
Quote from: garbon on June 30, 2011, 07:47:46 AM
Too bad he had to insert those that anecdotes. Kinda brought it down a peg.
There was just the one anecdote (the one with the English women, that said women thought Slargos was gay). What brings it down, IMO, is the loaded language; immigration is "invasion," "right Americans" excludes all poor people (and there seem to be just three groups: "right Americans"/"middle class and wealthy Americans"; "white trash;" and "poverty-stricken urban blacks"), the claim that 1960s rape laws had penalties that were "like a slap on the wrist," etc.
Post-1960s rape laws in the US, for instance, didn't seem to lessen the penalties at all; what they did was change the definition of the term and the requirements for conviction. The courts generally started disallowing the death penalty for rape in the 60s (the last execution for rape was in 1964, and the USSC outright banned the practice in 1977), but the big change was that the elements of proof changed; rape accusations could be made by males, the victim was no longer required to physically resist ((and prove that they had), the requirement for immediate reporting of a rape was relaxed, the public airing of the victim's previous sexual activities was no longer allowed as a defense strategy, etc.
So, the basic premises of Otto's analysis are probably false, and that is more damaging than the one anecdote. But it is a fun read.
Quote from: Valmy on June 30, 2011, 08:19:35 AM
Yeah 1.80 is almost in the ideal zone (1.9-2.1) and something like 90% of Sweden is still Skandi so maybe the Demographic thing is overblown. At least the baby making part.
What if most of the children are non-skandi?
You Americans have a country where every immigrant has gone to in order to work. Well, almost all. Whereas what we have in Europe, is the natives who have a culture accustomed to work and civilizations, and these immigrant cultures, who were used to basically scavenging as the safest mode of survival in their previous home, and the welfare state allows them to survive with these cultural sentiments intact.
That's pretty much what we have with the gypsies here. I don't think they are evil by genetics or anything, simply they have a culture completely at odds with the majority's, and suckling on the welfare tits allow them to stick to these values.
Quote from: Tamas on June 30, 2011, 08:28:43 AM
Quote from: Valmy on June 30, 2011, 08:19:35 AM
Yeah 1.80 is almost in the ideal zone (1.9-2.1) and something like 90% of Sweden is still Skandi so maybe the Demographic thing is overblown. At least the baby making part.
What if most of the children are non-skandi?
You Americans have a country where every immigrant has gone to in order to work. Well, almost all. Whereas what we have in Europe, is the natives who have a culture accustomed to work and civilizations, and these immigrant cultures, who were used to basically scavenging as the safest mode of survival in their previous home, and the welfare state allows them to survive with these cultural sentiments intact.
That's pretty much what we have with the gypsies here. I don't think they are evil by genetics or anything, simply they have a culture completely at odds with the majority's, and suckling on the welfare tits allow them to stick to these values.
Well as I said I do not think there are enough non-ethnic Swedes to do that.
In any case the second paragraph reflects my point about having a country whose entire existance and raison d'etre is to be an ethnic nation state and then trying to destroy that because, I presume, people living there find that basis distasteful. But destroying your country's reason for existance is going to be a pretty difficult road.
I don't have time to get detailed, but a quick google search reveals that in 2001 the Swedish population increased by about 32000.
Of this, 31000 was immigration while the rest was the net difference between births and deaths.
Numbers speak for themselves.
Quote from: Neil on June 30, 2011, 08:15:01 AM
I don't think that link really affects Otto's argument in any way, as the stats are by state, not by ethnic group.
That does that matter? If you are going to argue that Otto's "facts" supporting the argument that Swedes will be a minotrity in Sweden in "a few generations" trump facts reported by scientists, you need evidence. Otherwise, facts trump "facts."
Here is the ethnic breakdown of foreign-born in Sweden, according to Wikipedia's translation of http://www.scb.se/
As of 2010, 1.33 million people or 14.3% of the inhabitants in Sweden were foreign-born.[10] The largest groups were:
Finland Finland (172,218)
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Former Yugoslavia (152,268)
Iraq (117,919)
Poland (67,518)
Iran (59,922)
Germany (47,803)
Denmark (46,002)
Norway (43,819)
Turkey (40,766)
Somalia (31,734)
That's what: 250,000 out of 9.5 million that are potentially "Muslim immigrants who pop out 10 babies per couple?" How can 0.26% of the population grow "in a few generations" to the point where "you will essentially see large portions of Scandinavia and Central Europe essentially fall to an invasion that will be more successful than any that Europeans fought off in heroic battles during the 14th and 15th centuries?" Let's say "a few" is four. Let's say "large portions of Scandinavia" is just Sweden, for argument's sake.
