Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Well, the topic is Sweden. Seeing as how you don't have any facts to back up your statements, I accept your "embarrassing defeat." Really? You failed in your localising trick and are moving straight to that final move? Muda! Where was the evidence of your statement exactly? You invite me to disprove you (why? My statement made no reference to refugees and was clearly about the migrants as a whole) and then provide nothing? You think your statement a truth and a default that I must prove wrong, but you are very wrong.I suppose as an American used to stating "Immigrants commit less crimes" you are perhaps unaware that is not the case in Sweden. There are stats that show such things, old stats as Sweden decided to stop taking certain data for some reason and you know full well what the implication is when you stop collecting data that is unhelpful to your stance... however posting it against a dishonest person as you've proven yourself on this matter here is pretty useless. You'll dismiss it for being too old or perhaps for not being relevant to your localisation which I have no intention to engage... maybe you'll get cute against and quote me and write something in my quote box? Stop trying to bait me into defending things. I'll defend whatever I personally believe and not things you invite me to defend so you can try and finally eke out a win against me. I'm going to say what you're supposed to address in your next post so I'll highlight it for you to make it very easy for you. As I said, refugees from Syria in Sweden are not responsible for the crime that has been happening since Sweden opened it's doors to the plague known as multiculturalism no. Literally impossible considering the war started much later. With that said your attacks are castrated on that matter. The argument can then evolve into what is causing that crime and you might say it is poverty as you have done, perhaps like some you'll say the Swedes are just really racist and they are to blame ultimately? However then perhaps we'll move on to riots like what my original post was on in response to your talk that it was simply a poverty issue and not an immigrant one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Rinkeby_riots- For two mid-June nights in a row in 2010, youth riots broke out in Rinkeby, a suburb dominated by immigrant residents, in northern Stockholm, Sweden. Up to 100 youths threw bricks, set fires and attacked the local police station in Rinkeby. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Stockholm_riots- On 19 May 2013, violent disturbances broke out in Husby, a suburb dominated by immigrants and second-generation immigrant residents, including a substantial number from Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq, in northern Stockholm, Sweden. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_social_unrest_in_Sweden- On 15 May 2016. Economist and anti-immigration pundit Tino Sanandaji linked the situation to poor integration of immigrants in Sweden and criticised the failure to publicly address problems linked to immigration by labeling all criticism as racism. Soheila Fors, founder of the Khatoon-foundation for immigrant women, described the stone-throwing youths as an increasingly more ideological "border defence", behind which ethnic enclaves are established where Sharia becomes law, enforced by radical Salafi Islamists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Rinkeby_riots- On 20 February 2017, rioting broke out in Rinkeby, a predominantly immigrant-populated suburb of the Swedish capital Stockholm. Now it is your turn. You have attempted to disengage the fact they are immigrants (of a certain kind) from the matter so I asked you to provide all the riots done by other likewise poor people who happen to be Swedes. You responded with nonsense as I guess you knew you had nothing so now I challenge you head on so there is no escape. Provide evidence or you are proven wrong no matter whatever dishonesty you decide to come out with. Unlike you I have provided evidence and am directly asking for your counter evidence you must have to have made your previous post on the matter. So come on, show us all what you have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Really? You failed in your localising trick and are moving straight to that final move? Muda! Where was the evidence of your statement exactly? You invite me to disprove you (why? My statement made no reference to refugees and was clearly about the migrants as a whole) and then provide nothing? You think your statement a truth and a default that I must prove wrong, but you are very wrong.I suppose as an American used to stating "Immigrants commit less crimes" you are perhaps unaware that is not the case in Sweden. There are stats that show such things, old stats as Sweden decided to stop taking certain data for some reason and you know full well what the implication is when you stop collecting data that is unhelpful to your stance... however posting it against a dishonest person as you've proven yourself on this matter here is pretty useless. You'll dismiss it for being too old or perhaps for not being relevant to your localisation which I have no intention to engage... maybe you'll get cute against and quote me and write something in my quote box? Stop trying to bait me into defending things. I'll defend whatever I personally believe and not things you invite me to defend so you can try and finally eke out a win against me. I'm going to say what you're supposed to address in your next post so I'll highlight it for you to make it very easy for you. As I said, refugees from Syria in Sweden are not responsible for the crime that has been happening since Sweden opened it's doors to the plague known as multiculturalism no. Literally impossible considering the war started much later. With that said your attacks are castrated on that matter. The argument can then evolve into what is causing that crime and you might say it is poverty as you have done, perhaps like some you'll say the Swedes are just really racist and they are to blame ultimately? However then perhaps we'll move on to riots like what my original post was on in response to your talk that it was simply a poverty issue and not an immigrant one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Rinkeby_riots- For two mid-June nights in a row in 2010, youth riots broke out in Rinkeby, a suburb dominated by immigrant residents, in northern Stockholm, Sweden. Up to 100 youths threw bricks, set fires and attacked the local police station in Rinkeby. