Dusen wrote:
I think when it comes to solutions the following things might be worth trying out.
-An education for preachers of islam. I know they have that somewhere in Europe, i think every country should have that. Most priest today are educated as well.
-Strict control on preachers with hardcore islamic ideas traveling in from other countries, and a quick ban on those, so they can't spread their twisted ways (UK i believe is doing this already)
-Education - Much more focus on children who come from muslim families. Their parents might not be able to help them with their homework, and that might result in them not doing well in school. politicians could implement laws, so schools could keep some students with difficulties, so they could help them keep up with the rest of the class. Perhaps organize some help for homework in the local mosques.
(The suggestion regarding the school keeping students for a bit longer could also be implemented for ethnic europeans.)
-Maybe have a secular imam talk with the new refugees arriving, about western culture, to help them adjust.
Sounds like some solid suggestions. I think one of the main problems is that muslim immigrants tend to be working class, thus excluding them from a lot of opportunities. If education can be done right, a lot of problems can be solved.
Yes education is key i believe. Also my personal opinion regarding extremism no matter if it's muslim or neo nazi is that people with low income and education are more vulnerable to the extreme thinking these groups stand for .
Also I think the companies in Europe(at least in Denmark) also have to change a bit. At least in Denmark, it is easier to get a job if you have a ethnic danish name, than if your name is Muhammed. That needs to change!
People will more often that not favour someone that shares more of their "national identity. This applies worldwide. And especially to low-skilled jobs where many candidates are very much equal in skills needed for the job, in high level skill jobs this applies far less. I can't see how this can be changed.
I agree, but i guess that is a battle we will have to take in europe, just like the muslims must fight to adjust to their new home,and the customs we live by here, i think it is of most importance that the issue of what color skin or what kind of name you have, is being adressed in the debate.
But i do think, that if more non ethnic children (especially boys) do better in school, I think that will help the process. Multiculturalism isn't easy, by no means. But things that are worth having rarely does come easy (think of our democracy and free speech)
Paul23 wrote:
First of, you don't need to be part of the RAF, to be a left-wing extremist. We have the MG and the RAZ nowadays.
Just a few...
It's obvious that things like trespassing and resistance will be quite high for the left-wing - in most cases it's leftists blocking nazi marches, not the other way around. And the reason why the number of right-wing arsonists is so low is that burning down a refugees home doesn't make you right-wing nowadays. Essentially those statistics say more about the way crime is interpreted than the way crime is commited. Also shout out for quoting the biggest German conspiracy theory forum, trustworthy sources are always cool to see.
The stats are for the german "Verfassungsschutz". Sorry if these stats don't are like you want them to and hence they are not valid. I'm sorry for that. Also I think that our left-wing extremists are even dumber than our neo-nazis.
Neo-Nazis may follow an ideology, which I don't agree with, but at least they manage to have their demonstrations rightfully registered, while the RAZ and the MG just provoke the neo-nazis, by attacking a registered demonstration. ALso attacking the Army isn't really intelligent either.
The RAZ commited four explosive attacks, with zero casualties, the last one five years ago. They are certainly a massive danger. The MG was dissolved in 1991 (EDIT: and was non-violent anyway). That's certainly worse than the NSU or anyone burning down refugee housing.
The MG was founded in 2001. So they cannot disband in 1991...
Mainly they attacked the police, politicians, the Bundeswehr and so on...
The RAZ commited explosive attacks with zero casualties?
And?
In Bautzen they burned down a future asylum home with zero casualties...so the neo-nazis are no danger either.
In my opinion, we can be lucky, that our right-wing extremists, or neo-nazis for that matter, are just a bunch of followers. Luckily only a few have the balls(in a negative way) to make trouble.
Dusen wrote:
I think when it comes to solutions the following things might be worth trying out.
-An education for preachers of islam. I know they have that somewhere in Europe, i think every country should have that. Most priest today are educated as well.
