Ice, Ice Baby no more!

[HoreTore]

You remember that right-wing wave that swept over Europe during the last elections?`Well, the results are starting to come in....

Hungary bans Ice-T (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110102/ap_en_mu/eu_hungary_ice_t)

Hungary's newly created media board, consisting of 5 members of the ruling conservative party, has sanctioned a private radio station for broadcasting Ice-T's song "It's on", because the song is "adverse affect on the moral development". Oh, and a couple of radio hosts have been fired for airing "one minute of silence" in protest of the new board and media law. Oh, and an investigative journalist has quit because the government forced him to team up with a journalist who is a member of the conservative party.


Yes, conservatives are all about freedom. Or as we say in Hungary, "shut up and conform!!"

[Fragony]

We also have time-limits for some content, no porn or extreme violence on tv untill 10 o'bang. This is a bit much though

[HoreTore]

"a bit"?

This is censoring what those in power doesn't approve of.

[rory_20_uk]

Something an authoritarian state does. Rather like Venezuela or Cuba. That this one is Right wing is irrelevant.

~:smoking:

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Sadly, I can remember when the airwaves were dominated by the song HT references in his title (not Ice-T, whose music at least attempts something poetic). Nauseating tune. I was very happy that Vanilla Ice proved to be a one-hit wonder.


For this type of censorship, I find myself agreeing with Horetore. The public pressuring a radio station to stop airing a singer or type of music is legitimate, as is the radio station opting not to broadcast something. Government prohibiting it is never a good thing.

EDIT:

I also agree with Rory. Right-wingers may choose to censor "morally incorrect" broadcasts as opposed to "political opposition" broadcasts by leftist regimes, but it is still authoritarian censorship and the wrong way to go.

[Furunculus]

You remember that right-wing wave that swept over Europe during the last elections?`Well, the results are starting to come in....

Hungary bans Ice-T (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110102/ap_en_mu/eu_hungary_ice_t)

Hungary's newly created media board, consisting of 5 members of the ruling conservative party, has sanctioned a private radio station for broadcasting Ice-T's song "It's on", because the song is "adverse affect on the moral development". Oh, and a couple of radio hosts have been fired for airing "one minute of silence" in protest of the new board and media law. Oh, and an investigative journalist has quit because the government forced him to team up with a journalist who is a member of the conservative party.


Yes, conservatives are all about freedom. Or as we say in Hungary, "shut up and conform!!"
that is a stupid comment.

that hungary has elected a right-wing gov't that is distasteful to many in western europe is not in question.

to make blanket correlating statements like this is too "leading", try harder.

[Fragony]

"a bit"?

This is censoring what those in power doesn't approve of.

Like in Sweden? Not that I aprove but this has little to do with left or right. From what I heard Hungarian media is in a deadlock of the former authorities, but that the commision that says yes or no are all party members is certainly not a good thing

[Andres]

You remember that right-wing wave that swept over Europe during the last elections?`Well, the results are starting to come in....

Hungary bans Ice-T (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110102/ap_en_mu/eu_hungary_ice_t)

Hungary's newly created media board, consisting of 5 members of the ruling conservative party, has sanctioned a private radio station for broadcasting Ice-T's song "It's on", because the song is "adverse affect on the moral development". Oh, and a couple of radio hosts have been fired for airing "one minute of silence" in protest of the new board and media law. Oh, and an investigative journalist has quit because the government forced him to team up with a journalist who is a member of the conservative party.


Yes, conservatives are all about freedom. Or as we say in Hungary, "shut up and conform!!"

Oh, come on.

Going from an authoritarian regime that calls itself conservative to "all right wingers are closeted dictators" :rolleyes:

I guess all politicians who slightly tilt to the left are closeted dictators too, because of Stalin ?

[HoreTore]

Oh, come on.

Going from an authoritarian regime that calls itself conservative to "all right wingers are closeted dictators" :rolleyes:

I guess all politicians who slightly tilt to the left are closeted dictators too, because of Stalin ?

From now on, I'm going to call every leftie with anti-liberal views "an authoritarian who calls himself leftist".

[Fragony]

From now on, I'm going to call every leftie with anti-liberal views "an authoritarian who calls himself leftist".

Better don't they can get really nasty when the ducklings don't march in a straight line

[Beskar]

Better don't they can get really nasty when the ducklings don't march in a straight line

Don't you mean goslings ?

[Fragony]

Don't you mean goslings ?