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Stockholm_riots- On 19 May 2013, violent disturbances broke out in Husby, a suburb dominated by immigrants and second-generation immigrant residents, including a substantial number from Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq, in northern Stockholm, Sweden. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_social_unrest_in_Sweden- On 15 May 2016. Economist and anti-immigration pundit Tino Sanandaji linked the situation to poor integration of immigrants in Sweden and criticised the failure to publicly address problems linked to immigration by labeling all criticism as racism. Soheila Fors, founder of the Khatoon-foundation for immigrant women, described the stone-throwing youths as an increasingly more ideological "border defence", behind which ethnic enclaves are established where Sharia becomes law, enforced by radical Salafi Islamists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Rinkeby_riots- On 20 February 2017, rioting broke out in Rinkeby, a predominantly immigrant-populated suburb of the Swedish capital Stockholm. Now it is your turn. You have attempted to disengage the fact they are immigrants (of a certain kind) from the matter so I asked you to provide all the riots done by other likewise poor people who happen to be Swedes. You responded with nonsense as I guess you knew you had nothing so now I challenge you head on so there is no escape. Provide evidence or you are proven wrong no matter whatever dishonesty you decide to come out with. Unlike you I have provided evidence and am directly asking for your counter evidence you must have to have made your previous post on the matter. So come on, show us all what you have. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/feb/20/what-statistics-say-about-immigration-and-sweden/ Literally the first thing on google. What's your response? Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/feb/20/what-statistics-say-about-immigration-and-sweden/ Literally the first thing on google. What's your response? Like I said, castrated. That deals with the influx of refugees from "Syria", something which I have never stated as responsible for the issues Sweden suffers from. "In general, crime statistics have gone down the last (few) years, and no there is no evidence to suggest that new waves of immigration has lead to increased crime," Selin said. See the above? Doesn't touch me. Generally, there’s a certain over-representation of people with immigrant background in crime statistics, but that tends to be closely related to high levels of unemployment, poverty, exclusion, low language and other skills, Selin said. "Swedes with these characteristics are also overrepresented in crime statistics," he said. Here we have a sad admittance with your excuse already packaged in. So this takes us back to what I put in bold and you refused to address. Your claim, and it is your claim, that it is simply a poverty issue and not a immigrant one (well its really of just a certain kind but details). Now the incidents you said this in reference to was in regards to the rioting so that is what I provided examples for, presented again below to make it easy for you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Rinkeby_riots-For two mid-June nights in a row in 2010, youth riots broke out in Rinkeby, a suburb dominated by immigrant residents, in northern Stockholm, Sweden. Up to 100 youths threw bricks, set fires and attacked the local police station in Rinkeby. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Stockholm_riots-On 19 May 2013, violent disturbances broke out in Husby, a suburb dominated by immigrants and second-generation immigrant residents, including a substantial number from Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq, in northern Stockholm, Sweden. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_social_unrest_in_Sweden-On 15 May 2016. Economist and anti-immigration pundit Tino Sanandaji linked the situation to poor integration of immigrants in Sweden and criticised the failure to publicly address problems linked to immigration by labeling all criticism as racism. Soheila Fors, founder of the Khatoon-foundation for immigrant women, described the stone-throwing youths as an increasingly more ideological "border defence", behind which ethnic enclaves are established where Sharia becomes law, enforced by radical Salafi Islamists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Rinkeby_riots-On 20 February 2017, rioting broke out in Rinkeby, a predominantly immigrant-populated suburb of the Swedish capital Stockholm. All immigrant riots. Now you say it's a poverty issue so I challenged you to show us the riots done by Swedes in poverty. You've avoided this matter twice now so please don't do it a third time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omEbnB2cdfs tl;dr sweden censors* migrant/refugee crime within news, exposed by wikileaks Edited February 22, 2017 by fistofdoom Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComradeMilton Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Do you mean censor? Lots of countries have censors. Everything the Israeli media puts out has to go first through the Military Censor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Like I said, castrated. That deals with the influx of refugees from "Syria", something which I have never stated as responsible for the issues Sweden suffers from. Incorrect. The article deals with crime in general. The only time the article references specific population groups is "immigrants," not just Syrian refugees. Your argument hinges on the riots somehow being exceptional, despite the fact that the statistics includes the riots. Besides, if we were judging crime rates based on the number of riots, your conclusion would be that Chicago has less crime than Stockholm. Here we have a sad admittance with your excuse already packaged in. So this takes us back to what I put in bold and you refused to address. Your claim, and it is your claim, that it is simply a poverty issue and not a immigrant one (well its really of just a certain kind but details). Now the incidents you said this in reference to was in regards to the rioting so that is what I provided examples for, presented again below to make it easy for you. Nice try, but don't pick and choose my argument. Here, if it wasn't clear earlier: "The riot isn't indicative of a rising trend in violent crime in Sweden due to taking in a large portion of refugee immigrants." Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Incorrect. The article deals with crime in general. The only time the article references specific population groups is "immigrants," not just Syrian refugees. Your argument hinges on the riots somehow being exceptional, despite the fact that the statistics includes the riots. Besides, if we were judging crime rates based on the number of riots, your conclusion would be that Chicago has less crime than Stockholm. Nice try, but don't pick and choose my argument. Here, if it wasn't clear earlier: "The riot isn't indicative of a rising trend in violent crime in Sweden due to taking in a large portion of refugee immigrants." Thats your interpretation to try and worm your way ahead. The thing deals with the refugees taken in since the start of the Syrian war, that is the new wave of immigration they refer to and are defending. So a third time is it? I don't mind asking however many times it takes lad. Ibrahim went to 50+ times or however many times it was before the mods stepped in. Here we have a sad admittance with your excuse already packaged in. So this takes us back to what I put in bold and you refused to address. Your claim, and it is your claim, that it is simply a poverty issue and not a immigrant one (well its really of just a certain kind but details). Now the incidents you said this in reference to was in regards to the rioting so that is what I provided examples for, presented again below to make it easy for you. https://en.wikipedia..._Rinkeby_riots-Fortwo mid-June nights in a row in 2010, youth riots broke out in Rinkeby, a suburb dominated by immigrant residents, in northern Stockholm, Sweden. Up to 100 youths threw bricks, set fires and attacked the local police station in Rinkeby. https://en.wikipedia...tockholm_riots-On19 May 2013, violent disturbances broke out in Husby, a suburb dominated by immigrants and second-generation immigrant residents, including a substantial number from Somalia, Eritrea, Afghanistan and Iraq, in northern Stockholm, Sweden. https://en.wikipedia...rest_in_Sweden-On15 May 2016. Economist and anti-immigration pundit Tino Sanandaji linked the situation to poor integration of immigrants in Sweden and criticised the failure to publicly address problems linked to immigration by labeling all criticism as racism. Soheila Fors, founder of the Khatoon-foundation for immigrant women, described the stone-throwing youths as an increasingly more ideological "border defence", behind which ethnic enclaves are established where Sharia becomes law, enforced by radical Salafi Islamists. https://en.wikipedia..._Rinkeby_riots-On20 February 2017, rioting broke out in Rinkeby, a predominantly immigrant-populated suburb of the Swedish capital Stockholm. All immigrant riots. Now you say it's a poverty issue so I challenged you to show us the riots done by Swedes in poverty. You've avoided this matter twice now so please don't do it a third time. I don't care about it being indicative of a rising trend in violent crime or not as that is an irrelevant matter in regards to our conversation, though even your own link does say immigrants are over-presented, they simply say there hasn't been a massive spike which is only natural considering the issue of immigration there isn't as recent as the Syrian war but goes further back. Anyway I want you to defend your statement on the riots being simply poverty defended with proof. I've presented my evidence so where is yours? Surely you can find at least 1 riot by poverty stricken Swedes 2010 onward? If its poverty to blame then it should be all too easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Thats your interpretation to try and worm your way ahead. The thing deals with the refugees taken in since the start of the Syrian war, that is the new wave of immigration they refer to and are defending. So a third time is it? I don't mind asking however many times it takes lad. Ibrahim went to 50+ times or however many times it was before the mods stepped in. I don't care about it being indicative of a rising trend in violent crime or not as that is an irrelevant matter in regards to our conversation, though even your own link does say immigrants are over-presented, they simply say there hasn't been a massive spike which is only natural considering the issue of immigration there isn't as recent as the Syrian war but goes further back. Anyway I want you to defend your statement on the riots being simply poverty defended with proof. I've presented my evidence so where is yours? Surely you can find at least 1 riot by poverty stricken Swedes 2010 onward? If its poverty to blame then it should be all too easy. That's cute, but that wasn't what Trump was talking about in his campaign rally speech. But I'll humor you. So are you telling me, if I googled "Sweden crime rates after Syrian refugees," I will find an article stating that the arrival of Syrian refugees back in 2011-2012 resulted in a spike in crime? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Sweden Nice try though. Again, I've already told you my argument. Find me my statement where I said the cause of the riots was poverty. Stop putting words into my mouth. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimbitsNCoffee Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 There is a point, just one you refuse to accept for it would cause you to change how you respond. The Roz is always complimenting himself for if you can't love yourself then who can you truly love? Who said it was a 0 straight to 100 affair? There are levels to it all of course and you'll find the best time to address things is to nip it in the bud or even better when it hasn't even taken root. If you pretend there are no problems though then you will fail in such things and like a poisonous vine it will choke you of life until you are forced to take a blade to it all which will be messy. more poetry lol. I don't understand you trying to emphasize a point by using some old-English writing style. Once you start actually voicing opinions without the excessive use of subtle metaphors and excessive figurative devices I may consider properly responding to your arguments. Also, don't take this as me giving up. I have a lot more I can argue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Caecus isn't very logical, its because of his bias that logic and facts are his enemy. His deductive reasoning skills are non existent. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 That's cute, but that wasn't what Trump was talking about in his campaign rally speech. But I'll humor you. So are you telling me, if I googled "Sweden crime rates after Syrian refugees," I will find an article stating that the arrival of Syrian refugees back in 2011-2012 resulted in a spike in crime? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Sweden Nice try though. Again, I've already told you my argument. Find me my statement where I said the cause of the riots was poverty. Stop putting words into my mouth. ??? Its like you don't even read what I put down and are just arguing against an imagined opponent who you have all the answers for. What I've told you is there is no spike and that over the years long before the Syrian war the numbers increased due to immigration (of a certain kind especially). If Sweden hadn't done that disastrous policy then they wouldn't have had those riots (again, the Syrian refugees may well be gas on the flame but they are not the root cause) and their crime also would be much lower (those immigrants are over-represented in crime). Came two days later. No definite proof that it was refugee immigrants. Sure, you could say that the neighborhood that it happened in had a large immigrant population, but the neighborhood had high unemployment rates. Unemployment has historically been linked with a lot of bad things, including rioting. The riot isn't indicative of a rising trend in violent crime in Sweden due to taking in a large portion of refugee immigrants. You disavowed them of blame here by putting the blame on poverty. Where is my proof it was refugee immigrants you'll no doubt ask and to that I have to say, "Do keep up". I'm not saying they are to blame, but the immigrant population Sweden has imported over many years before the Syrian war ever began is. more poetry lol. I don't understand you trying to emphasize a point by using some old-English writing style. Once you start actually voicing opinions without the excessive use of subtle metaphors and excessive figurative devices I may consider properly responding to your arguments. Also, don't take this as me giving up. I have a lot more I can argue. I like to have fun but its all easily understood. You tackle a problem either while its small or before it can grow at all. You don't cheer it on while it gets worse and worse and then have to face up a very nasty affair. Look at Sweden for an easy example where more and more people are turning against the Muslim immigrants. Why? Because the stupid government of Sweden has happily allowed the problem to grow larger and larger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 But CNN is fake news. I don't know why people watch that shit anymore. http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/770888/Swedish-police-under-fire-after-riots-in-immigrant-suburb-of-Stockholm http://www.wsj.com/video/sweden-hit-by-riots-in-stockholm-suburb/06644F9B-D670-4CD2-8514-E24EB41F276C.html You noticed. :^) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 ??? Its like you don't even read what I put down and are just arguing against an imagined opponent who you have all the answers for. What I've told you is there is no spike and that over the years long before the Syrian war the numbers increased due to immigration (of a certain kind especially). If Sweden hadn't done that disastrous policy then they wouldn't have had those riots (again, the Syrian refugees may well be gas on the flame but they are not the root cause) and their crime also would be much lower (those immigrants are over-represented in crime). You disavowed them of blame here by putting the blame on poverty. Where is my proof it was refugee immigrants you'll no doubt ask and to that I have to say, "Do keep up". I'm not saying they are to blame, but the immigrant population Sweden has imported over many years before the Syrian war ever began is. I skim your wall texts. "Much lower?" You just saw in the link that I gave you, crime in Sweden has been the same since 1994. You also saw in the link that immigrants are over-represented in crime, sure, but they don't step outside of their expected socio-economic demographic. I see now. You think that by virtue of being immigrants/Syrian refugees/etc., they are inherently more violent and crime-prone. And you believe that my usage of the unemployment rate is refuting your belief that immigrants/Syrian refugees/etc. are inherently more crime-prone. I still defer to my last link. Again, if riots were the only thing we documented to indicate crime, your president would think Chicago is peaceful and the riot-ridden streets of LA to be a war zone. Caecus isn't very logical, its because of his bias that logic and facts are his enemy. His deductive reasoning skills are non existent. Still missing an apostrophe of elision on the "its." Somebody's got to teach you English, and it's sure as hell ain't your education secretary. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 good leaders delegate things out, and I'm pretty sure your issue with the new head of the department of education is retarded by that fact alone Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 I skim your wall texts. "Much lower?" You just saw in the link that I gave you, crime in Sweden has been the same since 1994. You also saw in the link that immigrants are over-represented in crime, sure, but they don't step outside of their expected socio-economic demographic. I see now. You think that by virtue of being immigrants/Syrian refugees/etc., they are inherently more violent and crime-prone. And you believe that my usage of the unemployment rate is refuting your belief that immigrants/Syrian refugees/etc. are inherently more crime-prone. I still defer to my last link. Again, if riots were the only thing we documented to indicate crime, your president would think Chicago is peaceful and the riot-ridden streets of LA to be a war zone. I have seen the stats that go up to 2001 or so, with later stats not being available as Sweden simply decided to stop taking them apparently. It was a pretty large over-representation and that is very doubtful to have changed. Tell me if you have a group that is over-respresented what happens when over a decade you add more and more to it, all poor, many jobless, all packed together in their ghettos? For my statement of there being lower crime if they'd done things right to be correct crime doesn't have had to have increased. Those people are overrepresented and as you pack more in that only worsens. So where is your evidence of poor Swedes rioting? Come now. What we have is two groups. They share a lot of disadvantaging traits but the rioting one has a particular trait the other group that doesn't riot hasn't. What is it? You seem to think there is some grand design here to prove crime rates going up via crime rates. There isn't. You have simply talked nonsense and I'm challenging you on it. They riot not simply because they are poor, jobless, or whatever