How many kids do these "baby-popping" people have to have per generation to grow a population from 250,000 to one equal to the current Swedish one of 7.7 million in four generations? Do the math.
You can vary "a few" to equal any number you choose. See what number it takes to make his argument plausible.
I'm not good at math. :(
How long is a generation? Let's say 20 years.
If the current trend holds steady (instead of increasing rapidly as has been the trend since the 90s) http://www.thelocal.se/15772/20081118/ there will be a net immigration of 3.44 million in 4 generations.
So you think Sweden will never change its immigration policies?
But also world wide birth rates are going down. Mercifully.
Still have a long way to go though.
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 08:47:27 AM
I don't have time to get detailed, but a quick google search reveals that in 2001 the Swedish population increased by about 32000.
Of this, 31000 was immigration while the rest was the net difference between births and deaths.
Numbers speak for themselves.
The 2010 natural population increase in Sweden was 25,154.* The total population increase was roughly 80,000*.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden, supposedly translated from http://www.scb.se/, which I cannot independently verify.
Total refugee immigrants in 2010 were 9,901.
http://www.migrationsverket.se/download/18.46b604a812cbcdd7dba80008288/Beviljade+uppeh%C3%A5llstillst%C3%A5nd+och+registrerade+uppeh%C3%A5llsr%C3%A4tter+2010.pdf
Again, how do these 9,901 people outbreed the non-gay Swedes?
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 08:54:29 AM
How long is a generation? Let's say 20 years.
If the current trend holds steady (instead of increasing rapidly as has been the trend since the 90s) http://www.thelocal.se/15772/20081118/ there will be a net immigration of 3.44 million in 4 generations.
But at current trends these will be immigrants from other areas of Europe, not ""Muslim immigrants who pop out 10 babies per couple."
Slargos, do you think it's an accurate analysis that Swedish people don't have sex because the men are afraid of the women?
My impression of Denmark is that the young people still fuck like rabbits, and I sort of assumed the same is true in Sweden. I mean, I've run in to Swedish guys in clubs in Copenhagen, and they were pretty aggressive in trying to pick up chicks.
I mean the English calling you out for not being sexual enough is pretty over the top :bowler:
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 29, 2011, 10:29:00 PM
FB's recent ragequit was a shocker.
I missed that. What happened?
I miss everyone's rage quits. :(
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 10:14:07 AM
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 29, 2011, 10:29:00 PM
FB's recent ragequit was a shocker.
I missed that. What happened?
It was over us playing a joke on Marty.
FB martyred himself histrionically for the Marty cause. Marty was cool about it though.
Quote from: grumbler on June 30, 2011, 08:48:47 AMThat's what: 250,000 out of 9.5 million that are potentially "Muslim immigrants who pop out 10 babies per couple?" How can 0.26% of the population grow...
Something doesn't seem quite right about your numbers.
It is an obvious typo. 2.6%.
Quote from: Neil on June 29, 2011, 07:25:20 PM
Is it really unreasonable for Slargos to by angry about the policies that have caused these crimes to occur?
Not at all.
QuoteSure, the stuff with Jacob is a bit extreme, but even then, Jacob is getting the reaction he wants.
I don't think Jacob wanted a reaction quite like
that. I don't think Jacob's statement crossed the line in terms of the unwritten Languish Code of Conduct-- I don't think *I* would have said that but it didn't seem out of place here.
Slarg's reaction to that *did* cross the line on two counts IMO: you don't wish rape upon anyone (even flippantly) and you don't go after spouses, family members, etc.
Quote from: Valmy on June 30, 2011, 10:46:38 AM
It is an obvious typo. 2.6%.
A compo, vice typo, but yeah, 2.6%.
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 10:55:41 AM
Quote from: Neil on June 29, 2011, 07:25:20 PM
Sure, the stuff with Jacob is a bit extreme, but even then, Jacob is getting the reaction he wants.
I don't think Jacob wanted a reaction quite like that. I don't think Jacob's statement crossed the line in terms of the unwritten Languish Code of Conduct-- I don't think *I* would have said that but it didn't seem out of place here.
Slarg's reaction to that *did* cross the line on two counts IMO: you don't wish rape upon anyone (even flippantly) and you don't go after spouses, family members, etc.
