Momus;1499807 wrote: Then pray tell, why do you think the new years eve migrant rampage was played down ?
One, there were rumblings of a UK referendum on leaving the EU. To publish the full extent of the attacks, could have swayed the leave voters. Another reason, i am sure, was simple humiliation. Merkel was warned and the very fact that new years eve's rampage took place, endorsed all those warnings. Another reason, the far right in Germany was already on the rise as it was in other EU member states.
Certainly nothing to do with the UK referendum, all the media Europe wide colluding to keep the UK in ?
'Simple humiliation' ? Who has been humiliated and why would the media not want to report it ?
The only possible reason is the PC brigade, the move toward everybody being afraid to offend that is self policing gone mad.
You might think I am a right winger racist bigot......as a new comer.
I am extremely moderate, non racist, non judgmental, old aged hippy type values.
However I am concerned with the repercussions that WILL happen at some time due to massive movements of people with different cultural back grounds into conservative (with a small c) Europe.
Repercussions......
Repercussions......
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Repercussions......
Bruv;1499810 wrote: Certainly nothing to do with the UK referendum, all the media Europe wide colluding to keep the UK in ?
'Simple humiliation' ? Who has been humiliated and why would the media not want to report it ?
The only possible reason is the PC brigade, the move toward everybody being afraid to offend that is self policing gone mad.
You might think I am a right winger racist bigot......as a new comer.
I am extremely moderate, non racist, non judgmental, old aged hippy type values.
However I am concerned with the repercussions that WILL happen at some time due to massive movements of people with different cultural back grounds into conservative (with a small c) Europe.
It wasn't just the new year eve rampage in Cologne that was played down. As more and more was revealed, other EU member states finally admitted that they also had a serious problem. Sweden and Denmark were the worst but as with Cologne, the attacks were played down. I don't think it was the PC brigade myself. Merkel has stated that she will continue with the migration plan into Europe, which on the surface, appears to be madness. It's not just the sex attacks, but in Germany in particular, there has also been an increase in migrant on migrant crime. Crimes often took place within refugee shelters, where religious differences, violence, theft, and rape, being the most common. It's a serious problem in Germany. It is as you said, the different cultural backgrounds coming together in a conservative Europe, but when those cultural differences see fighting among themselves, the inter racial violence makes the difficulty of assimilating into the West and Germany, all the more volatile. Maybe now Merkel has stated she is to continue with the migration influx, playing down the sex attacks, helps silence the opposition. There is a theory that i dread to think, is correct and that's the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan. He was the pioneer of European integration and was the founding president of the paneuropean union for nearly 50 years. His first book, Pan Europa was in 1923 and he set out his vision and plan for Europe which in short, was to flood Europe with blacks, and asians to create a Eurasian *****id race for the future that could be controlled by the ruling elite. He said " The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-*****id race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals ".
That may sound off the wall to some, but the rise of fascism in the 1930's, saw the Kalergi plan widely forgotten although the Coudenhove-Kalergi European Prize was awarded every two years.
In 2012, the president of the European council, Herman Van Rompuy was awarded the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize. In 2010, it was Angela Merkel who was awarded the prize.
'Simple humiliation' ? Who has been humiliated and why would the media not want to report it ?
The only possible reason is the PC brigade, the move toward everybody being afraid to offend that is self policing gone mad.
You might think I am a right winger racist bigot......as a new comer.
I am extremely moderate, non racist, non judgmental, old aged hippy type values.
However I am concerned with the repercussions that WILL happen at some time due to massive movements of people with different cultural back grounds into conservative (with a small c) Europe.
It wasn't just the new year eve rampage in Cologne that was played down. As more and more was revealed, other EU member states finally admitted that they also had a serious problem. Sweden and Denmark were the worst but as with Cologne, the attacks were played down. I don't think it was the PC brigade myself. Merkel has stated that she will continue with the migration plan into Europe, which on the surface, appears to be madness. It's not just the sex attacks, but in Germany in particular, there has also been an increase in migrant on migrant crime. Crimes often took place within refugee shelters, where religious differences, violence, theft, and rape, being the most common. It's a serious problem in Germany. It is as you said, the different cultural backgrounds coming together in a conservative Europe, but when those cultural differences see fighting among themselves, the inter racial violence makes the difficulty of assimilating into the West and Germany, all the more volatile. Maybe now Merkel has stated she is to continue with the migration influx, playing down the sex attacks, helps silence the opposition. There is a theory that i dread to think, is correct and that's the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan. He was the pioneer of European integration and was the founding president of the paneuropean union for nearly 50 years. His first book, Pan Europa was in 1923 and he set out his vision and plan for Europe which in short, was to flood Europe with blacks, and asians to create a Eurasian *****id race for the future that could be controlled by the ruling elite. He said " The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-*****id race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals ".