-Strict control on preachers with hardcore islamic ideas traveling in from other countries, and a quick ban on those, so they can't spread their twisted ways (UK i believe is doing this already)
-Education - Much more focus on children who come from muslim families. Their parents might not be able to help them with their homework, and that might result in them not doing well in school. politicians could implement laws, so schools could keep some students with difficulties, so they could help them keep up with the rest of the class. Perhaps organize some help for homework in the local mosques.
(The suggestion regarding the school keeping students for a bit longer could also be implemented for ethnic europeans.)
-Maybe have a secular imam talk with the new refugees arriving, about western culture, to help them adjust.
Sounds like some solid suggestions. I think one of the main problems is that muslim immigrants tend to be working class, thus excluding them from a lot of opportunities. If education can be done right, a lot of problems can be solved.
Yes education is key i believe. Also my personal opinion regarding extremism no matter if it's muslim or neo nazi is that people with low income and education are more vulnerable to the extreme thinking these groups stand for .
Also I think the companies in Europe(at least in Denmark) also have to change a bit. At least in Denmark, it is easier to get a job if you have a ethnic danish name, than if your name is Muhammed. That needs to change!
People will more often that not favour someone that shares more of their "national identity. This applies worldwide. And especially to low-skilled jobs where many candidates are very much equal in skills needed for the job, in high level skill jobs this applies far less. I can't see how this can be changed.
I agree, but i guess that is a battle we will have to take in europe, just like the muslims must fight to adjust to their new home,and the customs we live by here, i think it is of most importance that the issue of what color skin or what kind of name you have, is being adressed in the debate.
But i do think, that if more non ethnic children (especially boys) do better in school, I think that will help the process. Multiculturalism isn't easy, by no means. But things that are worth having rarely does come easy (think of our democracy and free speech)
Well I certainly agree, education will be key. But even going about education guarantees nothing. These Muslim kids will go to school with kids that see these scenes on tv, that most likely than not will see Muslims in bad light, influenced by parents. There will be bullying, bullying lead to isolation etc. It's a very delicate system that I can't see governments handle well.
Calling us democracy is the point I strongly disagree, democracy is a concept that is an illusion, oligarchy is what all countries ever have been and ever will be, until people revolt, there is a revolution, new people come to power and another oligarchy begins.
I think an issue is breaking down the wall of difference between ethnic europeans and muslim immigrants. Often they go in each their group, which is ofc. okay, but i just think it would be beneficial if the two groups could mix a bit more.
I don't have the answer for how you could make that happend, but it is crucial i believe.
Well, i agree that we might not have real democracy, since we elect people who then basicly do whatever they want until next election. The Swiss have real democracy. But i still do think that european countries are runned in a democratic way since we can change government, if they dissapoints us.
Compared to the US, i think we are doing pretty well. Cause if there is any place in the western world were democracy is lagging, it's there. There is no doubt that big money from rich companies run everything, trough lobyisme.
I hope that we don't end up like the US. Despite the fact that we sometimes have our own problems, it really is nothing compared to what's going on in USA.
Paul23 wrote:
First of, you don't need to be part of the RAF, to be a left-wing extremist. We have the MG and the RAZ nowadays.
Just a few...
It's obvious that things like trespassing and resistance will be quite high for the left-wing - in most cases it's leftists blocking nazi marches, not the other way around. And the reason why the number of right-wing arsonists is so low is that burning down a refugees home doesn't make you right-wing nowadays. Essentially those statistics say more about the way crime is interpreted than the way crime is commited. Also shout out for quoting the biggest German conspiracy theory forum, trustworthy sources are always cool to see.
The stats are for the german "Verfassungsschutz". Sorry if these stats don't are like you want them to and hence they are not valid. I'm sorry for that. Also I think that our left-wing extremists are even dumber than our neo-nazis.
Neo-Nazis may follow an ideology, which I don't agree with, but at least they manage to have their demonstrations rightfully registered, while the RAZ and the MG just provoke the neo-nazis, by attacking a registered demonstration. ALso attacking the Army isn't really intelligent either.
The RAZ commited four explosive attacks, with zero casualties, the last one five years ago. They are certainly a massive danger. The MG was dissolved in 1991 (EDIT: and was non-violent anyway). That's certainly worse than the NSU or anyone burning down refugee housing.