I don't know. Jacob was pretty obviously trying to get a rise out of Slargos. As for stepping over a line, the fact that Jacob was trolling makes it sort of a wash. Had it been an unprovoked attack, I might feel that social norms had been violated.
Quote from: Neil on June 30, 2011, 11:12:10 AM
Had it been an unprovoked attack, I might feel that social norms had been violated.
:lmfao:
Is this Keystone Cop thing going to be your new schtick? I like it a lot better than your Bertie Wooster schtick with the "Dreadnoughts are good, democracy is bad" routines. :thumbsup:
I see no schtick.
Besides, dreadnoughts are good. Very good.
Quote from: Neil on June 30, 2011, 11:42:52 AM
I see no schtick.
Besides, dreadnoughts are good. Very good.
But dreadnoughts without democracy = loud violent Krauts with spiked helments and Rollie Fingers mustaches.
You really need both.
Quote from: Jacob on June 30, 2011, 09:23:27 AM
Slargos, do you think it's an accurate analysis that Swedish people don't have sex because the men are afraid of the women?
My impression of Denmark is that the young people still fuck like rabbits, and I sort of assumed the same is true in Sweden. I mean, I've run in to Swedish guys in clubs in Copenhagen, and they were pretty aggressive in trying to pick up chicks.
Sorry, I'm not going to keep responding to your posts since all you do is attempt to provoke me and I would rather not play that game.
Quote from: Valmy on June 30, 2011, 08:58:04 AM
So you think Sweden will never change its immigration policies?
I don't know. I certainly hope so.
The last 20 years have seen an almost unbroken increase, and the outspoken policy of Swedish governments since 1975 has been that Sweden "shall be a multicultural society". This was a decision made by politicians, and has only seen broad public support after 30 years of deliberate propaganda.
Quote from: grumbler on June 30, 2011, 09:08:33 AM
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 08:47:27 AM
I don't have time to get detailed, but a quick google search reveals that in 2001 the Swedish population increased by about 32000.
Of this, 31000 was immigration while the rest was the net difference between births and deaths.
Numbers speak for themselves.
The 2010 natural population increase in Sweden was 25,154.* The total population increase was roughly 80,000*.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden, supposedly translated from http://www.scb.se/, (http://www.scb.se/,) which I cannot independently verify.
Total refugee immigrants in 2010 were 9,901.
http://www.migrationsverket.se/download/18.46b604a812cbcdd7dba80008288/Beviljade+uppeh%C3%A5llstillst%C3%A5nd+och+registrerade+uppeh%C3%A5llsr%C3%A4tter+2010.pdf (http://www.migrationsverket.se/download/18.46b604a812cbcdd7dba80008288/Beviljade+uppeh%C3%A5llstillst%C3%A5nd+och+registrerade+uppeh%C3%A5llsr%C3%A4tter+2010.pdf)
Again, how do these 9,901 people outbreed the non-gay Swedes?
I see that you blithely ignore the column for "family reunification" which is almost exclusively family members of "refugees" and other immigrants.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 30, 2011, 12:12:20 PM
Quote from: Neil on June 30, 2011, 11:42:52 AM
I see no schtick.
Besides, dreadnoughts are good. Very good.
But dreadnoughts without democracy = loud violent Krauts with spiked helments and Rollie Fingers mustaches.
You really need both.
Or even worse, an unfortunate hexagonal turret arrangement.
I suppose if you restrict the franchise a bit, you end up with beautiful dreadnoughts like the Queen Elizabeths, so I guess some form of democracy is alright.
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 12:21:54 PM
The last 20 years have seen an almost unbroken increase, and the outspoken policy of Swedish governments since 1975 has been that Sweden "shall be a multicultural society". This was a decision made by politicians, and has only seen broad public support after 30 years of deliberate propaganda.
If they want it to be a multicultural society they need to start by changing the name of the country. I suggest Social Democratia.
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 12:25:10 PM
I see that you blithely ignore the column for "family reunification" which is almost exclusively family members of "refugees" and other immigrants.
You see...
poorly. I don't "ignore" anything. I simply don't include irrelevant facts. Of course "family reunification" is almost exclusively family members of immigrants. Duh!
Quote from: grumbler on June 30, 2011, 01:01:29 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 12:25:10 PM
I see that you blithely ignore the column for "family reunification" which is almost exclusively family members of "refugees" and other immigrants.
You see... poorly. I don't "ignore" anything. I simply don't include irrelevant facts. Of course "family reunification" is almost exclusively family members of immigrants. Duh!
:huh:
There's nothing "of course" about it, but I'll leave it to you to sort out the implications of that, if you can.