That's just a small group that ruins it for the rest, birds in general are pretty cool. But I still don't think they are above us

[al Roumi]

That's just a small group that ruins it for the rest, birds in general are pretty cool. But I still don't think they are above us

What, even when they are flying?

[The Stranger]

Oh, come on.

Going from an authoritarian regime that calls itself conservative to "all right wingers are closeted dictators" :rolleyes:

I guess all politicians who slightly tilt to the left are closeted dictators too, because of Stalin ?

dont try to argue with horetore... you either agree with him or you are a lunatic, liar or a liverpoolfan of some kind

[Fragony]

What, even when they are flying?

nice catch

[The Stranger]

you know what they say better one bird in your hand... than 10 up your flyer

[Vladimir]

you know what they say better one bird in your hand... than 10 up your flyer

I'd rather have 10 in my fryer. Yummmm....

[Louis VI the Fat]

I, for one, think HoreTore is perfectly entitled to his 'told you so' opening post. When rightwing populists, at least national-conservative parties, are voted in - as they are throughout Europe - then this is what you get.


Also, I should like to wish the Hungarian government good luck with halting the Israeli colonisation of Manhattan, Poland and Hungary. :thumbsup:

[Vuk]

I, for one, think HoreTore is perfectly entitled to his 'told you so' opening post. When rightwing populists, at least national-conservative parties, are voted in - as they are throughout Europe - then this is what you get.


Also, I should like to wish the Hungarian government good luck with halting the Israeli colonisation of Manhattan, Poland and Hungary. :thumbsup:

You and Horetore should form your own little commie brigade. :)

[Louis VI the Fat]

You and Horetore should form your own little commie brigade. :)No.

1) I myself trancend left or right
2) I only do muscular manly men, sorry HoreTore
3) One can regard politics in either of two ways: A, in a manichean 'left vs right' idea of politics, considering everything in this light. Or, B, based on informed opinion. It is not out of any commie sympathy that I have serious worries about the current Hungarian government, and that I loathe the European national-conservative right in general.


In fact, the Economist, that bastion of European economic liberalism, that is, rightwing for you Americans, fully agrees with HoreTore and even goes one better:


FIDESZ, a right-wing party, was elected to government in Hungary in April with a stonking majority and a large popular mandate for change following what it saw as eight years of misrule and corruption under the Socialist Party. In office, Fidesz, led by the belligerent prime minister, Viktor Orban, has interpreted this mandate in a liberal fashion, extending state control over independent institutions and appointing party men to roles of authority. With Hungary about to take up the rotating presidency of the European Union, some observers are concerned (http://www.economist.com/node/17733367?story_id=17733367) about what they consider to be a growing trend of assaults on the country's independent centres of power. Our interactive chart chronicles the events of the last eight months.

https://img695.imageshack.us/img695/6264/magyar.jpg
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2010/12/fidesz


HUNGARY is under the international spotlight. In January the country takes over the rotating presidency of the European Union. But there is growing alarm about the increasing centralisation of power under the right-wing Fidesz government led by Viktor Orban, Hungary’s pugnacious prime minister.

Fidesz won an unprecedented two-thirds majority in April’s general election. Since then, say its critics, it has embarked on a power grab, taking over almost every independent institution. Pal Schmitt, an emollient former member of the European Parliament, has been appointed to the presidency. A “statement of national co-operation”, to be placed in public buildings, claims that only now has Hungary regained its self-determination, though it has been a democracy for two decades.



Party nominees have been elected to all five seats on a powerful new media council. This supervisory body will have an unparalleled mandate to impose large fines on print, online and broadcast media for such vague transgressions as offending “human dignity”. Its powers are causing alarm. Magazines and newspapers have published blank front pages in protest, and international bodies such as the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe have called for a rethink. The members of the council insist that they will not be pushed around by the government.


The charge sheet does not end there. The constitutional court’s jurisdiction over financial matters has been severely restricted. The government has imposed crisis taxes on banks, energy, telecoms and retail companies, alarming foreign investors. It has raided private pension funds. The fiscal council, which provided independent oversight of the budget, has been scrapped, though it will have a successor.


