Stockholm Terror Attack

[Panflute]

Sweden is going to crack down hard on this terror by hugging foreigners and stuffing cucumbers up their own arses.

[Fairy In Boots]

7 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said:

Can the government ever win when people take up views like that?

There is no instant fix. No matter what gets rolled out and implemented attacks will happen during its development and deployment. With every attack there will be a group of people who insist enough isn't being done because attacks are happening. 

I'm not saying what is being done is or isn't good enough. I'm just questioning where the limits are.

I think you'll never win as long as it's a belief system. As you say you'll never fully win because you can't legislate for odd nutters. 

All Europe can do now is damage control and social engineering to stop them becoming the majority. They will be the dominant religion of Europe within 200 years if we carry on as is. 

[Honey Honey]

2 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

I think you'll never win as long as it's a belief system. As you say you'll never fully win because you can't legislate for odd nutters. 

All Europe can do now is damage control and social engineering to stop them becoming the majority. They will be the dominant religion of Europe within 200 years if we carry on as is. 

"Them" is the kind of language that makes people recoil.

[Honey Honey]

23 minutes ago, Cannabis said:

I don't think you can't blame anyone for not wanting to be associated with ''them'' though.

The goal of "them" in this context is to avoid making the effort to judge someone as an individual and to just allow oneself to use stereotype shortcuts. Including to attribute the worst Muslims with all Muslims, to wash ones hands of responsibility towards the innocent so as to use a massive net that will capture the guilty.

People recoil because they value the right to individual freedom.

[Fairy In Boots]

2 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

"Them" is the kind of language that makes people recoil.

We are in a politics section of a football forum, if I was a politician I'd take the time to prepare honed speeches. In reality I'm a run of the mill cunt on my mobile shooting the shit. I don't see why all of a sudden I have to behave like a politician on paxman in all honesty. 

18 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said:

The goal of "them" in this context is to avoid making the effort to judge someone as an individual and to just allow oneself to use stereotype shortcuts. Including to attribute the worst Muslims with all Muslims, to wash ones hands of responsibility towards the innocent so as to use a massive net that will capture the guilty.

People recoil because they value the right to individual freedom.

It's a generalisation of course it is, I'd assume most chewing the fat over my posts on this topic see that I speak in general terms, it's mainly out of laziness. 

By them I meant the Muslims, and by control I meant as the dominant religion on the continent. My beef isn't with specific Muslims it's with the Islam machine itself. I view the doctrine and the belief system as the real evil, the Muslims themselves I view as brainwashed idiots, the terrorists scum. If that fails to come across sometimes it's probably because I'm not a skilled orator and just some cunt ranting on a forum. 

[Honey Honey]

Of course you changing would make no difference but that is because so many people aren't being careful with the words they use online that it will take more than 1 to change. You don't necessarily have to be a politician about things, the internet allows people to behave in ways they wouldn't in person.

Whenever an attack happens the whole continent is exposed to people making language woopsies and rants online. En masse it is absolutely having an effect on our national ability to deal with the situation. It is a bottom up culture effecting political leaders.

I'm just making an observation of why things keep hitting a brick wall. I'm not daft enough to think that I can change the world with my post 

Nor do I expect anyone on here to change just because of me.

[Fairy In Boots]

3 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

Of course you changing would make no difference but that is because so many people aren't being careful with the words they use online that it will take more than 1 to change. You don't necessarily have to be a politician about things, the internet allows people to behave in ways they wouldn't in person.

Whenever an attack happens the whole continent is exposed to people making language woopsies and rants online. En masse it is absolutely having an effect on our national ability to deal with the situation. It is a bottom up culture effecting political leaders.

I'm just making an observation of why things keep hitting a brick wall. I'm not daft enough to think that I can change the world with my post 

Nor do I expect anyone on here to change just because of me.

Ok forgetting lingo then and answering your other question we can't in our current political systems do anything. We're utterly paralysed by this bizarre notion that you can please everyone. 