Given how intelligent and educated you are, it shouldn't be difficult.
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
Much the same is the case in Norway even if I don't think DNA testing is allowed yet. Of course, any attempts to introduce the same system in Sweden has been blocked with the argument that it is "invasive to their privacy". Finger printing is apparently also a horrible breach of human rights. They are scarred for life by the act of mistrusting them.
To think that you'd come from a warzone, having been tortured and raped over a thousand times and having had 15 of your 25 children killed in front of your eyes, and then having your story questioned by racist immigrations officials? The nerve. These people need our guiding and comforting hand, not the spanish inquisition! :mad:
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
That would explain why the "immigrationist lobby" is against it in France as well and successfully vetoed it :hmm:
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 01:03:14 PM
:huh:
There's nothing "of course" about it...
:lmfao: For non-morons, it is absolutely "of course." The exception is for spouses of native-born citizens, which is a small percentage of any nation's immigrants (seems to be less than 5% for the US, unknown, apparently, for Sweden).
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on June 30, 2011, 01:38:13 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
That would explain why the "immigrationist lobby" is against it in France as well and successfully vetoed it :hmm:
How many Somalis does France take in?
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 01:36:24 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
Much the same is the case in Norway even if I don't think DNA testing is allowed yet. Of course, any attempts to introduce the same system in Sweden has been blocked with the argument that it is "invasive to their privacy". Finger printing is apparently also a horrible breach of human rights. They are scarred for life by the act of mistrusting them.
To think that you'd come from a warzone, having been tortured and raped over a thousand times and having had 15 of your 25 children killed in front of your eyes, and then having your story questioned by racist immigrations officials? The nerve. These people need our guiding and comforting hand, not the spanish inquisition! :mad:
Luckily have we here in Denmark seen through that scam years ago, DNA testing is required by select group of immigrants/refugees, including Somalis...
By the way, Somalis is one of the few immigrant/refugee groups in Denmark that declining in numbers...
Quote from: Mr.Penguin on June 30, 2011, 01:56:36 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 01:36:24 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
Much the same is the case in Norway even if I don't think DNA testing is allowed yet. Of course, any attempts to introduce the same system in Sweden has been blocked with the argument that it is "invasive to their privacy". Finger printing is apparently also a horrible breach of human rights. They are scarred for life by the act of mistrusting them.
To think that you'd come from a warzone, having been tortured and raped over a thousand times and having had 15 of your 25 children killed in front of your eyes, and then having your story questioned by racist immigrations officials? The nerve. These people need our guiding and comforting hand, not the spanish inquisition! :mad:
Luckily have we here in Denmark seen through that scam years ago, DNA testing is required by select group of immigrants/refugees, including Somalis...
By the way, Somalis is one of the few immigrant/refugee groups in Denmark that declining in numbers...
Probably moving to Sweden and being numbered among "Danes". :D
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 02:12:25 PM
Quote from: Mr.Penguin on June 30, 2011, 01:56:36 PM
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 01:36:24 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
Much the same is the case in Norway even if I don't think DNA testing is allowed yet. Of course, any attempts to introduce the same system in Sweden has been blocked with the argument that it is "invasive to their privacy". Finger printing is apparently also a horrible breach of human rights. They are scarred for life by the act of mistrusting them.
To think that you'd come from a warzone, having been tortured and raped over a thousand times and having had 15 of your 25 children killed in front of your eyes, and then having your story questioned by racist immigrations officials? The nerve. These people need our guiding and comforting hand, not the spanish inquisition! :mad:
Luckily have we here in Denmark seen through that scam years ago, DNA testing is required by select group of immigrants/refugees, including Somalis...
By the way, Somalis is one of the few immigrant/refugee groups in Denmark that declining in numbers...
Probably moving to Sweden and being numbered among "Danes". :D
They are moving to England, as they believe that the Brits are tolerant of their lifestyle...
You know, now that I think about it, I went to high school with an Eritrean. He seemed okay. Very quite and studious. As opposed to the Scandi I went to school with who fucking broke my arm.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 30, 2011, 03:19:06 PM
As opposed to the Scandi I went to school with who fucking broke my arm.
you should get over that :lol:
Quote from: HVC on June 30, 2011, 03:20:13 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 30, 2011, 03:19:06 PM
As opposed to the Scandi I went to school with who fucking broke my arm.
you should get over that :lol:
That really hurt. And the fucker did it on purpose. He put his foot behind me in Gym class and pushed me.