Opposition politicians and civil-society activists hoping that the forthcoming EU presidency would bring outside pressure to bear on Fidesz have been disappointed. The priority in Brussels is for smooth management over the next six months, not bust-ups over press freedom. The government was elected with a clear mandate for change, comments one senior EU official.
http://www.economist.com/node/17733367?story_id=17733367

[Furunculus]

I, for one, think HoreTore is perfectly entitled to his 'told you so' opening post. When rightwing populists, at least national-conservative parties, are voted in - as they are throughout Europe - then this is what you get.


lol, thank god we have a coalition with the lib-dem's, or i just wouldn't be able to restrain those urgues to round up the jews and gypsies, and god, how i hate those disabled and their communist running dogs; the homosexuals!*



* irony alert for those who missed it.

[Louis VI the Fat]

The TorLiban are destroying everything that's good and just in Britain as if it were ancient 100 meter Buddha statues, but they are not national-conservative.

On their right flank some Tories and some policies approach nationalist-populism, and the Conservatives are the party of choice for a part of the electorate which would vote nationalist-populist in a system with more than two parties. But other than that, Britian is thankfully fully within its tradtion of being firmly aloof of continent-style rightwing populism.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Don't be hating the conservatives! :laugh4:

[Beskar]

lol, thank god we have a coalition with the lib-dem's, or i just wouldn't be able to restrain those urgues to round up the jews and gypsies, and god, how i hate those disabled and their communist running dogs; the homosexuals!*


No no, Jews were so last century. It would be Arabs and possibly Poles, now-a-days.

[Furunculus]

The TorLiban are destroying everything that's good and just in Britain as if it were ancient 100 meter Buddha statues, but they are not national-conservative.

On their right flank some Tories and some policies approach nationalist-populism, and the Conservatives are the party of choice for a part of the electorate which would vote nationalist-populist in a system with more than two parties. But other than that, Britian is thankfully fully within its tradtion of being firmly aloof of continent-style rightwing populism.
i on the other hand firmly believe that if the coalition does not last its full term then labour will return as will 1970's Britain, only this time we won't have a demographic profile that can pull us back from the brink with a few sensible policies. no, it will be a long and painful decline into Cuba for us.

seems to me that you are splitting hairs, and thus casting aspersions as little to wide of their proper mark, i.e. Fiduz

[Ronin]

Word to your censoring government!

[HoreTore]

lol, thank god we have a coalition with the lib-dem's, or i just wouldn't be able to restrain those urgues to round up the jews and gypsies, and god, how i hate those disabled and their communist running dogs; the homosexuals!

Gypsies, yes....

A group the new Hungarian government hasa their eyes on turning into second class citizens...


2) I only do muscular manly men, sorry HoreTore

WHAT WHAT WHAT????

[Vuk]

Gypsies, yes....

A group the new Hungarian government hasa their eyes on turning into second class citizens...



WHAT WHAT WHAT????

Do you know what Hore Tore? I am going to say something really unpopular, but nonetheless true. Most Gypsies who I saw when I was in Hungary were total trash. Everything that I have read about their culture reinforces that. They are not raised to take their place in society, but to stick to their ancient ways of living and to leech off of society. If they want to maintain their ancient practices, that is fine, BUT, they cannot do so at the cost of society at large. Personally, I think they need to take them all off of any government help, unless at least one person in their family has held a full time job in the last few years. I also think that they should undertake efforts to break up their communities, crack down on the Gypsy mafia, and try to get them integrated into society. They don't like it? They can go somewhere else. The country is Hungary, and you have to live like a Hungarian.
It is why I was not packing heat when I went over there, I respect their laws and customs, and if you do not, you should not be in their country. Plain and simple. Gypsies are not good Hungarian citizens, and that is the truth.

[Fragony]

They are actually poorly treated in Hungary but mostly agreed. Know a few on the camping where a friend of me lives, really friendly and hospitable people, you'll have a blast with them. But they don't seem to understand the concepts 'property' and 'theft' all too much

[Vuk]

They are actually poorly treated in Hungary but mostly agreed. Know a few on the camping where a friend of me lives, really friendly and hospitable people, you'll have a blast with them. But they don't seem to understand the concepts 'property' and 'theft' all too much

Yes, and that is why I say that they are disruptive to society. One of the people at my school was a half Gypsy and I could tell that people treated her differently, but it is the Gypsies who form their own reputation. You have to obey the law of the land that you are in, that is not too much to ask for.