As traditional Europeans ( I mean whites) abandon various religions and become secular it's going to create a monopoly for Islam within Europe. What's the worrying part is Islam isn't just a religion it's got the built in political system of Sharia. Sharia courts already act within various parts of Western Europe without to much fear of the Authorities and we now have politicians pandering to this religious vote. It's why they've not tackled the complete lack of any serious integration and they fall over themselves to deflect attention from the fact there's a wolf in the hen house. 

 

The way way I see it we have two realistic option's:

option 1:

Is as the vast majority of those that live in these enclaves of Islam are in social housing. We break these communities up and scatter them all over the UK where they're not going to be able to bunch together and they're forced to intergrate. We need to bulldoze mosques with sketchy ethics and no permit (there's hundreds in Brum that aren't actually official mosques) and start pushing the communities through progressive mosques that push a version of Islam that we can accept. Schools need quotas in which they're (Muslims) not allowed to be the dominant religion or largest group (all faith schools need to go now) so they're forced to intergrate. Marriage from abroad needs to be heavily regulated to stop the repeat first generation problem. The hijab, burka need the bin, halah needs to be outlawed as does all religious slaughter. If we do all that within 25-30 years we could maybr solve the problem. 

Option 2: idi Amin style peaceful removal from various states, allow them a period to sell up and leave peacefully or renounce the faith and outlaw the faith. 

Option 2 sounds extreme but the longer we don't implement option 1 the move the extreme option 2 becomes the only valid option to avoid civil war and widespread violence.

No doubt I'll get pelters for this but Islam has form with this, it's how it's spread. Strangely enough I was talking to a Coptic Christian Egyptian on Friday when this attack was breaking news about work. He stopped looked at it said "it's Muslim this, they'll destroy Europe the way they've destroyed Egypt you can only stop them by force. You're all too soft you're fucked" I didn't comment about it,  but I agreed with him 100%. 

[Panflute]

Sweden should solve this issue by admitting more refugees, giving young citizens of foreign descent more internships, and letting Somali immigrants run a train  on their wives.

[Honey Honey]

1 hour ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Ok forgetting lingo then and answering your other question we can't in our current political systems do anything. We're utterly paralysed by this bizarre notion that you can please everyone. 

As traditional Europeans ( I mean whites) abandon various religions and become secular it's going to create a monopoly for Islam within Europe. What's the worrying part is Islam isn't just a religion it's got the built in political system of Sharia. Sharia courts already act within various parts of Western Europe without to much fear of the Authorities and we now have politicians pandering to this religious vote. It's why they've not tackled the complete lack of any serious integration and they fall over themselves to deflect attention from the fact there's a wolf in the hen house. 

 

The way way I see it we have two realistic option's:

option 1:

Is as the vast majority of those that live in these enclaves of Islam are in social housing. We break these communities up and scatter them all over the UK where they're not going to be able to bunch together and they're forced to intergrate. We need to bulldoze mosques with sketchy ethics and no permit (there's hundreds in Brum that aren't actually official mosques) and start pushing the communities through progressive mosques that push a version of Islam that we can accept. Schools need quotas in which they're (Muslims) not allowed to be the dominant religion or largest group (all faith schools need to go now) so they're forced to intergrate. Marriage from abroad needs to be heavily regulated to stop the repeat first generation problem. The hijab, burka need the bin, halah needs to be outlawed as does all religious slaughter. If we do all that within 25-30 years we could maybr solve the problem. 

Option 2: idi Amin style peaceful removal from various states, allow them a period to sell up and leave peacefully or renounce the faith and outlaw the faith. 

Option 2 sounds extreme but the longer we don't implement option 1 the move the extreme option 2 becomes the only valid option to avoid civil war and widespread violence.

No doubt I'll get pelters for this but Islam has form with this, it's how it's spread. Strangely enough I was talking to a Coptic Christian Egyptian on Friday when this attack was breaking news about work. He stopped looked at it said "it's Muslim this, they'll destroy Europe the way they've destroyed Egypt you can only stop them by force. You're all too soft you're fucked" I didn't comment about it,  but I agreed with him 100%. 

You don't have to please everyone, we live in a democracy, you just have to win a large enough majority to flip things on its head.

