Immigration discussion

[mellowautomata]

If I got promised heaven, I'd be skeptical : ever heard the expression too good to be true?

Not how it works, since we already assume that you did buy into it. Sorry, not every human being is perfect, especially during times of despair. For example many "natural product" scams are targeted towards people who have illnesses which conventional medicine cannot cure and they sell really well to those people. You can't just assume that people are perfect at all times and pass conviction on their actions based on this assumption.

You are trying to make me sypmathize with criminals : no. They broke a law, and they CHOSE to embark over seas with a shitty raft. Even if they get shelled out the water, that was their choice to do so.

You know what? I'll just leave this conversation. Clearly you cannot talk about these issues seriously and you are heavily biased against refugees. I guess I'm disappointed but not surprised. Looking at the rest of your post, this impression just strengthens.

[mumblemumble]

Not how it works, since we already assume that you did buy into it. Sorry, not every human being is perfect, especially during times of despair. For example many "natural product" scams are targeted towards people who have illnesses which conventional medicine cannot cure and they sell really well to those people. You can't just assume that people are perfect at all times and pass conviction on their actions based on this assumption.

I can see SOME validation to this : its easier to be conned, which is why ALL of us should be skeptical of EVERYTHING. And I think allowing people to fail is a necessary evil to reinforce the idea of being skeptical. Rather than rioting, they could spread the word of "how awful Europe is, giving free housing and letting men off of rape charges".

I don't assume people are perfect, but people should suffer consequences for poor judgement.

heavily biased against refugees ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

Fixed that for ya mate.

[BetaSpectre]

Immigrants aren't your own nation's citizens. It's more or less an invasion if they decide to squat on Govt land. But honestly the thing is Europe had pretty open policies and narratives of letting them stay, running most of the world organization meant to prevent war, and aid those in need.

Essentially a bunch of white people got together said they'd help make the world a better place, and now the world comes to their door step.

Just like giving a handout to a hobo, Europe is reluctant, but feels obliged to help. Opinions are changing turning more conservative in response, but this is seen all the time in the USA where conservative parents, and idealistic liberal children at odds in the political spectrums.

One hoards resources, the other wants to hand them out but there's not enough to give unless it's somehow produced.

Feeding and housing immigrants should be a given, refugee camps can do that. But giving a social and economical lifestyle isn't practical. IMO feeding and housing is only as good as preventing massive crime from starving desperate people. They ought to have their own nation/lands. And that's what Israel is for. The creation of a new land for immigrants.

[mumblemumble]

its funny you call israel a nation of immigrants : do you mean the jews, whom typically immigrate everywhere FROM israel and hold dual citizenships in many places? Or muslims who wish to destroy israel and the jews by having open borders, and immigrating there?

[mellowautomata]

So are you guys even European? Because it sounds like you ain't.

[mumblemumble]

It sounds like I'm not because this would be hate speech, getting me arrested in Europe right?

Free speech covers hate speech too, long as you aren't actively advocating for unlawful violence.

how can refugees have it that bad, if theres LAWS against criticizing them?

[mellowautomata]

Nah fam, it sounds like you're not because you're delusional about how things are in Europe. People do get prosecuted here for rape. But thanks for the confirmation — you're exclusively talking about things you have no idea of. No firsthand experience and it seems your sources are.. what, Breitbart?

[mumblemumble]

People who don't have brown skin you mean? I think its pretty racist to treat people different, so this person should be put in jail for JUST as much time as a swedish man who raped a little girl.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/14812/muslim-sweden-gets-40-hours-community-service-joseph-curl

This guy got community service. If there was ever a rape culture, THAT is it. The guy deserves death for his actions

In the related articles you can find countless other cases of abuse from "refugees".

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/10/26/john-guandolo-anti-muslim-hate-speech-prosecutions-europe-portend-destruction-liberty-west/

Also, what is your case against brietbart? I put up information as to why I'm against immigrants, whats your issue with brietbart? If you cannot illustrate a reason WHY you dislike it, I simply will dismiss you mocking it, as should anyone with any intellectual integrity.

Also, don't call me "Fam". I am not your family, your blood, your culture, or anything. Fam is IDIOTIC to say, as its not even proper English, and I am by no means part of your family. Your very culture you live in hates people like me, so don't make such mockery.

[mellowautomata]

1. You're using a source that uses Fria Tider as a source without specifying which article we're talking about and it apparently used google translate. Yeah, legit source.

2. As an European I'm bit confused: are you implying that Sweden represents that of all Europe? Sweden has the loosest immigration policy out of all of Europe, you see. Their biggest issues related to immigration is actually their failure to locate immigrants all about Sweden which resulted into suburban areas such as Malmö that, relatively speaking, is packed with immigrants.