The MG was founded in 2001. So they cannot disband in 1991...
Mainly they attacked the police, politicians, the Bundeswehr and so on...
The RAZ commited explosive attacks with zero casualties?
And?
In Bautzen they burned down a future asylum home with zero casualties...so the neo-nazis are no danger either.
In my opinion, we can be lucky, that our right-wing extremists, or neo-nazis for that matter, are just a bunch of followers. Luckily only a few have the balls(in a negative way) to make trouble.
Four attacks would be the main point. Compared to hundreds of times refugee homes have burned down. And what MG are you talking of? The Marxistische Gruppe? That definitely disbanded in 1991...
Paul23 wrote:
First of, you don't need to be part of the RAF, to be a left-wing extremist. We have the MG and the RAZ nowadays.
Just a few...
It's obvious that things like trespassing and resistance will be quite high for the left-wing - in most cases it's leftists blocking nazi marches, not the other way around. And the reason why the number of right-wing arsonists is so low is that burning down a refugees home doesn't make you right-wing nowadays. Essentially those statistics say more about the way crime is interpreted than the way crime is commited. Also shout out for quoting the biggest German conspiracy theory forum, trustworthy sources are always cool to see.
The stats are for the german "Verfassungsschutz". Sorry if these stats don't are like you want them to and hence they are not valid. I'm sorry for that. Also I think that our left-wing extremists are even dumber than our neo-nazis.
Neo-Nazis may follow an ideology, which I don't agree with, but at least they manage to have their demonstrations rightfully registered, while the RAZ and the MG just provoke the neo-nazis, by attacking a registered demonstration. ALso attacking the Army isn't really intelligent either.
The RAZ commited four explosive attacks, with zero casualties, the last one five years ago. They are certainly a massive danger. The MG was dissolved in 1991 (EDIT: and was non-violent anyway). That's certainly worse than the NSU or anyone burning down refugee housing.
The MG was founded in 2001. So they cannot disband in 1991...
Mainly they attacked the police, politicians, the Bundeswehr and so on...
The RAZ commited explosive attacks with zero casualties?
And?
In Bautzen they burned down a future asylum home with zero casualties...so the neo-nazis are no danger either.
In my opinion, we can be lucky, that our right-wing extremists, or neo-nazis for that matter, are just a bunch of followers. Luckily only a few have the balls(in a negative way) to make trouble.
Four attacks would be the main point. Compared to hundreds of times refugee homes have burned down. And what MG are you talking of? The Marxistische Gruppe? That definitely disbanded in 1991...
With MG, I mean the "Militante Gruppe".
Also you tend to forget, that only a minority of the asylum-home-attacks are from right-wingers.
Paul23 wrote:
First of, you don't need to be part of the RAF, to be a left-wing extremist. We have the MG and the RAZ nowadays.
Just a few...
It's obvious that things like trespassing and resistance will be quite high for the left-wing - in most cases it's leftists blocking nazi marches, not the other way around. And the reason why the number of right-wing arsonists is so low is that burning down a refugees home doesn't make you right-wing nowadays. Essentially those statistics say more about the way crime is interpreted than the way crime is commited. Also shout out for quoting the biggest German conspiracy theory forum, trustworthy sources are always cool to see.
The stats are for the german "Verfassungsschutz". Sorry if these stats don't are like you want them to and hence they are not valid. I'm sorry for that. Also I think that our left-wing extremists are even dumber than our neo-nazis.
Neo-Nazis may follow an ideology, which I don't agree with, but at least they manage to have their demonstrations rightfully registered, while the RAZ and the MG just provoke the neo-nazis, by attacking a registered demonstration. ALso attacking the Army isn't really intelligent either.
The RAZ commited four explosive attacks, with zero casualties, the last one five years ago. They are certainly a massive danger. The MG was dissolved in 1991 (EDIT: and was non-violent anyway). That's certainly worse than the NSU or anyone burning down refugee housing.
The MG was founded in 2001. So they cannot disband in 1991...
Mainly they attacked the police, politicians, the Bundeswehr and so on...