The anti-islam movement in the UK has a fanaticism like the remoaners, Tommy Robinson is Gina Miller. People who are losing the argument but are doubling down on it hysterically. It doesn't mean giving up on the fundamentals of the argument, but it does mean the argument is at an impasse, a cross roads, you can either double down in the hope and expectation that in time people will see it your way, or you can assess why people aren't joining in and moderate accordingly. 

In my opinion the line that Muslims are taking over, monopoly, 200 years majority, they want to overthrow us... That is the sort of stuff that won't wash. That is the sort of stuff that needs to be kept to the fringe of any argument or movement and not the forefront. Kind of like the hard socialists in the Labour party or the homophobes in the conservative party, when they come out of the closet (no pun intended) the whole movement takes a step away from majority.

Not moderating the argument is like pissing in the wind.

[Fairy In Boots]

1 hour ago, HoneyNUFC said:

You don't have to please everyone, we live in a democracy, you just have to win a large enough majority to flip things on its head.

The anti-islam movement in the UK has a fanaticism like the remoaners, Tommy Robinson is Gina Miller. People who are losing the argument but are doubling down on it hysterically. It doesn't mean giving up on the fundamentals of the argument, but it does mean the argument is at an impasse, a cross roads, you can either double down in the hope and expectation that in time people will see it your way, or you can assess why people aren't joining in and moderate accordingly. 

In my opinion the line that Muslims are taking over, monopoly, 200 years majority, they want to overthrow us... That is the sort of stuff that won't wash. That is the sort of stuff that needs to be kept to the fringe of any argument or movement and not the forefront. Kind of like the hard socialists in the Labour party or the homophobes in the conservative party, when they come out of the closet (no pun intended) the whole movement takes a step away from majority.

Not moderating the argument is like pissing in the wind.

So basically sell the argument. 

I get dial it down to mainstream the argument, but that way you're diluting the argument and it won't be the complete treatment that's needed. 

Honestly how do you think the UK will look population wise in 2100 and what will be the biggest religion? 

[Batard]

34 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

So basically sell the argument. 

I get dial it down to mainstream the argument, but that way you're diluting the argument and it won't be the complete treatment that's needed. 

Honestly how do you think the UK will look population wise in 2100 and what will be the biggest religion? 

Firstly, we'll all be dead. Secondly you can't worry about something you're only assuming. Thirdly, whilst I appreciate its human nature to categorize everything and attribute blame and rationalize it with simplicity, the discussions around Islam are just tiresome. Humanity is littered with atrocities throughout the ages under various banners and flags.

Disenfranchised individuals committing acts under a religion are no more representative of that religion than say accusing all Catholics of being nonces. The notion the West is swarming with terrorists is a nonsense.

I for one do not want to continually see threads veering close to and then descending into "Islam! The Apocalypse is upon us!" debates ad infinitum. Because I'll just close them. 

[Spike]

Cultures have been destroyed throughout history. Don't think just because we live in an 'enlightened technological age' that we are safe in our status quo. The culture of the greatest empire of human history was wiped in scarcely a century due to mass migration of different cultures. The political and societal structures of the Western-Roman Empire were annihilated when certain cultural groups became the majority in isolated geographical areas. Visigothic Iberia, Budinian France, Vandal Northern-Africa, et al. For crying out loud the shift was so radical that Europe essentially lost the technology to mass-produce concrete for near a millennium.

[Fairy In Boots]

29 minutes ago, Batard said:

Firstly, we'll all be dead. Secondly you can't worry about something you're only assuming. Thirdly, whilst I appreciate its human nature to categorize everything and attribute blame and rationalize it with simplicity, the discussions around Islam are just tiresome. Humanity is littered with atrocities throughout the ages under various banners and flags.

Disenfranchised individuals committing acts under a religion are no more representative of that religion than say accusing all Catholics of being nonces. The notion the West is swarming with terrorists is a nonsense.

I for one do not want to continually see threads veering close to and then descending into "Islam! The Apocalypse is upon us!" debates ad infinitum. Because I'll just close them. 

I'm sorry the last statement is just horseshit. We have a terrorist atrocity a thread gets opened once it becomes apparent it's Islamic terrorism the conversation naturally moves into the topic of Islam because it's a driving factor of the incident. What are we supposed to discuss the make of trucks? Rule one of the Internet if you don't like it, you don't have to look at it. 