That may sound off the wall to some, but the rise of fascism in the 1930's, saw the Kalergi plan widely forgotten although the Coudenhove-Kalergi European Prize was awarded every two years.
In 2012, the president of the European council, Herman Van Rompuy was awarded the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize. In 2010, it was Angela Merkel who was awarded the prize.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Repercussions......
You did not answer my post #47, Momus. As you could not find similarities between American cultists & head decapitating jihadists at least admit so & please temper your exaggerations in the future.
Repercussions......
More conspiracy theories again????
Repercussions......
Ted;1499845 wrote: More conspiracy theories again????
For some maybe Ted but not me. The fact remains that the The Coudenhove Kalergi plan was very real and it's interesting to wonder how Europe would be today, had the war and Hitler not come along.
For some maybe Ted but not me. The fact remains that the The Coudenhove Kalergi plan was very real and it's interesting to wonder how Europe would be today, had the war and Hitler not come along.
Repercussions......
AnneBoleyn;1499839 wrote: You did not answer my post #47, Momus. As you could not find similarities between American cultists & head decapitating jihadists at least admit so & please temper your exaggerations in the future.
Just out of interest, while i was making the sufficient number of posts in order to add a link, did it not occur to you, that perhaps you could throw a few words into your search engine and possibly locate any substance to my statement ? After all, there are many sites out there that explain the methods of deradicalization used in prisons with Jihadists and similar or same methods when it comes to those brainwashed into a religious cult. I myself tend to go searching should i find a statement incredulous, especially if i know little on the subject. Having done so, it's useful should i wish to continue debating the subject, as only then, i can offer a counter debate based on that of which, i have just educated myself in. I tend to find that process substantially more polite than accuse a poster of exaggerating.
Just out of curiosity, how would you know that a poster, who you know nothing about, has exaggerated a statement without offering a shred of evidence in the thread, that you know better and have a superior knowledge on the subject ? Here's the challenge. If you believe i have exaggerated a post when you know nothing about me or my line of work, then why don't you post some hard evidence that what i have said is untrue or exaggerated. I take it you can do that ? If you can't, then i have a link ready for a later date that will show otherwise. In the meantime, please temper your aggressive and antagonistic demands.
Just out of interest, while i was making the sufficient number of posts in order to add a link, did it not occur to you, that perhaps you could throw a few words into your search engine and possibly locate any substance to my statement ? After all, there are many sites out there that explain the methods of deradicalization used in prisons with Jihadists and similar or same methods when it comes to those brainwashed into a religious cult. I myself tend to go searching should i find a statement incredulous, especially if i know little on the subject. Having done so, it's useful should i wish to continue debating the subject, as only then, i can offer a counter debate based on that of which, i have just educated myself in. I tend to find that process substantially more polite than accuse a poster of exaggerating.
Just out of curiosity, how would you know that a poster, who you know nothing about, has exaggerated a statement without offering a shred of evidence in the thread, that you know better and have a superior knowledge on the subject ? Here's the challenge. If you believe i have exaggerated a post when you know nothing about me or my line of work, then why don't you post some hard evidence that what i have said is untrue or exaggerated. I take it you can do that ? If you can't, then i have a link ready for a later date that will show otherwise. In the meantime, please temper your aggressive and antagonistic demands.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Repercussions......
Oh no you don't. YOU are the one who made the claim, therefore YOU are the one who should show proof of it. I'm ready for your link right now, not at a later date.
Repercussions......
AnneBoleyn;1499860 wrote: Oh no you don't. YOU are the one who made the claim, therefore YOU are the one who should show proof of it. I'm ready for your link right now, not at a later date.