The RAZ commited explosive attacks with zero casualties?
And?
In Bautzen they burned down a future asylum home with zero casualties...so the neo-nazis are no danger either.
In my opinion, we can be lucky, that our right-wing extremists, or neo-nazis for that matter, are just a bunch of followers. Luckily only a few have the balls(in a negative way) to make trouble.
Four attacks would be the main point. Compared to hundreds of times refugee homes have burned down. And what MG are you talking of? The Marxistische Gruppe? That definitely disbanded in 1991...
With MG, I mean the "Militante Gruppe".
Also you tend to forget, that only a minority of the asylum-home-attacks are from right-wingers.
@Dippofix:
What's wrong with mmnews? Didn't notice conspiracy stuff there, but can't say I'm a regular visitor.
Why even attack the source and not trying to prove the information wrong. It's tough to get an open discussion going if one decides if a link is valid or not.
Dippofix wrote:
Back in the early 2000s, the NPD (the post 1945 version of the NSDAP) was supposed to be banned. It turned out that wasn't possible. Why? Basically the Verfassungsschutz (which means "protection of constitution, btw) was so involved in running the party that it could not be deemed unconstitutional anymore. Employees of the Verfassungsschutz also played a rather big part in supporting the NSU, which killed at least 10 people in the early to mid 2000s. The Verfassungschutz might not be the best source when it comes to right-wing extremism...
I totally agree with what you've written here as it is what I've researched, too.
But not only huge parts of right-wing extremism is state sponsored, it's the same with the political left (late RAF, Celler Loch). East German Stasi sponsored left and right wing extremists in Western Germany, too.
And globally secret NATO armies (Gladio) infiltrated and used left and right terrorist groups to scare the populations and push their political agenda.
It seems to be all about divide and conquer. The radicalised on both sides will end as mislead tools, anyway.
So far countless times the politicians say we are at WAR, but they wait to raid suspect places after major attack has happened??? What on earth? So will they leave this after few days until next big attack where they continue their raiding again. Very perplexing.
I say we send ground troops in around Syria and Iraq fully equiped and kill any top ISIS members they find and the route out our own countries and kill any ISIS jihandists we find. Expensive operation but its time to fully go to war against this vermin.
Ste117 - Whilst I agree with you it will never happen, despite months of bombing on so called Isis targets they seem to be getting stronger and in every European Country too, this is going to be a long and bloody battle with a lot more innocent people killed along the way.....
Because things went so well last time there was an invasion of Iraq by Western forces. It's not like that caused the collapse of a government and in the following power vacum Islamic State established itself and rose to become a dominant regional power.
And i'm sure it's totally a good idea to persecute our own population based purely off a fear. How do you prove someone is radicalised to the extent they could be a danger? Do we round up all the Muslims and send them away to special camps?
TheManxMissile wrote:
Because things went so well last time there was an invasion of Iraq by Western forces. It's not like that caused the collapse of a government and in the following power vacum Islamic State established itself and rose to become a dominant regional power.
And i'm sure it's totally a good idea to persecute our own population based purely off a fear. How do you prove someone is radicalised to the extent they could be a danger? Do we round up all the Muslims and send them away to special camps?
While what you are saying is true, we are at war and actions are needed. Just sitting and waiting for next attack to happen ain't going help anybody.
But we shouldn't worry, give it few years Syria will be empty and Europeans can migrate over there
Wow, that's some emotional day I went through yesterday. The day seemed to start normally, apart from the fact that I almost overslept. I was running late for my day at the company where I work as a trainee. Luckily, this company is situated only two blocks away from where I live. Just before I ran out of my room, I noticed I had forgotten to charge my phone overnight.
So I plugged my phone in and left it, knowing that I would be able to unplug it a few hours later as I spend my lunch break at home every day.
I hurried and arrived just in time. When I got to my desk, colleagues of mine were turning up the radio volume. As they told me about the explosions at the airport, one image kept flashing by: the face of a co-student of mine whose traineeship is currently going on at that very same airport. And I'm talking about someone I truly care about.