Also it's not assumed it's based on the fact there's a clear pattern if you'd bother to look in which it's taken root undermined, overtaken and then once in the driving seat oppressed opposing ideas and in many cases eradicated  throughout history. I have kids I worry about the world they and their children will inherit. I live in a city where the school system was investigated because they're preaching terrorism (another today actually) they're actively pulling a Rotherham & Rochdale and grooming unabated, they're plotting terrorist attacks all the time and preaching hate. You're own city of Marseille (I'm assuming you're from there) has a huge problem, just because you don't give a fuck doesn't mean others don't.

[Batard]

Just now, Fairy In Boots said:

I'm sorry the last statement is just horseshit. We have a terrorist atrocity a thread gets opened once it becomes apparent it's Islamic terrorism the conversation naturally moves into the topic of Islam because it's a driving factor of the incident. What are we supposed to discuss the make of trucks? Rule one of the Internet if you don't like it, you don't have to look at it. 

Also it's not assumed it's based on the fact there's a clear pattern if you'd bother to look in which it's taken root undermined, overtaken and then once in the driving seat oppressed opposing ideas and in many cases eradicated  throughout history. I have kids I worry about the world they and their children will inherit. I live in a city where the school system was investigated because they're preaching terrorism (another today actually) they're actively pulling a Rotherham & Rochdale and grooming unabated, they're plotting terrorist attacks all the time and preaching hate. You're own city of Marseille (I'm assuming you're from there) has a huge problem, just because you don't give a fuck doesn't mean others don't.

I'm not arguing with you. I made my point more than clearly enough. These threads are not a platform for pervasive Islamophobia. Far to often these conversations head towards "Islam! It's serious! Won't someone think of the children!". You're entitled to disagree but equally I'm not interested in this becoming a religious bashing thread. 

[Devil-Dick Willie]

I'm with Fairy on this. If there is an Islamic terrorist attack we should be able to discuss it in full. We shouldn't have to avoid it like the racist uncle at the family reunion. As long as no one is outright racist or just firing of slurs rather than discussing the points of topic I can't see an issue.

The fact that these attacks are happening regularly is ugly. And I understand that the topic is not for everyone. But I'll do you a deal. I will stop talking about the ramifications of Islamic immigrants in Europe in these terrorist attack threads just as soon as they stop committing terrorist attacks.

[Fairy In Boots]

11 minutes ago, Batard said:

I'm not arguing with you. I made my point more than clearly enough. These threads are not a platform for pervasive Islamophobia. Far to often these conversations head towards "Islam! It's serious! Won't someone think of the children!". You're entitled to disagree but equally I'm not interested in this becoming a religious bashing thread. 

Ok fair enough Trucks then lads what shall we do about the recent spate of truck related murders? I propose we move to trams. 

Fyi your fellow mod asked the question about can we ever solve the problem, will you be taking it up with Harvz? Or is it now a case of because my view of Islam is classed as islamophobic by the collective group in your mod chat. It's now a case of you can talk about it as long as we agree with the opinion expressed? 

13 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

Can the government ever win when people take up views like that?

There is no instant fix. No matter what gets rolled out and implemented attacks will happen during its development and deployment. With every attack there will be a group of people who insist enough isn't being done because attacks are happening. 

I'm not saying what is being done is or isn't good enough. I'm just questioning where the limits are.

I was answering that. I suggest you staff have a huddle 

[Spike]

Having been a staff on other forums I can understand where Batard is coming from. It's not that these discussion are being censored for their content because is a football forum the place for this discussion? I feel like any truly open forum is allowed to any discussion that doesn't break any laws or calls for harm of any persons. 

Unfortunately patterns are popping up. Islamic Terrorism is real and it can be spun that we just aren't told through the media about other atrocities or that the media spins them out of control. The fact remains it doesn't matter if X is causing terrorism as well, Islamic Terrorism is still an issue. Fortunately the odds are very slim that any of us will be directly affected by it, however this sort of discourse and the changes in our environment because of it does indeed cause indirect change.