3. You don't understand what rape culture means. It's a thesis by second-wave feminists which says that the juridic process in societies that deals with rape is often blaming the victim through myriad of ways. Later on the meaning was extended to any kind of victim blaming related to rape by anyone out there. This has nothing to do with rape culture.

4. Now now, looks like I guessed that Breitbart part right. I guessed it right, you have no clue about Europe, fam.

[mumblemumble]

I can't speak for fria tider (especially with the language barrier) but honestly i fail to see how, google translate or not, you could have "rape" and "40 hours community service" both in the same article. I think thats all thats really important. Also, considering it seems they put themselves on the line facing "hate speech" possibly, I'm inclined to think they do it for truth, considering I see no other symptoms of them lying.

Sweden is very different, and they have been damaged beyond repair : I hope in ww3 they get annexed, just to repair them from their broken state. I agree, not all places are as bad, but the fact sweden is packed with immigrants, shames men for "manspreading", but then is (was?) rape capitol of the world shows something is horrendously wrong : to which many think immigrants are the cause, because honestly, what else could it be? Especially since swedish men were kind of turning into pussycats with the extreme feminism, till the rape suddenly started, and no local men defending...

Rape culture was a joke : at least, how feminists mean it : but there is indeed a culture of rape which is going on in Europe, its imported. That was my point : though I wish these women could be armed, I'd love nothing more than European women able to fill rapists full of lead to the point there no body left to mop up, just ground meat.

What exactly is your problem with brietbart? Or are you just one of those morons who teases someone for something they do with 0 evidence or data for WHY its bad?  Because those people I don't take seriously : christian, muslim, LGBT, or whatever, if you shame someone without any data or argument, you are full of shit.

[Kegereneku]

As someone who actually live in Europe and in one of the richest country crossed by refugee/would be immigrant, I can confirm that Mumblemumble's diatribe are just his usual poorly researched -biased when not fallacious- arguments. Trying to justify and impose his own point of view with a disregard for actual fact as long as he believe he look right.

Anyway, we all know any topic involving the mumbling madman will devolve into explaining him how to reason correctly and what are trustworthy source of information.

So...

What exactly is your problem with brietbart?

They regularly publish data that are unverified, proven, demonstrated false by either reality or other real-news network, that is when they don't publish propaganda with a clear political agenda or conspiracy theories to make money from it as clickbait.

Thus it cannot be used as a reliable source of information, those who do tend to fit into three category :
(a) people with poor judgment who may survive the consequences
(b) people who want to impose their viewpoints to the gullible above
(c) people who derive fun out of their silly claim

The only reasons we even talk about this website is because of its link via Bannon to Trump, who himself have a shaky relationship with truth. Beyond that it is only a source of comedy, a tragic comedy.
http://www.cracked.com/article_24363_6-mind-boggling-ways-breitbart-fails-to-report-news.html

[mumblemumble]

Which country is that? It also doesn't help if you are indeed in VERY wealthy areas, as you will naturally be AWAY from the problems common people face.

I hope you keep this crap in mind

You say "unverified" and "demonstrated false" but do not cite anything with it. Thankfully you provided a link, so I'll demolish that.

1: quotes : This is done by news companies of ALL sorts, ALL the time, cnn, fox, msnbc, ect. Ever seen a quote along the lines of "We will build America... ... ... with the help of our allies" or something similar? This means text was cut out. What matters here is NOT if stuff was cut out, but if its accurate, and in these statements,  even in the articles they mention, it seems very accurate. Worst one in the article is where obama was reported by his team to "be the closest thing to a jew" (ironic since the jewish friends I have think hes a muslim, and hate him), in that its an alleged reporting from his team, but its still that far off : and the hypothetical example with trump they list is so completely different, and just a stretch to make a poop joke about trump. Sad. At best what they accuse them of is not an exact quote in the title, because fitting the whole quote in the title would take up half the page, even though they effectively said the same thing.

2: I don't think brietbart EVER tried to say hatecrimes do not exist : this is a strawman by cracked's part, which instantly makes me think CRACKED is worthless as news. They are showing fake hate crimes are a serious problem, and they are. Its ALSO important to keep in mind hate crimes are not all equal : killing an entire family of jewish / whatever minority you want to insert, is NOTHING compared to calling someone a slur : And this is beyond the fact I think hate crimes are stupid, and you should be arrested on actions, not motiv : this is mainly used as a political tool to oppress people : for instance, what if a gay person beats up a christian for not agreeing? not a hatecrime. What if a revenge beating happens, and the person is called a faggot during it? Hatecrime. Its hypocritical to begin with, motive should not matter as much as actions : If I beat someone, me saying nasty words or not should have nothing to do with the fact I beat them up. Even southpark understood this "hate crime law, a vicious hipocracy"

But beyond my personal views, they never advocated that hate crimes don't happen. But I do agree with them that people should be allowed to say "gay, faggot, and queer", because freedom of speech is important : people are free to dislike me if I spew it everywhere, but it shouldn't be punished just for being used sparingly. not by law, and not by employers.