Tell me, have you ever studied the Collective De-radicalization and Disengagement practices used in prisons worldwide by the ICSR to deradicalize terrorists, and in use by the Office for Security and Counterterrorism, in the UK? Or even, have you compared that mandate with the work of the international ICSA, International cultic studies association or indeed the desensitization methods used for cult victims in the USA ? Have you compared that with the reasons rational humans such as the killers of Lee Rigby, find themselves radicalized into the Jihad? Maybe you have studied extensively why victims fall prey to religious cults and compared the similarities between methods used to radicalize vulnerable subjects to the Jihad. I suspect not and i further suspect, that you would actually have no interest in being educated in such matters and have no interest in exploring the subject further here. Typically, those who find a claim incredulous, tend to at least have some knowledge of the subject and offer some kind of counter debate. Rarely have i seen anyone who steams in claiming another post is erroneous without at least offering a morsel to prove otherwise. As it stands, i could waste an hour of my valuable time posting links to show that your claim of exaggeration is wildly inaccurate, while you have demonstrated that you have nothing to provide evidence of your ludicrous attack. I have no obligation whatsoever to waste my time pandering to what clearly appears to be an antagonist. If other members would like to engage with me on the subject further in an agreeable manner as they have already demonstrated here, i would be delighted to do so. It's clear that you possess no concept of the process of debating. Making ridiculous accusations without a shred of evidence is not debate. From your demands, i suspect two scenarios here. One, you are miffed that the newbie has turned up and seems to be getting along dandy with other members, or perhaps you suspect some attention may be drawn away from your own self importance on this forum. I suspect the former and the latter equally. Sadly, this is the downfall with forums. While they tend to possess mostly, interesting and educated members who's purpose is to interact with others on subject matter, they invariably tend to possess the odd one who seems to offer nothing but antagonism. What a shame. I looked around this forum, read some threads and noted healthy debate with interesting members. To conclude, if you would like to take time out to research the subject matter and come back with some evidence to support your own claim, then i am happy to do likewise. Until then, i am not wasting hours of my time on someone who appears to just put down the newbie. I don't know who you are or how old you are, but i suggest you grow up and take a more congenial approach that just may get you somewhere. I, however do not pander to ridiculous demands without any basis. You have a nice day now.
Tell me, have you ever studied the Collective De-radicalization and Disengagement practices used in prisons worldwide by the ICSR to deradicalize terrorists, and in use by the Office for Security and Counterterrorism, in the UK? Or even, have you compared that mandate with the work of the international ICSA, International cultic studies association or indeed the desensitization methods used for cult victims in the USA ? Have you compared that with the reasons rational humans such as the killers of Lee Rigby, find themselves radicalized into the Jihad? Maybe you have studied extensively why victims fall prey to religious cults and compared the similarities between methods used to radicalize vulnerable subjects to the Jihad. I suspect not and i further suspect, that you would actually have no interest in being educated in such matters and have no interest in exploring the subject further here. Typically, those who find a claim incredulous, tend to at least have some knowledge of the subject and offer some kind of counter debate. Rarely have i seen anyone who steams in claiming another post is erroneous without at least offering a morsel to prove otherwise. As it stands, i could waste an hour of my valuable time posting links to show that your claim of exaggeration is wildly inaccurate, while you have demonstrated that you have nothing to provide evidence of your ludicrous attack. I have no obligation whatsoever to waste my time pandering to what clearly appears to be an antagonist. If other members would like to engage with me on the subject further in an agreeable manner as they have already demonstrated here, i would be delighted to do so. It's clear that you possess no concept of the process of debating. Making ridiculous accusations without a shred of evidence is not debate. From your demands, i suspect two scenarios here. One, you are miffed that the newbie has turned up and seems to be getting along dandy with other members, or perhaps you suspect some attention may be drawn away from your own self importance on this forum. I suspect the former and the latter equally. Sadly, this is the downfall with forums. While they tend to possess mostly, interesting and educated members who's purpose is to interact with others on subject matter, they invariably tend to possess the odd one who seems to offer nothing but antagonism. What a shame. I looked around this forum, read some threads and noted healthy debate with interesting members. To conclude, if you would like to take time out to research the subject matter and come back with some evidence to support your own claim, then i am happy to do likewise. Until then, i am not wasting hours of my time on someone who appears to just put down the newbie. I don't know who you are or how old you are, but i suggest you grow up and take a more congenial approach that just may get you somewhere. I, however do not pander to ridiculous demands without any basis. You have a nice day now.
Repercussions......
@Momus, don't bother introducing yourself as suggested by myself recently, I think I have the measure of you already.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Repercussions......