else as otherwise Sweden would be suffering riots day in and day out all across the country. They riot because they are immigrants of a particular culture who have not and will not integrate. Now do not misunderstand as I'm sure you will. There are many good and positive immigrant groups, however that one is not one of them. Admit it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 I have seen the stats that go up to 2001 or so, with later stats not being available as Sweden simply decided to stop taking them apparently. It was a pretty large over-representation and that is very doubtful to have changed. Tell me if you have a group that is over-respresented what happens when over a decade you add more and more to it, all poor, many jobless, all packed together in their ghettos? For my statement of there being lower crime if they'd done things right to be correct crime doesn't have had to have increased. Those people are overrepresented and as you pack more in that only worsens. So where is your evidence of poor Swedes rioting? Come now. What we have is two groups. They share a lot of disadvantaging traits but the rioting one has a particular trait the other group that doesn't riot hasn't. What is it? You seem to think there is some grand design here to prove crime rates going up via crime rates. There isn't. You have simply talked nonsense and I'm challenging you on it. They riot not simply because they are poor, jobless, or whatever else as otherwise Sweden would be suffering riots day in and day out all across the country. They riot because they are immigrants of a particular culture who have not and will not integrate. Now do not misunderstand as I'm sure you will. There are many good and positive immigrant groups, however that one is not one of them. Admit it. There are several things wrong with your statement. First, you imply that the spike in crime in 2001 was due to immigrants without providing any evidence that would suggest that. Secondly, you imply that due to immigrants having a "pretty large" over-representation in crime statistics, Sweden's crime rate will spike at any moment now. That is despite the fact that Sweden has been taking large numbers (~160k) of refugees/immigrants since 2011 and has since seen no spike in crime statistics. For your argument to be true, you would have to point to a "cusp" or "maximum sustainable" number of refugees/immigrants, where extra refugees/immigrants would subsequently cause a spike in crime, of which you have no evidence for. You seem to really desperate for me to argue this point. I've already told you my argument, this is a red herring and doesn't contribute to the discussion. Even if it did, your argument is full of logical holes that it simply collapses on itself. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 you're deliberately obtuse Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimbitsNCoffee Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 I like to have fun but its all easily understood. You tackle a problem either while its small or before it can grow at all. You don't cheer it on while it gets worse and worse and then have to face up a very nasty affair. Look at Sweden for an easy example where more and more people are turning against the Muslim immigrants. Why? Because the stupid government of Sweden has happily allowed the problem to grow larger and larger. Jesus. Took you two rounds before you finally concisely said something. Sweden took a massive influx of refugees, uncontrolled and without proper vetting. Law of Averages says a good 5% of them will commit crimes, number may be higher considering what Sweden considers a "crime". The fact that the media look at every single crime to pounce on it and say every single Muslim is bad is a dangerous generalization. Many of these people are second-generation Muslims who are no better than the neighborhood Crips and/or Bloods. I disparage these actions as a bunch of fakes who simply paint refugees in bad paint. Most of the refugees are women, children, families and minorities that had to flee because they were the most targeted. Using this example not to admit properly-vetted refugees is simply logically flawed. The US has some of the harshest conditions when it comes to vetting, and the no of people that will be admitted as refugees that will commit crimes will be close to zero. There will always be opposition to thing, and immigration is one of the most hotly-debated things. The US really has very little to argue when it comes to refugees, considering they're one of the few groups of people that are actually properly vetted before being admitted. Populist/right wing politics have had a huge surge in Europe, just like Liberalism did in the early millennia, and this will probably go back and forth through generations. Both sides have positives and negatives, and this can be debated a whole bunch. I wouldn't be surprised if Geert Wilders formed coalition in The Netherlands, or Marine Le Pen managed to squeeze a coalition between FN and Les Republicains. It's how the whole "political wave" concept works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistofdoom Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 everything sucks ayy lmao Quote 01:05:55 <%fistofdoom> im out of wine 01:06:03 <%fistofdoom> i winsih i had port 01:06:39 <@JoshF{BoC}> fistofdoom: is the snowman drunk with you 01:07:32 <%fistofdoom> i knet i forgot somehnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComradeMilton Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 I wouldn't be surprised if Geert Wilders formed coalition in The Netherlands, or Marine Le Pen managed to squeeze a coalition between FN and Les Republicains. It's how the whole "political wave" concept works. Are just assuming Wilders is going to be back out of jail by then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 (edited) There are several things wrong with your statement. First, you imply that the spike in crime in 2001 was due to immigrants without providing any evidence that would suggest that. Secondly, you imply that due to immigrants having a "pretty large" over-representation in crime statistics, Sweden's crime rate will spike at any moment now. That is despite the fact that Sweden has been taking large numbers (~160k) of refugees/immigrants since 2011 and has since seen no spike in crime statistics. For your argument to be true, you would have to point to a "cusp" or "maximum sustainable" number of refugees/immigrants, where extra refugees/immigrants would subsequently cause a spike in crime, of which you have no evidence for. You seem to really desperate for me to argue this