3 : This is more a disagreement on what constitutes "a war on women" by either party. The left often says slut shaming, promoting traditional gender roles, and chivalry is "a war on women" when really its promoting good, healthy values, good for men AND for women : Whores tend not to be very well off, traditional women tend to have more successful marriage, and chivalry allows for good women, and gentle men. However they also ignore things like islamic families doing honor killings for daughters attending a dance, even in america, FGM, treatment of women as property in other cultures, ect... meanwhile brietbart is pretty much the opposite, promoting traditional aspects for the most part, and calling out oppressive cultures, and promiscuity, which is damaging to women, and society.

Basically it depends if you think telling a woman to not be a whore is worse than treating women as property and killing them for acting like a "whore". Though really, the expression on BOTH sides is a bit sensationalist, even if one is more valid.

I also find it odd they brush over the idea of the stomping on freedom of religion, but then point on stomping on "womans rights" despite the fact women have the right to chose who they sleep with. And they mock brietbart to ignore the article of mental health risks of abortion : something I've grown to expect, being a scoffers. Scroffers cannot be taken seriously whatsover, so this has already shown to me to take this sight with a handful of salt. Infact it gets worse, as they list articles which shows DATA, and cracked responds with something along the lines of "riiiight, its SOOOOO baaaad isn't it?". Theres no scientific discussion, just being a pompous ass. And the last thing they list with drinking while pregnant, the article actually makes an interesting point, about how drugs might not be AS bad as expected. And the OP was not saying "it was healthy for her to drink alchohol for me", he was saying he was glad she drank, RATHER than abort him : and I agree, just like I'd rather get screamed at than stabbed. Doesn't mean I want people to scream at me, just means it lesser of two evils. Though I DO need to acknowlege that yes, keeping chemicals out of the system entirely IS preferred.

YES, brietbart is kinda bad at slightly clickbaitish titles, which generate clicks : but this is so common I cannot really fault them. Especially since their articles (which cracked apparently doesn't read) actually contain interesting stuff.

4 : This I find rather ironic : again, ignoring a lot of information.

They particularly ignore any mention of transexual sex offenses out there : which actually prompts an interesting question : does a transexual instantly become a cis male when commiting sexual assault?

In all seriousness, the stories are mentioned because, legally speaking, there is NO way to keep a man outside a bathroom now if he SAYS he is a woman : you say your a woman, you get in. And these are examples of that. This is why I say transgenders MUST be better defined before they get any special rights, period. Otherwise you get these abuses : hell, in seattle, a liberal bastion, one man legally went into a womans lockerrooms around little girls and couldn't be kicked out cause he said he was a woman, and he had no hormones, dress, or even shaved face. I also suspect one says a man with stubble, a dress, who calls himself a girl is a "transexual" if they are beaten up, but if they molest a child, they will call the same person a "cis male" . This is why I HATE transexuality : its so vague that anyone can warp it anyway they want. Theres no definition, its just a title thrown around, and mental abnormality.

Its even worse when they talk about religious freedom vs homosexual militancy, where buisnesses are shut down because "embrace homosexuality, OR ELSE", and people allow it. And yet they coyly talk like they have no idea what the problem is : bs. If a homosexual bakery can refuse to bake a cake with a bible quote about homosexuals having their blood upon them, then a christian bakery can refuse to make a homosexual cake. But this shows that there is indeed privilege in america for SOME groups.

5 : Considering people have called me a nazi for not thinking trump is that bad, frankly I don't give a damn. Besides some of the articles are true, jews having guns would of made ww2 less catastrophic.

Seriously, lots of others on the left make comparisons to hitler, nazis, halocaust, and MANY people said trump was pretty much hitler : so this stuff is BS, because the left is no better at all.

6 : Lol, hilary? Well first off, the cunt lost, so thats not important for right now, second, hilaries health WAS messed up, and she was going kinda insane, and collapsing on stage, and third, didn't everyone on the left obsess over donald trumps MENTAL health? Seriously, buncha damn hipocrits.