[Strike For The South]

Yes, and that is why I say that they are disruptive to society. One of the people at my school was a half black and I could tell that people treated her differently, but it is the blacks who form their own reputation. You have to obey the law of the land that you are in, that is not too much to ask for.

removed by moderator


All of Eastern Europe needs to be leveled, at which point we can send some Germans in, they are a clean industrious people

[Fragony]

removed by moderator


All of Eastern Europe needs to be leveled, at which point we can send some Germans in, they are a clean industrious people

And removed by moderator can project it on the USA and blacks all you want but it's European affairs, aka different problems. The problem being over a million really poor and undeveloped people travelling west. thx eu

[Strike For The South]

removed by moderator, can project it on the USA and blacks all you want but it's European affairs, aka different problems. The problem being over a million really poor and undeveloped people travelling west. thx eu

Yea Europe and undrepresented minority groups which span national borders have such a rich and tolerant history

I'm sure it'll work itself out

[Vuk]

Thinking is not one of your strong points


All of Eastern Europe needs to be leveled, at which point we can send some Germans in, they are a clean industrious people

removed by moderator. Let me just point out that A. You have no idea at all what you are talking about, as the situation of Blacks in America (most of whom were brought over as slaves) and the situation of Gypsies in Europe (who migrated Westward from India are completely different, and B. I was not referring to race, but culture. I know that you love to play the race card, but get a life.
The fact of the matter is that Gypsies are living as minorities in countries that already have established cultural values and laws, and if they want to live there, they will need to do as other immigrants do and respect those laws and values. That does not mean that they have to give up their culture, change the dress habits, or anything like that. They just have to start being lawful citizens who contribute to a society instead of destroying it.
I do not think that their opportunities to succeed should be limited (as that would be counter productive), but I do think that their opportunities to be a bunch of criminal refuse should.

removed as potentially objectionable.

[Strike For The South]

removed. Let me just point out that A. You have no idea at all what you are talking about, as the situation of Blacks in America (most of whom were brought over as slaves) and the situation of Gypsies in Europe (who migrated Westward from India are completely different, and B. I was not referring to race, but culture. I know that you love to play the race card, but get a life.
The fact of the matter is that Gypsies are living as minorities in countries that already have established cultural values and laws, and if they want to live there, they will need to do as other immigrants do and respect those laws and values. That does not mean that they have to give up their culture, change the dress habits, or anything like that. They just have to start being lawful citizens who contribute to a society instead of destroying it.
I do not think that their opportunities to succeed should be limited (as that would be counter productive), but I do think that their opportunities to be a bunch of criminal refuse should.

I removed.


Yes yes, the tired old cry of "BUT THIS MINORITY GROUP IS DIFFERENT"

I'm sure however long you spent as an exchange student is some eastern european hovel supercedes the entire historical record of interaction between majority-minority population groups

[Fragony]

Yea Europe and undrepresented minority groups which span national borders have such a rich and tolerant history

Saying what, yeah it doesn't get any sicker than European history, but you should know that you are part of it after all it's in your very genes, an accumulating of centuries of mindless violence and pityless cruelty.

But it's still a bad idea though

[Strike For The South]

Saying what, yeah it doesn't get any sicker than European history, but you should know that you are part of it after all it's in your very genes, an accumulating of centuries of mindless violence and pityless cruelty.

But it's still a bad idea though

My genes? lol. My ansectors were quakers when they were kicked out of jolly old. Granted they then killed an uncountable number of natives but we're pretty sure they shot first.

[Fragony]

My genes? lol. My ansectors were quakers when they were kicked out of jolly old. Granted they then killed an uncountable number of natives but we're pretty sure they shot first.

K, nano's then. But it's really a problem, Belgium was nice enough to have the most rediculous immigration-laws in human history so it's their problem for a while, but I wouldn't take it too lightly overall.

[Strike For The South]

K, nano's then. But it's really a problem, Belgium was nice enough to have the most rediculous immigration-laws in human history so it's their problem for a while, but I wouldn't take it too lightly overall.

God forbid you try to reach out to the Gypsies

You did everything wrong with Jews, here is your chance to make it up 1 outta 2 aint bad

I mean srsly does no one look back 70 years and think "Wait, I've seen this episode before" or are people so wrapped up in xenophobia and there warped veiw of social mores that taking a deep breath and considering alternatives would mean the Gypsies win

[Louis VI the Fat]

I'm sure however long you spent as an exchange student is some eastern european hovel supercedes the entire historical record of interaction between majority-minority population groupsWhich reminds me of the movie Eurotrip, in which a few Americans briefly find themselves in Eastern Europe too. In Bratislava, the...uh...capital of Hungary:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbcH_qYkeTc&feature=related

[Louis VI the Fat]

You did everything wrong with Jews, here is your chance to make it up 1 outta 2 aint badThere have been thousands of etnic and religious groups in Europe, no0t two.