point. I've already told you my argument, this is a red herring and doesn't contribute to the discussion. Even if it did, your argument is full of logical holes that it simply collapses on itself. Just putting words in my mouth that suspiciously suit the points you are so desperate to argue against. This level of misunderstanding has to be on purpose. Never at any point, and I say this for the third time I think, have I said that refugees have spiked nor will spike the crime rate (I don't need to commit to such a thing). I have said they are very likely to be gasoline on the fire but not anything more. That could well be represented by a lowering of the overall crime rate and a upping of the over-representation we've talked about... though obviously if so then actually knowing this for certain is made difficult due to to Sweden. Could also of course up the crime rate a bit, or maybe the fuse blows and it all goes completely crazy. Now what you keep wanting is for me to state that there will be a massive spike (or alternatively that the refugees have caused a massive spike) which I refuse to do so no dice there. My position is that things will continue as they are (which ain't good no) and the issue of over-representation will simply grow worse which is perfectly logical as making a problem bigger tends to make it worse, a simple concept a child could understand (I hope you are able to). On a personal level I'm pretty sure you are overall wrong on basically any related issue here, however unlike perhaps some others you've ran into I know that such things are hard to prove, something Sweden itself has made it extra difficult which is certainly suspicious if you ask most people and in addiontion any alternative source that might tackle such an issue you will instantly dismiss anyway.. as such I don't try on that nor do I have to. Instead I've challenged you on certain other matters and you've fallen apart. Thats why you keep going back to refugees again and again because thats all you know to do in this affair. Now, for a forth time. Where are the poor Swede riots? I mean they suffer the same ailments and there is even more of them and yet... where are the riots? Come on now. Give it up already. Why are the riots happening? Because they are poor? No, because they are immigrants who have not and will not immigrate. Oh and please do not say that being poor and an immigrant is a special mix we should make exceptions for. Plenty of poor immigrants from a variety of cultures cause no trouble at all just fine. Jesus. Took you two rounds before you finally concisely said something. Sweden took a massive influx of refugees, uncontrolled and without proper vetting. Law of Averages says a good 5% of them will commit crimes, number may be higher considering what Sweden considers a "crime". The fact that the media look at every single crime to pounce on it and say every single Muslim is bad is a dangerous generalization. Many of these people are second-generation Muslims who are no better than the neighborhood Crips and/or Bloods. I disparage these actions as a bunch of fakes who simply paint refugees in bad paint. Most of the refugees are women, children, families and minorities that had to flee because they were the most targeted. Using this example not to admit properly-vetted refugees is simply logically flawed. The US has some of the harshest conditions when it comes to vetting, and the no of people that will be admitted as refugees that will commit crimes will be close to zero. There will always be opposition to thing, and immigration is one of the most hotly-debated things. The US really has very little to argue when it comes to refugees, considering they're one of the few groups of people that are actually properly vetted before being admitted. Populist/right wing politics have had a huge surge in Europe, just like Liberalism did in the early millennia, and this will probably go back and forth through generations. Both sides have positives and negatives, and this can be debated a whole bunch. I wouldn't be surprised if Geert Wilders formed coalition in The Netherlands, or Marine Le Pen managed to squeeze a coalition between FN and Les Republicains. It's how the whole "political wave" concept works. Well I am glad I rephrased it for you then as that was a good post. The countries that have talked of taking in vetted people (from the camps and not those spilling across Europe) and at reasonable enough numbers talk of what normally is a perfectly logical look at the problem. Immigrants, even refugees are not an instant negative as some people believe these days. You only need to look at the Kindertransport to see that... however there is some very serious problems in this case. To begin with there is little in the way of trust on such matters. People may well be able to believe Trump when he says they'll look on only taking in Christian refugees (due to it being such an extreme and him having shown he is willing to do such thing... but those same people would not believe a word of Obama/Clinton on the matter when they would talk on it. Second of all... the profile of the people is not good due to how those people are currently handled. Those people are going to get shoved in ghettos and simply be a drain and a negative, which will naturally amplify the strength of those who opposed them to begin with. Worse the large majority are Muslim which means they have the Islamic culture which is a culture that promotes non-integration and is heavily shielded by a certain section of societies in the western countries. That in itself seems to be an element you miss which is they may not be a "baddy" when they come over but they soon become one. If those refugees were vetted, came in manageable numbers, weren't ghettoised, and best of all weren't allow to develop into bad folk by the country tackling Islam at last... then yeah I'm with you. However we both know that is not how it goes down. Geert Wilders from what I've seen is likely to become #1 in the Netherlands (though a recent incident has happened which may hamper that) but his problem will be that getting 50+% is damn hard and so will getting people in a coalition with him. Le Pen has better odds I would say. Are just assuming Wilders is going to be back out of jail by then? They can't jail him for fear of creating a massive surge of support for him. Thats why they can judge him guilty and then give no punishment. Edited February 24, 2017 by Rozalia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Just putting words in my mouth that suspiciously suit the points you are so desperate to argue against. This level of misunderstanding