I've always been of the opinion 'just because it exists doesn't mean it deserves to'. I don't have the authority to legislate but if we do believe in any sort of morality it has to be derived from some abstract universal good. 

[Devil-Dick Willie]

5 minutes ago, Spike said:

Having been a staff on other forums I can understand where Batard is coming from. It's not that these discussion are being censored for their content because is a football forum the place for this discussion? I feel like any truly open forum is allowed to any discussion that doesn't break any laws or calls for harm of any persons. 

Unfortunately patterns are popping up. Islamic Terrorism is real and it can be spun that we just aren't told through the media about other atrocities or that the media spins them out of control. The fact remains it doesn't matter if X is causing terrorism as well, Islamic Terrorism is still an issue. Fortunately the odds are very slim that any of us will be directly affected by it, however this sort of discourse and the changes in our environment because of it does indeed cause indirect change.

I've always been of the opinion 'just because it exists doesn't mean it deserves to'. I don't have the authority to legislate but if we do believe in any sort of morality it has to be derived from some abstract universal good. 

 

[Batard]

1 hour ago, Spike said:

Having been a staff on other forums I can understand where Batard is coming from. It's not that these discussion are being censored for their content because is a football forum the place for this discussion? I feel like any truly open forum is allowed to any discussion that doesn't break any laws or calls for harm of any persons. 

Unfortunately patterns are popping up. Islamic Terrorism is real and it can be spun that we just aren't told through the media about other atrocities or that the media spins them out of control. The fact remains it doesn't matter if X is causing terrorism as well, Islamic Terrorism is still an issue. Fortunately the odds are very slim that any of us will be directly affected by it, however this sort of discourse and the changes in our environment because of it does indeed cause indirect change.

I've always been of the opinion 'just because it exists doesn't mean it deserves to'. I don't have the authority to legislate but if we do believe in any sort of morality it has to be derived from some abstract universal good. 

No one here on the staffing team has an interest in censorship. If I did, this thread would have been closed. Maybe I didn't articulate myself very well as to why I find the Islam debate frustrating but there is a fine line in the sand regarding this. It's far too easy to dress up bigotry as righteous concern. That's a statement as opposed to an accusation against anyone either for the record. 

[Spike]

2 minutes ago, Batard said:

No one here on the staffing team has an interest in censorship. If I did, this thread would have been closed. Maybe I didn't articulate myself very well as to why I find the Islam debate frustrating but there is a fine line in the sand regarding this. It's far too easy to dress up bigotry as righteous concern. That's a statement as opposed to an accusation against anyone either for the record. 

Bigotry isn't inherently evil. I am very biased towards paedophiles, murderers, cannibals, etc. (THIS ISN'T A COMPARISON BETWEEN THOSE AND ISLAM). Who is to say what is bigotry and righteous concern?

[Batard]

14 minutes ago, Spike said:

Bigotry isn't inherently evil. I am very biased towards paedophiles, murderers, cannibals, etc. (THIS ISN'T A COMPARISON BETWEEN THOSE AND ISLAM). Who is to say what is bigotry and righteous concern?

All very interesting but off topic and I feel we're venturing into semantics here. A conversation for another thread 

[oliveandblue]

Each attack is making Trump look more and more intelligent - which he is not.

Sweden has to realize that if you're going to have a liberal country that you MUST have some sort of border control.  I just finally spoke with someone who has spent some time in Sweden, and she's telling me that the no-go zones are real (here in the states I have no idea what's actually going on). 

Denmark and Norway are both doing a good job of balancing the two.

[SirBalon]

2 hours ago, oliveandblue said:

Each attack is making Trump look more and more intelligent

I think you mean shrewd mate...  Trump never looks or sounds intelligent, probably never will.  But he must be shrewd for more than just this.

[Honey Honey]

The alleged attacker has nothing to do with the open door policy. That's not to say that the policy doesn't statistically increase the threat. 

He arrived in Sweden in 2014. When his asylum application was rejected in 2016 he went underground and hid from the police. This happens in pretty much every single western country. Asylum is rejected, you are told to turn up at the airport on X day at X time, some do, some don't. 

[Fairy In Boots]

not going to post them here but that picture of the little 11 year old girl torn in half is utterly disgusting.