Oh my god. They've done it. This takes all rights away. - by Outlooker
SD on 23/10/2006 at 15:35
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
Nobody said that those were the only options, you stupid strawmanning fuck.
And I didn't say that he had said those were the only options you fucking troll - I didn't even
imply he was saying that. So where you got the idea I was strawmanning him is beyond me.
If you listen to the British government though, you might well believe those
are the only options open to us - their authoritarianism, or the Islamists' authoritarianism.
Rug Burn Junky on 23/10/2006 at 16:16
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
I didn't even
imply he was saying that. So where you got the idea I was strawmanning him is beyond me.
howsabout this?
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
Of course, it's not an either/or situation between police state and Islamist theocracy ;).
Ummmm, yeah.*
So either you're strawmanning him (your usual tactic), or you're badly regurgitating hackneyed platitudes that were the basis for the discussion in the first place, which is usually Convict's job.
*and have enough self respect to not fall back on the rather weak "hurr, that's why I put a smiley in there."
SD on 23/10/2006 at 16:49
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
your usual tactic
hurr
Quote:
or you're badly regurgitating hackneyed platitudes
If you want to describe it like that, you're entitled to your opinion. I just thought it was pertinent to the wider discussion (this is page 6 of the thread, in case you hadn't noticed). What I wrote wasn't intended as criticism of what Chimpy said, because I didn't disagree with a single word of it; I was just expanding on the general theme.
In any case, I think he's big enough to defend himself if he felt I was criticising him. I appreciate that now the inscrutable po trainwreck has died down, you gotta get your kicks some other way, but please leave me out of it.
Shug on 23/10/2006 at 16:58
polite applause
Rug Burn Junky on 23/10/2006 at 17:04
Quote Posted by Strontium Dog
What I wrote wasn't intended as criticism of what Chimpy said
Your past history doesn't exactly entitle you to the benefit of the doubt. Especially when your contribution to the "General theme" was by writing something contradicting a particular passage you had quoted. For a supposed writer, understanding the effect of your own rhetoric isn't exactly your strong suit.
The only thing you tend to contribute to conversations is mirth and laughter at the ridiculous extremes of your stances. Pardon me for thinking that you were providing more of the same, instead of a tepid cliché.
Chimpy Chompy on 23/10/2006 at 17:25
I didn't really read Strontz' post as being a contradiction of my own, he just used it as a springboard for some "we get terrorist attacks cos of past misdeeds" stuff.
But anyway, yeah, of course it's not a choice between theocracy or Police State, and I don't think anyone is claiming that. I only brought up theocracies as what the islamists would ideally wish for in the West, not what they're realistically hoping to bring about right now.
Blair's proferred options are along the lines of "more security" or "live in fear of the tube getting blown up". Which, of course, you migh well reject also! But I don't see the islamists getting much satisfaction out of Britain heading towards a police state - it doesn't hurt us in a way that furthers their own cause. In fact it would prolly mean a crackdown on veils (ooh! topical!) which would piss them off more.
Rug Burn Junky on 23/10/2006 at 17:51
Fair 'nuff, I had certain expectations for StD, and he's let me down this time. I shall not forgive. ;)
TheGreatGodPan on 23/10/2006 at 18:29
Speaking of Sweden, (
http://www.sociologi.lu.se/krim/vi_krigar.pdf) here's a sociology report on islamic immigrants/first-born youth involved in crime called "We're waging a war against the Swedes". The intro is in english, but unfortunately the rest is Swedish. Here's a translation of a (
http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=147&a=531981) newspaper article about the study
Quote Posted by Ole Rothenborg in Dagens Nyheter
The wave of robberies the city of Malmö has witnessed during this past year is part of a “war against Swedes.” This is the explanation given by young robbers with immigrant background on why they are only robbing native Swedes, in interviews with Petra Åkesson for her thesis in Sociology. “I read a report about young robbers in Stockholm and Malmö and wanted to know why they are robbing other youths. It usually doesn’t involve a lot of money,” she says. She interviewed boys between 15 and 17 years old, both individually and in groups.
Almost 90% of all robberies that are reported to the police were committed by gangs, not individuals. “When we are in the city and robbing, we are waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes.” This argument was repeated several times. “Power for me means that Swedes shall look at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet.” The boys explain, laughingly, that “there is a thrilling sensation in your body when you’re robbing, you feel satisfied and happy, it feels as if you’ve succeeded, it simply feels good.” “It’s so easy to rob Swedes, so easy.” “We rob every single day, as much as we want to, whenever we want to.” The immigrant youth view Swedes as stupid and cowardly: “The Swedes don’t do anything, they just give us the stuff. They’re so wimpy.” The young robbers don’t plan their crimes: “No, we just see some Swedes that look rich or have nice mobile phones and then we rob them.”
Why do they hate Swedes so much? “Well, they hate us,” they answer, according to Petra Åkesson. “When a Swede goes shopping, the lady behind the counter gives him the money back into his hand, looks him into the eyes and laughs. When we go shopping, she puts the money on the counter and looks another way.” Åkesson, who is adopted from Sri Lanka and thus doesn’t look like a native Swede, says it was not difficult to get the boys to talk about their crimes. They were rather bragging about who had committed the most robberies. Malin Åkerström, professor in Sociology, can see only one solution to the problem: “Jobs for everybody. If this entails a deregulation of the labor market to create more jobs, then we should do so.”
Renegen on 24/10/2006 at 04:27
Perhaps you forget that Sri Lankans are not originally of swedish descent. The laws of nature say that when you park your ass in someone else's nest they'll get mad.
What I heard, second hand, was that a lot of the immigrants lived on welfare support, it's a really tough issue but when you have a bunch of tards running the circus you're not going to get an opera.. It seems in that example it's the sri lankans who are discriminating and isolating themselves culturally, the first stepping stone to a happy and successful assimilation and co-habitation with their swedish neighboors of course.
Either way a sociology professor saying Sweden should open up its job market isn't exactly the first person we should listen to. It's interesting that with all the problems today that immigration essentially failed in those countries.
SD on 24/10/2006 at 04:37
Quote Posted by Renegen
Perhaps you forget that Sri Lankans are not originally of swedish descent. The laws of nature say that when you park your ass in someone else's nest they'll get mad.
What I heard, second hand, was that a lot of the immigrants lived on welfare support, it's a really tough issue but when you have a bunch of tards running the circus you're not going to get an opera.. It seems in that example it's the sri lankans who are discriminating and isolating themselves culturally, the first stepping stone to a happy and successful assimilation and co-habitation with their swedish neighboors of course.
I didn't read a word of sense in this. Anyone else, or is it just me?