They are either a) assimilated, b) strong enough to resist assimilation and maiontain a distinct identity, or c) place themselves outside of European civilisation so much they are impervious to assimilation.

'A' is a whole string of groups few have ever heard of because they, well, have assimilated. B and C roughly correspond with your two groups. [/fascism]

[Strike For The South]

There have been thousands of etnic and religious groups in Europe, no0t two.

They are either a) assimilated, b) strong enough to resist assimilation and maiontain a distinct identity, or c) place themselves outside of European civilisation so much they are impervious to assimilation.

'A' is a whole string of groups few have ever heard of because they, well, have assimilated. B and C roughly correspond with your two groups. [/fascism]

So the Jews are B while the Gypsies are C

I'm glad your arbitrary classification system puts them outside the realm of saving. Clearly this thread is over and there is nothing left to talk about.

So the same government who outlaws a song from an irrelevant 90s rapper (who plays a cop now on tv..weird) also takes a run at gypsies, you have mocked one of these things while giving the other a pass, granted you are holding your nose and lamenting the fact that if the gypsies had just been a bit more cooperative this could have been avoided but you are complicit none the less

Why the difference? Is it because the Gypsies are too icky of a topic to take on? Because reaching out to them would cause an introspective on how you do business?

The /facism could mean your joking

[Fragony]

God forbid you try to reach out to the Gypsies

Hey where do you think I spend my new years eve

[Strike For The South]

Hey where do you think I spend my new years eve

I have no idea you cryptic tulip

[Louis VI the Fat]

So the Jews are B while the Gypsies are C

I'm glad your arbitrary classification system puts them outside the realm of saving. Clearly this thread is over and there is nothing left to talk about.

So the same government who outlaws a song from an irrelevant 90s rapper (who plays a cop now on tv..weird) also takes a run at gypsies, you have mocked one of these things while giving the other a pass, granted you are holding your nose and lamenting the fact that if the gypsies had just been a bit more cooperative this could have been avoided but you are complicit none the less

Why the difference? Is it because the Gypsies are too icky of a topic to take on? Because reaching out to them would cause an introspective on how you do business?

The /facism could mean your jokingIn America there are groups outside of mainstream society: Amish, native Americans in reservations, to some extent Mormons. Mormons are integrated and do well, Amish are not but do well too. Native Americans in reservations on the whole are poorly integrated, suffer from a whole host of social problems. They are probably the group most easily comparable with the gypsies in Europe.

Surely the solution is not to 'reach out to them'? How would that work? They place themselves outside of mainstream society if only for the very reason to preserve their identity.

[Fragony]

I have no idea you cryptic tulip

Well a Roma camp great fun

[Strike For The South]

In America there are groups outside of mainstream society: Amish, native Americans in reservations, to some extent Mormons. Mormons are integrated and do well, Amish are not but do well too. Native Americans in reservations on the whole are poorly integrated, suffer from a whole host of social problems. They are probably the group most easily comparable with the gypsies in Europe.

Surely the solution is not to 'reach out to them'? How would that work? They place themselves outside of mainstream society if only for the very reason to preserve their identity.

Ok if they would like to be vagabonds let them, if the commit a crime arresst them.

The wholesale deportation and marginalzation thing went out of style years ago.



Well a Roma camp great fun



And you came back unhamred. Unpossible

[HoreTore]

Do you know what Hore Tore? I am going to say something really unpopular, but nonetheless true. Most Gypsies who I saw when I was in Hungary were total trash. Everything that I have read about their culture reinforces that. They are not raised to take their place in society, but to stick to their ancient ways of living and to leech off of society. If they want to maintain their ancient practices, that is fine, BUT, they cannot do so at the cost of society at large. Personally, I think they need to take them all off of any government help, unless at least one person in their family has held a full time job in the last few years. I also think that they should undertake efforts to break up their communities, crack down on the Gypsy mafia, and try to get them integrated into society. They don't like it? They can go somewhere else. The country is Hungary, and you have to live like a Hungarian.
It is why I was not packing heat when I went over there, I respect their laws and customs, and if you do not, you should not be in their country. Plain and simple. Gypsies are not good Hungarian citizens, and that is the truth.


I am not surprised in the slightest though.

Oh, and the Roma have lived in Hungary for centuries.

[Vuk]

I am not surprised in the slightest though.