has to be on purpose. Never at any point, and I say this for the third time I think, have I said that refugees have spiked nor will spike the crime rate (I don't need to commit to such a thing). I have said they are very likely to be gasoline on the fire but not anything more. That could well be represented by a lowering of the overall crime rate and a upping of the over-representation we've talked about... though obviously if so then actually knowing this for certain is made difficult due to to Sweden. Could also of course up the crime rate a bit, or maybe the fuse blows and it all goes completely crazy. Now what you keep wanting is for me to state that there will be a massive spike (or alternatively that the refugees have caused a massive spike) which I refuse to do so no dice there. My position is that things will continue as they are (which ain't good no) and the issue of over-representation will simply grow worse which is perfectly logical as making a problem bigger tends to make it worse, a simple concept a child could understand (I hope you are able to). On a personal level I'm pretty sure you are overall wrong on basically any related issue here, however unlike perhaps some others you've ran into I know that such things are hard to prove, something Sweden itself has made it extra difficult which is certainly suspicious if you ask most people and in addiontion any alternative source that might tackle such an issue you will instantly dismiss anyway.. as such I don't try on that nor do I have to. Instead I've challenged you on certain other matters and you've fallen apart. Thats why you keep going back to refugees again and again because thats all you know to do in this affair. Now, for a forth time. Where are the poor Swede riots? I mean they suffer the same ailments and there is even more of them and yet... where are the riots? Come on now. Give it up already. Why are the riots happening? Because they are poor? No, because they are immigrants who have not and will not immigrate. Oh and please do not say that being poor and an immigrant is a special mix we should make exceptions for. Plenty of poor immigrants from a variety of cultures cause no trouble at all just fine. What's the source of that graphic? I find it surprising that you would even use a graphic like that without putting down a link. I call bullshit.1997-2001 would have been mostly Bosnian refugees, correct? Which makes it irrelevant and a red herring to any discussion related today anyway since we are talking about post-Syrian civil war in 2011. And for the forth time, "poor Swede riots" are a red herring. Even if it were relevant, your argument would collapse on itself. You have made several faulty assumptions and logical fallacies. To remind you, my claim is this: "The riot isn't indicative of a rising trend in violent crime in Sweden due to taking in a large portion of refugee immigrants." For you to refute this claim, you would either need to question the source of my statistics as a fallacy of appeal to authority or present contrary evidence and explain why that evidence should be accepted over mine. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 What's the source of that graphic? I find it surprising that you would even use a graphic like that without putting down a link. I call bullshit.1997-2001 would have been mostly Bosnian refugees, correct? Which makes it irrelevant and a red herring to any discussion related today anyway since we are talking about post-Syrian civil war in 2011. And for the forth time, "poor Swede riots" are a red herring. Even if it were relevant, your argument would collapse on itself. You have made several faulty assumptions and logical fallacies. To remind you, my claim is this: "The riot isn't indicative of a rising trend in violent crime in Sweden due to taking in a large portion of refugee immigrants." For you to refute this claim, you would either need to question the source of my statistics as a fallacy of appeal to authority or present contrary evidence and explain why that evidence should be accepted over mine. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/02/we-should-practice-truth-statistics-even-when-it-hurtsArticle contains where its from. Again with the damn "red herrings". I have not been talking about the damn "Syrians". My position here has always been, and its been clear, that the issues Sweden faces is because of immigration that goes back to at least that period listed. You are trying to be deceptive there. Came two days later. No definite proof that it was refugee immigrants. Sure, you could say that the neighborhood that it happened in had a large immigrant population, but the neighborhood had high unemployment rates. Unemployment has historically been linked with a lot of bad things, including rioting. The riot isn't indicative of a rising trend in violent crime in Sweden due to taking in a large portion of refugee immigrants. You see there was a statement before that one that is very relevant as that is what I'm arguing against. The refugees don't matter here and I've tackled your defence of the immigrant population there that has been built up from before the Syrian war. So again, for the fifth time. Where are the poor and unemployed Swede riots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caecus Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/02/we-should-practice-truth-statistics-even-when-it-hurtsArticle contains where its from. Again with the damn "red herrings". I have not been talking about the damn "Syrians". My position here has always been, and its been clear, that the issues Sweden faces is because of immigration that goes back to at least that period listed. You are trying to be deceptive there. You see there was a statement before that one that is very relevant as that is what I'm arguing against. The refugees don't matter here and I've tackled your defence of the immigrant population there that has been built up from before the Syrian war. So again, for the fifth time. Where are the poor and unemployed Swede riots? Well, if you actually read the article, it would prove your point wrong. If your argument equates all immigrants as "crime-prone," the recent mass of immigrants to Sweden should have resulted in a rise in crime, which it has not. Therefore, showing outdated statistics (that even the article said was "useless" in 2017) is a red herring. You might have a better chance arguing your point from the last paragraph, which you didn't for some reason. Even if you argued the beginning of 2016 saw a rise in crime statistics, it still doesn't explain why it took at least 2 years for any rise in crime to occur since the arrival of immigrants to Sweden. You have no case here. You have done nothing to address my claim then: "Unemployment has been historically linked to a lot of bad things, including rioting." What you essentially put up was just a bunch of information on riots in Sweden, nothing refuting my claim. There are also several problems with your argument: 1. That because the riot took place in a predominately immigrant neighborhood, the participants were immigrants. This is an appeal to probability, a logical fallacy. 