In university you learn how much there is to learn and how much you really don't know and ways to improve the situation. There is no single right answers to most questions.
Repercussions......
Hello Momus, welcome to Forum Garden ! I have read, with interest, this thread. You don't give much away about yourself, in fact nothing in your profile - it would be interesting to know which nationality you are though. The other thing I would make comment about is that your site name appears to be appropriate, and well chosen ! Gill winks and runs for cover !
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6632
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
Repercussions......
Momus;1499868 wrote: Tell me, have you ever studied the Collective De-radicalization and Disengagement practices used in prisons worldwide by the ICSR to deradicalize terrorists, and in use by the Office for Security and Counterterrorism, in the UK? Or even, have you compared that mandate with the work of the international ICSA, International cultic studies association or indeed the desensitization methods used for cult victims in the USA ? Have you compared that with the reasons rational humans such as the killers of Lee Rigby, find themselves radicalized into the Jihad? Maybe you have studied extensively why victims fall prey to religious cults and compared the similarities between methods used to radicalize vulnerable subjects to the Jihad. I suspect not and i further suspect, that you would actually have no interest in being educated in such matters and have no interest in exploring the subject further here. Typically, those who find a claim incredulous, tend to at least have some knowledge of the subject and offer some kind of counter debate. Rarely have i seen anyone who steams in claiming another post is erroneous without at least offering a morsel to prove otherwise. As it stands, i could waste an hour of my valuable time posting links to show that your claim of exaggeration is wildly inaccurate, while you have demonstrated that you have nothing to provide evidence of your ludicrous attack. I have no obligation whatsoever to waste my time pandering to what clearly appears to be an antagonist. If other members would like to engage with me on the subject further in an agreeable manner as they have already demonstrated here, i would be delighted to do so. It's clear that you possess no concept of the process of debating. Making ridiculous accusations without a shred of evidence is not debate. From your demands, i suspect two scenarios here. One, you are miffed that the newbie has turned up and seems to be getting along dandy with other members, or perhaps you suspect some attention may be drawn away from your own self importance on this forum. I suspect the former and the latter equally. Sadly, this is the downfall with forums. While they tend to possess mostly, interesting and educated members who's purpose is to interact with others on subject matter, they invariably tend to possess the odd one who seems to offer nothing but antagonism. What a shame. I looked around this forum, read some threads and noted healthy debate with interesting members. To conclude, if you would like to take time out to research the subject matter and come back with some evidence to support your own claim, then i am happy to do likewise. Until then, i am not wasting hours of my time on someone who appears to just put down the newbie. I don't know who you are or how old you are, but i suggest you grow up and take a more congenial approach that just may get you somewhere. I, however do not pander to ridiculous demands without any basis. You have a nice day now.
Lots of words to hide behind without an answer to a simple question, or links to prove a claim. As far as I'm concerned, you're a blabbermouth & I will be glad to not continue our acquaintance. However, if on a boring day I read your posts & see nonsense again, I will call you out on it.
Lots of words to hide behind without an answer to a simple question, or links to prove a claim. As far as I'm concerned, you're a blabbermouth & I will be glad to not continue our acquaintance. However, if on a boring day I read your posts & see nonsense again, I will call you out on it.
Repercussions......
Momus;1499868 wrote: Tell me, have you ever studied the Collective De-radicalization and Disengagement practices used in prisons worldwide by the ICSR to deradicalize terrorists, and in use by the Office for Security and Counterterrorism, in the UK? Or even, have you compared that mandate with the work of the international ICSA, International cultic studies association or indeed the desensitization methods used for cult victims in the USA ? Have you compared that with the reasons rational humans such as the killers of Lee Rigby, find themselves radicalized into the Jihad? Maybe you have studied extensively why victims fall prey to religious cults and compared the similarities between methods used to radicalize vulnerable subjects to the Jihad. I suspect not and i further suspect, that you would actually have no interest in being educated in such matters and have no interest in exploring the subject further here. Typically, those who find a claim incredulous, tend to at least have some knowledge of the subject and offer some kind of counter debate. Rarely have i seen anyone who steams in claiming another post is erroneous without at least offering a morsel to prove otherwise. As it stands, i could waste an hour of my valuable time posting links to show that your claim of exaggeration is wildly inaccurate, while you have demonstrated that you have nothing to provide evidence of your ludicrous attack. I have no obligation whatsoever to waste my time pandering to what clearly appears to be an antagonist. If other members would like to engage with me on the subject further in an agreeable manner as they have already demonstrated here, i would be delighted to do so. It's clear that you possess no concept of the process of debating. Making ridiculous accusations without a shred of evidence is not debate. From your demands, i suspect two scenarios here. One, you are miffed that the newbie has turned up and seems to be getting along dandy with other members, or perhaps you suspect some attention may be drawn away from your own self importance on this forum. I suspect the former and the latter equally. Sadly, this is the downfall with forums. While they tend to possess mostly, interesting and educated members who's purpose is to interact with others on subject matter, they invariably tend to possess the odd one who seems to offer nothing but antagonism. What a shame. I looked around this forum, read some threads and noted healthy debate with interesting members. To conclude, if you would like to take time out to research the subject matter and come back with some evidence to support your own claim, then i am happy to do likewise. Until then, i am not wasting hours of my time on someone who appears to just put down the newbie. I don't know who you are or how old you are, but i suggest you grow up and take a more congenial approach that just may get you somewhere. I, however do not pander to ridiculous demands without any basis. You have a nice day now.