Oh, and the Roma have lived in Hungary for centuries.
So what? In all that time, they have not assimilated themselves into society or even attempted to be good citizens. Hungary has shown that it is good at assimilating people (Jassic people, Cumans, etc), but the Gypsies have not tried. It is not oppressive to expect someone to obey the laws of the country that everyone else is expected to obey.

@Strike: How do you reach out to the Gypsies? By giving them more privileges than everyone else? How would that be fair? The thing is Strike, that Gypsies have to decide if being Hungarian is important to them. If it is, then they will be good Hungarians, and if not...then they will keep doing what they are doing.

[HoreTore]

I don't feel like debating racism.

If you want to discuss the failures pf the Roma, might I suggest the stormfront forums?

[Vuk]

I don't feel like debating racism.

If you want to discuss the failures pf the Roma, might I suggest the stormfront forums?

Racism? You and Strike are the only ones talking about racism. It is the usual tactic of those who cannot support their position.

[Furunculus]

There have been thousands of etnic and religious groups in Europe, no0t two.

They are either a) assimilated, b) strong enough to resist assimilation and maiontain a distinct identity, or c) place themselves outside of European civilisation so much they are impervious to assimilation.

'A' is a whole string of groups few have ever heard of because they, well, have assimilated. B and C roughly correspond with your two groups. [/fascism]

good post louis, pretty much sums it up.

to add my thoughts in furtherance of the explanation, which you may or may not agree with.

from the english perspective:

while jews don't integrate nor too do they make demands of conformance from the rest of society, and are grudgingly accepted as an absolutely law-abiding group within wider society.
therefore great tolerance is shown.

while gypsies have limited numbers in Britain they do not integrate, and their marginalised lifestyle is not very economic, the combination of which leads to a perception of criminality among wider society, and thus a burden.
therefore less tolerance is shown.

muslims might have integrated very well, but were imported in such numbers into multi-cultural ghettoes that in the end they have not (in visibly large numbers), in addition to which those poorly integrated elements are percieved as a fount of criminality and terrorism, and worst of all; demanding conformance from the host population that constitutes wider society.
therefore the least tolerance is shown.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
it is that last point that is most telling on how the British receive their immigrant groups, for it boils down to a core attitude that demands non-interference:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mrs_Patrick_Campbell

"Does it really matter what these affectionate people do — so long as they don’t do it in the streets and frighten the horses!"

no group publicly calling for sharia law to be imposed on the rest of us will ever attract much affection in the British.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

and to truthfully state that i make every effort to be a tolerant person does not change the fact that i would have a decided preference on who lives next door to me:

1. western european/angloshere work migrant (here to work rather than to stay, no demands of integration made, broadly compatible in the first place)
2. indian hindu family immigrant (zero crime, perfect kids, will be hard-working, and makes few/no demands of wider society)
3. jewish family (zero crime, perfect kids, will be hard-working, and makes few/no demands of wider society)
4. commonwealth immigrant (broadly compatible culture resulting from shared history makes assimilation easy)
5. brit (could be a work-shy scrounger or a pillar of the community, but familiar and unlikely to murder me for sleeping with his daughter)
6.
7.
8.
9. gypsy family
10. the radicalised population of bradford

Q: is there an explicit generalisation above where i ignore the fact that the vast majority of Britain's muslim community is not radicalised, and basically a law-abiding and hardworking group who want nothing more than to earn a living and provide a future for their kids?
A: sure, but given that i don't get to choose my neighbours beforehand i will continue to discriminate.*

*
–verb (used without object)
1.
to note or observe a difference; distinguish accurately: to discriminate between things.
–verb (used with object)
3.
to make or constitute a distinction in or between; differentiate: a mark that discriminates the original from the copy.
4.
to note or distinguish as different: He can discriminate minute variations in tone.
–adjective
5.
marked by discrimination; making or evidencing nice distinctions: discriminate people; discriminate judgments.

[Drag0nUL]

So what? In all that time, they have not assimilated themselves into society or even attempted to be good citizens. Hungary has shown that it is good at assimilating people (Jassic people, Cumans, etc), but the Gypsies have not tried. It is not oppressive to expect someone to obey the laws of the country that everyone else is expected to obey.



I live in Romania and here we also have a singificant gipsy population.
I have nothing against gipsy as peope, but i do think their community is somewhat disruptive. Or at least what they are showing.

I know quite a few gypsies that integrated all right in the normal society.
They make an honest living and 'feel' no differently than any other human being.