Anyway, overall, what I got was that brietbart are slightly clickbaitish in making titles, and that they aren't afraid of triggering others : neither of which makes a bad news site.

If you have anything ELSE to add, go ahead, but I still say its not that bad, and I'd rather have serious discussion of brietbart to the snarky BS of cracked anyday.

Also, if those are the 6 "most mind boggling fails" then I'm not at all disappointed in them. The many of the fails would only be fails if you are a leftist, who supports hilary, supports all the LGBT, think you should always believe "victims", ect.

....I see no reason to view them as bad, after reading all that link and viewing the articles they cite themselves : and this whole discussion makes me doubt the discussion on immigrants more, and makes me think people wish to vilify a site so NOBODY checks it out because "its junk", before letting themselves read and judge for themselves. The only part I conceed is they are a bit edgy, and are looking to aggitate people : but frankly even THIS feels like a necessary evil, when everyone is demanding safe spaces , which will inturn make them emotionally weak and feeble.

this is actually why I like crowder for instance : he advocates for fans to read brietbart, salon, huffpost, jezabel, and countless other sights with different opinions : because he doesn't want you taking his word alone.


....But I've never seen this on the left, or from illegal immigrants.

But back to your argument, I'd LOVE to hear which country you are in, even if you didn't include what city or town.

[SpaceDorf]

As someone who actually live in Europe and in one of the richest country crossed by refugee/would be immigrant, I can confirm that Mumblemumble's diatribe are just his usual poorly researched -biased when not fallacious- arguments. Trying to justify and impose his own point of view with a disregard for actual fact as long as he believe he look right.

As Kegereneku I live on the receiving end of the refugee wave.
In a town that actually houses and supports them.

It is strange for both sides, War, Religion and Terrorism aside, there is a influx of thraumatized People, elderly, children, maybe even disfigured or in other ways disabled, who do not speak the local language, have a completely different cultural background and education.

This is a logistic and bureaucratic nightmare.
People were and are put whereever there is room, the same way when a natural disaster happens.
The need food, clothes, money, papers, they need to apply for refugee status, this needs to be processed and so on ..
and that is the best case scenario where everybody behaves.
My Town has a University and two colleges, we allready have a problem with affordable living because of the student influx every year. ...
Looping Back to the "Syrian Rimworld Pirate" - Do you think a Refugee, even in Germany, has the money, time and possibility to afford a PC and Rimworld ?
This would tie into Integration .. how do you get a job in a industrial nation where education is key ?
As I happen to know someone with the National Agency for Work .. it is nearly impossible to place refugees in any job ..

Well our Grandparents build some camps a few years ago .. we could reopen and use those .. but I think the political backlash would even drown out Trumps latest Foxtrott Uniform for a week or so ..

[mellowautomata]

Also, what is your case against brietbart? I put up information as to why I'm against immigrants, whats your issue with brietbart? If you cannot illustrate a reason WHY you dislike it, I simply will dismiss you mocking it, as should anyone with any intellectual integrity.

Disliking Breitbart follows from having functioning brains. Heck, you're defending Breitbart (later) on the account that other media is "just as bad". And generally that's true — media is pretty terrible. Which is why you shouldn't form your opinions solely on what media has to say. And that's exactly what you seemed to do.

Let's face it fam, you're just a bigot. Talking to you about these (political) topics is equal to that of simply wasting time. Just warn your opponents next time, so they'll just know to avoid talking with you altogether hopefully. That saves their time and, I guess, it saves your time.

[Kegereneku]

which instantly makes me think CRACKED is worthless as news

They never claimed to be one and yet you still learn more from them than breitbart. Which say a lot at how bad breibart is at that.
Frankly I didn't expected a single link to send you on a new diatribe over it. Then again you defend the darndest things (like how you believe in Infinite-Energy Generator on that other topic), so no real surprise.

You say "unverified" and "demonstrated false" but do not cite anything with it.

I did, I'm not required to spoonfeed you common facts you should already know about (if you didn't know about Breitbart being accused of fake news, I suggest you start reading other website, for comparison at least)
The Cracked article was full of good sources already, but if you want other websites...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2017/mar/24/breitbarts-james-delingpole-says-reef-bleaching-is-fake-news-hits-peak-denial
https://trofire.com/2016/12/06/breitbarts-pizzagate-conspiracy-fake-news-inspires-real-violence/
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/nov/10/breitbart/breitbart-gets-wrong-loretta-lynch-whitewater-clai/
http://www.snopes.com/scientific-papers-global-warming-myth/
http://www.snopes.com/targets-stock-transgender-bathroom-policy/
http://www.snopes.com/2016/08/07/breitbart-duped-by-fake-news-again/
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/27/1614946/-Breitbart-moves-on-to-their-next-propaganda-and-misinformation-target-Germany
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/15/breitbart-fake-news-right-trump