2. That because the participants were (based on a previous fallacy) most likely immigrants, ALL of the participants were immigrants. This is also an appeal to probability, a logical fallacy. 3. That because the participants were most likely immigrants, they were rioting over "not willing to integrate." This is a fallacy of false equivalence, causal oversimplication, and it implies a !@#$ed up fallacy of false attribution, from, presumably, Sean Hannity. All of this is wrapped up in a red herring. This argument doesn't contribute anything to the topic of discussion. Quote It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Well, if you actually read the article, it would prove your point wrong. If your argument equates all immigrants as "crime-prone," the recent mass of immigrants to Sweden should have resulted in a rise in crime, which it has not. Therefore, showing outdated statistics (that even the article said was "useless" in 2017) is a red herring. You might have a better chance arguing your point from the last paragraph, which you didn't for some reason. Even if you argued the beginning of 2016 saw a rise in crime statistics, it still doesn't explain why it took at least 2 years for any rise in crime to occur since the arrival of immigrants to Sweden. You have no case here. You have done nothing to address my claim then: "Unemployment has been historically linked to a lot of bad things, including rioting." What you essentially put up was just a bunch of information on riots in Sweden, nothing refuting my claim. There are also several problems with your argument: 1. That because the riot took place in a predominately immigrant neighborhood, the participants were immigrants. This is an appeal to probability, a logical fallacy. 2. That because the participants were (based on a previous fallacy) most likely immigrants, ALL of the participants were immigrants. This is also an appeal to probability, a logical fallacy. 3. That because the participants were most likely immigrants, they were rioting over "not willing to integrate." This is a fallacy of false equivalence, causal oversimplication, and it implies a !@#$ed up fallacy of false attribution, from, presumably, Sean Hannity. All of this is wrapped up in a red herring. This argument doesn't contribute anything to the topic of discussion. I did not say all immigrants are crime-prone and even specifically stated here that there are plenty of immigrant groups who are not crime prone. You keep treating me like your imagined opponent and so keep falling into these pitfalls. I've heard of slightly more recent stats (2004 I think) but locating these things can be difficult and I don't want to source articles that don't source. Whatever the case Sweden decided to stop taking such stats and ultimately those who speak very... strongly on these matters are likely correct that the reason for that was to stop providing evidence of the failure that was going on. You can disagree of course, no definite thing out there to explain it but its not a hard thing to logically work out why. Anyway this is why I don't bother to talk with you on the refugees and such. Sweden has purposely covered up stats and when they do that when people say they "cook the books", well the ones they haven't just burnt in the fire anyway, I am inclined to believe them. Of course such a belief isn't a strong case so I don't bother with that. What I can however bother with is over-representation and some minor support from statistics that Sweden can't erase. I've laid out the scenarios where upon crime could increase in those groups and yet the overall crime rate stay the same or decrease even already. Of please, spare us this absolute poppycock. You know it, I know it, everybody bloody knows it. Lets tackle those 3 to show how foolish and stupid you are being here and why you keep being made a loser in any of these things because you choose to defend the indefensible. Rinkeby (its riot in 2010) - Population: 89.1% Immigrant 1: The police and other government services themselves are scared to enter such a place and have to go in numbers. Your excuse #1 implies that normal people, those violent and racist Swedes I suppose, would enter the area and then... target the police? Why not the immigrants? 2: Well you got me there, plenty of white Swedish women mixed in there... wait, no there wasn't. These particular immigrant groups are not very accepting and tolerant you'll find. Even if there happened to be someone damaged enough to join them they would have been rejected. 3: You still assume I'm some Fox News watching Conservative. Can you even think and then use that thinking to adapt? Anyone who could stop and think would realise long ago that such things do not have any effect on me. Newsflash, when you are integrated you are a lot less likely to be rioting. Its why you can't find any evidence of poor Swedes rioting like the immigrants. Not integrating is very much a reason for these things. That isn't to say its fully their fault, in fact I would happily state that the ultimate blame is with Sweden and its sheer insanity of a policy. It doesn't of course stop there because below are places hit with riots. Husby: 80% Immigrant Rosengård: 86% Immigrant Rinkeby: 89.1% Immigrant I'm sure you could find poor Swedish areas that are like 99% Swede. Where are their riots? Any child could work these things out and yet you profess that you don't know anything about it. Utterly shameful. Have some honesty and courage for once and admit you are wrong. It doesn't "contribute" to you because you have all those generic responses ready and you can't hit me with any of them, so you have to keep trying to shift things and put words in my mouth so you can then use them. No. I challenged you on that issue and a conversation started between us. The immigrants, with rioting being especially important, is the subject between us. Your constant attempts to shift it all to the refugees and your other talking points you have, all very well rehearsed I'm sure, is the distraction and the so called "Red Herring". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.