My problem lies with gipsy communities that promote a certain way of life that's disruptive to the rest of the society:

-Many poor gypsies live in illegal 'villages' of makeshift shacks or ruined/abandoned buildings. Sometimes the police comes, kicks them out, they wait a bit, and they come back.


-Their family/clan ties, and the conflicts that arise from this. Here we don't have any kind of gang culture apart form gipsy clans and it's a bit shocking (in the bad way) to see 200 gypsies duking it out with axes and swords until the police comes(it's mostly for show though. I refuse to believe that 200 armed people can fight for real and end up with only 2-3 wounded).


-They have a distinct lack of respect (sometimes I even think they are unable to understand ) of the more abstract social norms, such as the cvic duty to respect the law. Most gypsies will respect the law only for fear of consequences, and will break it at leisure if they think they can avoid them.

I've witnessed several incidents with gypsies caught in the act of doing something either illegal or just unpleasant (moslty faking disablilities in order to beg) and wouldn't quit doing it unless directly threatened with reprisal (once it took a police officer taking out his gun and removing the safety for a gipsy begger that was travelling in a train without ticket, pretending to have crippled legs, to get off the train, on his own legs mind you).

[Vuk]

I live in Romania and here we also have a significant Gypsy population.
I have nothing against Gypsy as people, but i do think their community is somewhat disruptive. Or at least what they are showing.

I know quite a few gypsies that integrated all right in the normal society.
They make an honest living and 'feel' no differently than any other human being.

My problem lies with Gypsy communities that promote a certain way of life that's disruptive to the rest of the society:

-Many poor gypsies live in illegal 'villages' of makeshift shacks or ruined/abandoned buildings. Sometimes the police comes, kicks them out, they wait a bit, and they come back.


-Their family/clan ties, and the conflicts that arise from this. Here we don't have any kind of gang culture apart form gipsy clans and it's a bit shocking (in the bad way) to see 200 gypsies duking it out with axes and swords until the police comes(it's mostly for show though. I refuse to believe that 200 armed people can fight for real and end up with only 2-3 wounded).


-They have a distinct lack of respect (sometimes I even think they are unable to understand ) of the more abstract social norms, such as the civic duty to respect the law. Most gypsies will respect the law only for fear of consequences, and will break it at leisure if they think they can avoid them.

I've witnessed several incidents with gypsies caught in the act of doing something either illegal or just unpleasant (mostly faking disabilities in order to beg) and wouldn't quit doing it unless directly threatened with reprisal (once it took a police officer taking out his gun and removing the safety for a Gypsy beggar that was traveling in a train without ticket, pretending to have crippled legs, to get off the train, on his own legs mind you).

Yes, as I said, I knew a half Gypsy girl who I studies with in Szeged, and her and her family were good citizens and I had nothing against them. That was the only example that I saw of a well integrated Gypsy family though, and the wider Gypsy community was anything but integrated. The only major crime problem in Szeged is due to the Gypsy mafia, and their drug trade is well developed.

I have absolutely nothing against Gypsies as people, it is that 'Gypsy' way of life that refuses to obey the laws of society. No, I don't think Gypsies should be abused, oppressed, etc, but I do think that significant, targeted effort needs to be made to bring them into the larger fold of society. If they gave up that lawlessness, then people would start appreciating them for their cultural contributions, and their positive role in society.

[Strike For The South]

haha I love it

"My best friend is black how dare you accuse me"

I don't know why I'm surprised Europe has a long rich history of genocide and population displacement. Such a petty people, unwilling to look past their own prejudices

It should be rather telling when Sarkozy tries to kick the roma out the back door in what is supposedly the most socially tolerant nation on earth, what is really going on. It's all well and good until you upset the status quo, then you are ostracized and marginalized.



but I do think that significant, targeted effort needs to be made to bring them into the larger fold of society. If they gave up that lawlessness, then people would start appreciating them for their cultural contributions, and their positive role in society.


The good ol Vuk backtrack. The smell of victory is so sweet

[Vuk]

haha I love it

"My best friend is black how dare you accuse me"

I don't know why I'm surprised Europe has a long rich history of genocide and population displacement. Such a petty people, unwilling to look past their own prejudices

It should be rather telling when Sarkozy tries to kick the roma out the back door in what is supposedly the most socially tolerant nation on earth, what is really going on. It's all well and good until you upset the status quo, then you are ostracized and marginalized.