I got beat up a lot it in school. :( I wonder if this how serial killers get started.
I'm willing to wager you did something to deserve it. Should've broken both your arms.
He didnt break your arm on purposes , he tripped you on purpose. There's a difference.
Raz doesn't come across as a serial killer.
Quote from: The Brain on June 30, 2011, 03:38:49 PM
Raz doesn't come across as a serial killer.
ORLY? :hmm:
Quote from: The Brain on June 30, 2011, 03:38:49 PM
Raz doesn't come across as a serial killer.
I could see him as a cereal killer, but otherwise agree.
The Americans in the class should have banded together and sodomized the swedish student with a plunger.
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 30, 2011, 03:42:40 PM
The Americans in the class should have banded together and sodomized the swedish student with a plunger.
He was worse. Icelandic.
Quote from: The Brain on June 30, 2011, 03:38:49 PM
Raz doesn't come across as a serial killer.
Seedy thought so, or at least he thought I looked like one.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 30, 2011, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 30, 2011, 03:38:49 PM
Raz doesn't come across as a serial killer.
Seedy thought so, or at least he thought I looked like one.
I'd fuck you. I'd fuck you hard.
Quote from: Razgovory on June 30, 2011, 03:43:45 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on June 30, 2011, 03:42:40 PM
The Americans in the class should have banded together and sodomized the swedish student with a plunger.
He was worse. Icelandic.
Correction: Taken out in a field and shot.
Quote from: The Brain on June 30, 2011, 03:46:30 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on June 30, 2011, 03:44:22 PM
Quote from: The Brain on June 30, 2011, 03:38:49 PM
Raz doesn't come across as a serial killer.
Seedy thought so, or at least he thought I looked like one.
I'd fuck you. I'd fuck you hard.
That's... okay. I'm all right. I appreciate the sentiment. I think.
Quote from: grumbler on June 30, 2011, 01:50:47 PM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on June 30, 2011, 01:38:13 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
That would explain why the "immigrationist lobby" is against it in France as well and successfully vetoed it :hmm:
How many Somalis does France take in?
FWIW, I went back & found an article (not what I read, but an original article from 2008) to refresh my memory. Apparently it wasn't just Somalis:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hWOHJFLFXSWN9TDQXLbQpBDboAqQ
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 05:40:38 PM
FWIW, I went back & found an article (not what I read, but an original article from 2008) to refresh my memory. Apparently it wasn't just Somalis:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hWOHJFLFXSWN9TDQXLbQpBDboAqQ
:hmm:
Quote
"After the samples suggested high rates of fraud, we expanded testing to Ethiopia, Uganda, Ghana, Guinea, Gambia and Ivory Coast," he said.
Except for Ivory Coast, which had smaller samples, the percentages were roughly the same, said a US official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
I'm shocked,
shocked to find that there is fraud in immigration applications!
Quote from: grumbler on June 30, 2011, 06:57:09 AM
An interesting analysis, Otto, but I think the emphasis placed on fertility rate doesn't follow from the facts. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate), Canada has a lower fertility rate (1.53 births per woman) than Sweden (1.80), which is the lowest in the Scandi countries. Yet Canada doesn't seem to suffer the problems you note.
I'd argue the real issue with immigrants there is that they do0n't become Swedes or whatever, not that they expect to live in the lap of welfare-state luxury. Some who come are refugees, for sure, but these refugees don't identify as potential Swedes (or whatever) and so don't make an effort to fit in - this is just temporary, after all. I'd want to see the results for the second and third generations before I accepted an argument that this represented a permanent change.
That's actually the core of what I had originally said. I don't believe a neutral analysis of my post would suggest I was implying any state that receives a high degree of immigration relative to natural growth is destined to end up like Scandinavian countries + several other European states. Rather I was saying when the population of "bad eggs" out numbers the "good folk" because of immigration the state will have very little ability to salvage itself.
It really is immigration neutral. If for some reason 65% of natural born Americans woke up tomorrow and became lunatics who felt it was appropriate to kill their daughters for dishonoring the family or to rape a woman because her younger brother saw a female classmate without her head scarf on, I posit the country would essentially be fucked because the bad would outweigh the good.
In the case of Scandinavia it is exactly the problem that eventually the worst parts of Scandinavian society will, if trends continue (obviously a major caveat), outnumber the best parts of their society that make it work and have made it work for the past generations. The means of getting to that point will be runaway immigration of bad types combined with lower natural birth rate, and that is how I would
typically assume such a situation would occur, but I could posit some other ways it could happen. This argument says nothing about all states which have high immigration rates, but rather ones where it will lead to the anti-social cancers outnumbering the core society itself.