I could only think about phoning her as soon as I could, but you can already guess it: I didn't have my phone. I didn't know her phone number by heart, so I couldn't use the phone at my desk either. Not that it woul've mattered, the phone network was down anyway.
So I spend the whole morning waiting and failing to concentrate on what I am normally at the company for. I was stuck with some kind of feeling that kept gnawing away at me. Never have I been so happy to leave at noon.
So I rushed home to find out she hadn't been in the building that morning because she was supposed to work Tuesday's evening shift.
I went back to the office, put at ease, and finished my working day, but the worst was yet to come. When I came home in the evening, I ended up sitting alone on my bed. That's when everything started to dawn on me: what happened in the country I have always felt so safe in, and how scared I had been thinking about that friend of mine... I ended up in tears. I felt so relieved she was safe and felt guilty for feeling relieved at the very same moment. Guilty towards people whose loved ones didn't make it.
This must be nothing compared to what people who actually lost a loved one have been and will be put through, but God, that feeling I had then, sitting on my bed and staring in front of myself... That combination of guilt, relief, powerlessness and uncertainty: that's something I never want to experience again. Never.
Ground operation in the Middle East is not a good idea by any means.
First ,we dont really know who is who there and it would only lead to many dead civilians. Also what Manx said, it would only destabilize the region even more and since destabilization od the region caused the troubles at first place, why we would do that?
Second, major world powers have different interests in the region, especially USA and Russia. They of course say we all have to stick together in fight against terror, but actually they dont give a fuck, what is important are their global interests. Russia wants to support Assad and will target his opponents like they did with airstrikes.
USA want to dethrone Assad and would supoport groups that are willing to take actions against him, even when they should turn out as terrorists in the end (that is what they did in Afghanistan in 80s and that is what they did in Middle East already). Islamic State begun to form in Iraq war prisons, later supoorted by many smaller groups directly supported by Saudi Arabia and USA.
Turkey wants to destroy Kurds and everythuing else is not an issue for them.
EU is not able to take any actions, it is economical fellowship, not military one. They are only able to decide during five summits, that they will meet again on sixth summit, where they will talk about establishing of seventh summit (you get it by now).
What we need to do, is to act on European soil. But act, not spend 90% of time talking empty phrases to media and hug people to give them warm feeling. Secret services failed totally in Belgium and that should not happen again.
But then again, there is a question of how many of our private freedom we should give up to be able to fight secret terorist cells.
Terrible things that went down here. Have quite some friends who work in Brussels but they're all fine.
Worst thing is, things like this happen every single day.
I still fail to understand why there is so much hatred and war in the world. Why there are people who actually want conflict. That's beyond my understanding...
Ian Butler wrote:
Terrible things that went down here. Have quite some friends who work in Brussels but they're all fine.
Worst thing is, things like this happen every single day.
I still fail to understand why there is so much hatred and war in the world. Why there are people who actually want conflict. That's beyond my understanding...
You dont understand because you are naive Ian, sorry to say that but that is howe i see it. Hate is natural to men for thousand of years and it will be always present, if we wont get rid of it through human genom (which would be terrible). Also there are always people who want to gain something on behalf of loss of the other ones, be it fame, acknowledgement or solid goods, or just making their point.
Ian Butler wrote:
Terrible things that went down here. Have quite some friends who work in Brussels but they're all fine.
Worst thing is, things like this happen every single day.
I still fail to understand why there is so much hatred and war in the world. Why there are people who actually want conflict. That's beyond my understanding...
You dont understand because you are naive Ian, sorry to say that but that is howe i see it. Hate is natural to men for thousand of years and it will be always present, if we wont get rid of it through human genom (which would be terrible). Also there are always people who want to gain something on behalf of loss of the other ones, be it fame, acknowledgement or solid goods, or just making their point.
I didn't mean I didn't literally understand it.
I just can't understand it, emotionally.
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
I know, just that life turned me a bit into a cynical person, so i have to share some of it.
I balance between cynical and idealist.
But despite being cynical, I can't get in the mindset of murder or war.
And I presume that you getting cynical means you once had a hard time grasping it, too, otherwise you wouldn't have turned cynical
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