Neither is making assertions without being able to back them up if asked to do so or making ad hominem arguments as a way of dodging the question. Come to that apparently claiming to have a level of arcane knowledge that is supposed to impress os not much of a debating tactic either. If you can't accept that some people may disagree with you maybe you should keep away from discussion forums. Healthy debate does not mean someone has to win the argument.
As it happens I think you have a valid point pity you can't express it better.
Sadly, this is the downfall with forums. While they tend to possess mostly, interesting and educated members who's purpose is to interact with others on subject matter, they invariably tend to possess the odd one who seems to offer nothing but antagonism.
pot kettle black.
His first book, Pan Europa was in 1923 and he set out his vision and plan for Europe which in short, was to flood Europe with blacks, and asians to create a Eurasian *****id race for the future that could be controlled by the ruling elite. He said " The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-*****id race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals ".
A best seller by one adolf hitler was arguably more influential.
posted by ted
The atheists have their own religious faith.
:-5:-5. Why is it the atheists insist that atheism is just another form or religion? Alkl they have in common is a lack of belief in a god or gods. essentially two types those who say they believe there is definitely nod god and those who say there is no evidence there is a god so don't believe in one. I'm an atheist because nop oine has ever been able to produce any kind of convincing proof or argument that such a being or beings exist.
There is no system of beliefs or authority that must be followed by an atheiss to be called one we are not simply confused or have had something happen t turn us against god. It's not up to atheists to prove god doesn't exist it's up to you to prove he does and you quite simply can't. Please try it might make for an interesting thread but please don't throw your toys out the pram if you find your arguments falling on fertile ground butr not ble to germinate.
Neither is making assertions without being able to back them up if asked to do so or making ad hominem arguments as a way of dodging the question. Come to that apparently claiming to have a level of arcane knowledge that is supposed to impress os not much of a debating tactic either. If you can't accept that some people may disagree with you maybe you should keep away from discussion forums. Healthy debate does not mean someone has to win the argument.
As it happens I think you have a valid point pity you can't express it better.
Sadly, this is the downfall with forums. While they tend to possess mostly, interesting and educated members who's purpose is to interact with others on subject matter, they invariably tend to possess the odd one who seems to offer nothing but antagonism.
pot kettle black.
His first book, Pan Europa was in 1923 and he set out his vision and plan for Europe which in short, was to flood Europe with blacks, and asians to create a Eurasian *****id race for the future that could be controlled by the ruling elite. He said " The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-*****id race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals ".
A best seller by one adolf hitler was arguably more influential.
posted by ted
The atheists have their own religious faith.
:-5:-5. Why is it the atheists insist that atheism is just another form or religion? Alkl they have in common is a lack of belief in a god or gods. essentially two types those who say they believe there is definitely nod god and those who say there is no evidence there is a god so don't believe in one. I'm an atheist because nop oine has ever been able to produce any kind of convincing proof or argument that such a being or beings exist.
There is no system of beliefs or authority that must be followed by an atheiss to be called one we are not simply confused or have had something happen t turn us against god. It's not up to atheists to prove god doesn't exist it's up to you to prove he does and you quite simply can't. Please try it might make for an interesting thread but please don't throw your toys out the pram if you find your arguments falling on fertile ground butr not ble to germinate.