Just so you know:
When normal news network learn they were wrong, they recognize their errors and apologize.
Breibart just cash and make money of those buzz, and will create fake new for it. They'll publish anything that generate money or promote their political views no matter how biased. Only erasing articles (acting as if they never existed) if the public backslash is hurting their profits. (hence why you have to use internet archive to find some of their blunder)

I don't think brietbart EVER tried to say hatecrimes do not exist

Of course you don't, many of the things you defend yourself are called "hate crime" (which is a well defined things, yes).
Breitbart is extremely right-wing conservative with a religious streak, 80% of "hate crime" are indeed things they wish to see spread and so will routinely misrepresent how much hate crime happen, rarely ever use the term themselves when it should be used or play the victim of hate crime in an attempt to discredit it.
So this is no surprise to hear them claim hate crime hoax is "an epidemic"
http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/05/02/hate-crime-hoaxes-growing-epidemic/
In reality the number of fake hate crime is too ridiculously small to call it anything. Calling it "epidemic" is pure misinformation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/18/5-charts-show-the-stubborn-persistence-of-american-hate-crime/
But reality goes against Breitbar agenda, so instead they claim it's all conspiracy.

Next,
Your own belief are pretty much misogynistic so again no bet Breitbart and its "women stay in the kitchen" mentality don't look stupid to you. They argue and fight against any step toward treating women as equal to men despite equal skills and routinely deny any sexism with a "women are just inferior" mindset, despite reality and history saying otherwise.
https://www.thecut.com/2016/11/what-steve-bannon-thinks-of-women-and-minority-groups.html

No one will be surprised to notice the text below were written by "Milo Yiannopoulos" (who since then resigned for reason I let your search for)
http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/07/01/not-sexism-women-just-suck-interviews/
http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/07/07/real-war-on-women-chicks-in-combat/ (you'll notice the picture very respectful of women soldiers fighting for their country)
Note : women are allowed as front line fighter in several country ( in US at least http://time.com/4134976/pentagon-combat-women/ ) and submarines ( http://nypost.com/2017/04/19/how-the-navy-is-redesigning-submarines-to-accommodate-women/ )

Then again, we still have to teach you why some of your beliefs go against LAWS or HUMAN'S RIGHT.

Let's take this new pearl of yours

If a homosexual bakery can refuse to bake a cake with a bible quote about homosexuals having their blood upon them, then a christian bakery can refuse to make a homosexual cake. But this shows that there is indeed privilege in america for SOME groups.

Anybody can refuse to do a job that ask to do illegal things like "promoting hate against a specific group".
Who know what the hell you mean by "homosexual cake", but it is ILLEGAL to discriminate your client based on their beliefs/race/...etc.
If a someone asked a bakery to write "I'm christian & homosexual" there is nothing illegal in it, but it would be illegal (and stupid) for a christian baker to refuse to do it.
For the same reason it is illegal for any shop/restaurant to refuse to serve a couple because they are religious, homosexual or of an ethnic group so long as no law was broken.

Your inability to understand laws that goes against your bigotry are why those threads always devolve into teaching you logic and reasons.

6 : Lol, hilary? Well first off, the cunt lost

I applaud your respectful take[/sarcasm] on a Presidential candidate that was supported by more of the US population than Trump (the US Electoral College baffle a lot of us).
Speaking of hypocrisy, yours (and Breitbart) is beyond imagination. I'm from a country who had a president who fainted and had to go to the hospital during his term (I'm giving you the big hint here).

If we listened to those idiots, President who survived assassination-attempt (Theodore Roosevelt) should have been removed from office.

I don't know for others but Trump MENTAL health is seriously more important for a job as a PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATE OF AMERICA which I've been led to believe required some cogitation and common-sense.
More so than a physical one that clearly didn't keep Hillary from being far more rational than Trump.

No surprise Breibart supported the only candidate who believe their fake news. You can say a lot about News Network political bias, but as far I know they don't get their main executive hired by the candidate they made propaganda for.
This isn't because Breitbart claimed "other do smear campaign against", that they aren't doing smear campaign themselves.

But back to your argument, I'd LOVE to hear which country you are in, even if you didn't include what city or town.

No way! Your rambling about Europeanything are bad enough, I gave you a hint and let you do some thinking

Myself I don't see any argument or interlocutor to keep discussing with.
This topic only exist because you derailed a topic, i wonder if the moderators like to see us haggle with you over the value of truth.