Quote from: grumbler on June 30, 2011, 08:27:06 AMWhat brings it down, IMO, is the loaded language; immigration is "invasion," "right Americans" excludes all poor people (and there seem to be just three groups: "right Americans"/"middle class and wealthy Americans"; "white trash;" and "poverty-stricken urban blacks"), the claim that 1960s rape laws had penalties that were "like a slap on the wrist," etc.
Right, but mind the medium--and I was never presenting myself as a neutral observer, and never have.
QuotePost-1960s rape laws in the US, for instance, didn't seem to lessen the penalties at all; what they did was change the definition of the term and the requirements for conviction
While throwing aspersions at others arguments let us note that if I am to give this statement notable weight I am accepting it tacitly that you have performed some extensive study of a large portion of American jurisdictions statutes on rape. Instead I suspect you spent a cursory amount of time gathering evidence to support an argument.
But either way, that is more than I did since I was speaking entirely off of vague recollection, remembrances of interviews and opinion pieces that were not sourced and etc. Mind however that my argument was not and really isn't one designed or particularly intended to be held up to great scrutiny. Nor do I have the investment in it to care much what happens to it.
I will say that in many cases the biggest change in criminal sanctions was not a period in which statutory penalties were decreased and then increased, but rather a period in which judges and juries started sentencing people more leniently and making use of alternative forms of punishment as they became available. Much of the reactionary crime legislation of the 1980s and 1990s was really more about "truth in sentencing", in effect removing much of the significant discretion judges and juries used to have. So instead of being able to sentence someone anywhere from 6 months to 50 years for a crime, States slowly started to create much, much tighter ranges. At the Federal level just as an example (and this is one you can look up) the discretion a Federal judge has under the Federal sentencing guidelines is usually only a few months one way or the other. (Note that after U.S. v. Booker it was found that Congress could not make the Federal Sentencing Guidelines binding on Federal judges. However judges still tend to follow them, and when they don't statistics demonstrate that it is far more likely they punish someone above what the maximum recommended by the guidelines.)
Another issue was that for many years judges and juries only vaguely influenced what the sentence would be. For example someone might be sentenced to a
range instead of an actual sentence. So if I rape someone I might be sentenced to 5 to 30 years. Where I fall on that spectrum would be based on things like good behavior credit and the judgment of parole committees. So two inmates sentenced for the exact same criminal act (assume they were equally complicit partners in a felony) and sentenced to the exact same range could have vastly differing release dates. For example one could be released 5 years into a "5 to 30" and the other could be released 30 years later. Where the public truly became concerned was the plight of the inmate who had to serve the maximum, but instead the inmate who followed the rules and got out early and then reoffended in spectacular fashion.
Quote from: grumbler on June 30, 2011, 01:50:47 PM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on June 30, 2011, 01:38:13 PM
Quote from: derspiess on June 30, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I read somewhere a few weeks ago that when the State Dept. started mandating DNA testing for "family reunification"-type refugees, they found about 80% of Somali "family members" to be fraudulent.
That would explain why the "immigrationist lobby" is against it in France as well and successfully vetoed it :hmm:
How many Somalis does France take in?
It was all for candidates for family regrouping.
Quote from: Valmy on June 30, 2011, 10:18:00 AM
It was over us playing a joke on Marty.
FB martyred himself histrionically for the Marty cause. Marty was cool about it though.
:lol: no. Marty was in his first-hour rage fit over it, FB felt that as a friend he had to take a stand for him. This lead to his ragequit, which was followed by Marty's predictable crawl back.
Why can't people stay in their own countries?
If they don't like it there, they can go and do something about their own goverments, wheather it takes violence or not.
They have to stay in their countries!
We should KILL all immigrants!!!
Oh wait....
Nevermind.
Quote from: Slargos on June 30, 2011, 12:19:35 PMSorry, I'm not going to keep responding to your posts since all you do is attempt to provoke me and I would rather not play that game.
Your call, of course.
Now, if it's the provocations that piss you off (and they're not a one way thing) my suggestion to you is to ignore the posts you think are meant to provoke you and respond to the civil posts.
That's what I do with you, except on the occasions I feel up to tangling a bit.
Apparently it would be immoral to deport him because "it would just mean some non-swedish woman would be raped instead".
I have changed my mind. They need to be cleansed by fire.