The good ol Vuk backtrack. The smell of victory is so sweet

Perhaps you would like to point out to me when I contradicted myself then, oh wise and knowing the one.
You just have to keep throwing around the race/racist card, don't you?
First of all, the girl was not my friend, I barely knew her. She was nice, and helped me find a cheap bike, but that is about as far as I ever had contact with her. I mentioned her not to show how tolerant I was toward Gypsies, but to point out that her and her family were the only example I saw in all those months of successful integration. Second of all, using race when talking about Gypsies is about as stupid as using it to talk about Muslims, considering that Gypsies used to be quite good at adopting people into their society, whatever genetics Gypsies had when they first came into Europe is probably much different than now. Must you always think of things in terms of 'racial identity'? Someone can dislike someone's culture without disliking their race (conservative southerners for instance, you seem to hate them). Just earlier you and Horetore were bashing the Magyar!
Quit throwing around your PC talking points and actually read what was posting. You have not once made any serious criticism of my argument; you just screamed "RACISM, NAZI, BABY MURDERER!"
Let me make this really simple for you. I will lay out several points, and if you feel so inclined to discuss this with me, I would be happy to hear your reply.

1. The way that a large portion of Gypsies live in Hungary is outside of the normal social order. Can we agree on that?
2. Gypsies not only often live outside of society, but do not respect the laws and institutions of Hungarian society and government? Can we agree on that one? Or do you not know?
3. When a social group lives outside of larger society and does not respect its laws and institutions, it becomes disruptive and potentially dangerous to society. Can we agree on this on? This would include everything from gun-toting, bomb-making, anti-government radicals in the US, to Gypsies in Hungary, to Militias in Sub-Saharan Africa. All very different beasts, but of the same category (described above). This would not include people living out of society, BUT respecting its laws. ie, Amish, American Indians on reserves, some Jewish communities, etc. Can we agree on that point?
4. When such a group exists, it needs to either start respecting the laws and customs of the country, or get out. If they do not agree with them, they can participate in the democratic process to change them, like everyone else who disagree with laws. If the law is enforced on everyone but them, you are discriminating against the rest of society? Can we agree on that one?
Now this one I sense is where the source of the conflict is:
5. In the case of Gypsies, they have in the past and continue to stick stubbornly to their ways of life, even when it conflicts with the laws of the Hungarian government. They deliberately segregate themselves from the rest of society, and live life in their own way, which produces a drain on society. The answer to the problem then is to give them the ultimatum to either start making progress toward integration by such and such time, or be forcibly integrated, or if they do not want that, then to leave. The lack of integration is what is allowing their lawlessness to flourish, and if you were to integrate them into society at large, you would take care of the problem of their lawlessness? I have a feeling that you are going to disagree with me here, so if you do, please do not just say that I am wrong, but tell me what you think causes such lawlessness and disrespect for law and custom amongst Gypsies, and give me your solution for it, as I have given you mine.

[Strike For The South]

If they break laws arrest them and give them their day in court. What is so hard about that? Labeling an entire group of people ostracizes them further

I don't care what they do, what is the "normal social order" ? You have not brought up any point other than "they are different and that makes people uncomfortable" All of the people you pointed out that "respect the laws" have all been viciously persecuted at one point or another in history because of THE EXACT SAME REASONS YOU ARE LAYING OUT FOR THE GYPSIES

Until you can point out to something concrete your posts are nothing more than xenophobic drivel which has infested humanity since we first realized the guys across the river are different

I am not promoting Gypsy lawlessness, I simply abhor systematic attempts by a majority government to further marginalize and demonize minority groups for the sake of promoting its own jingoism, Which they are doing because they have no idea how to govern and when you have a failing government you have a scapegoat.

Gypsies are ~2% of the population in Hungary SMFH

Maybe you can just sterlize them like the Czechs did

As for my solution? lol, Don't kill them? Let them be? If they break a law arrest them?

Can someone else tell him he's wrong? I don't think he'll listen to me. Maybe a short history of all the groups he just presented as nice and docile minority groups. I could give him nice picture books with all the forced assimaltion and ethnocide, of Jewish babies being ripped from there mothers arms and Amish farms being burned, all for the sake of "WELL THEY REPRESENT A DANGER" A 2% DANGER

The real danger here is the bloody government which is already qaushing expression and the ultimate expression is being a minority group

[Strike For The South]

And of course No one has brought up that:

There have been dozens maybe 000s of attacks on gypsies in the past year and not ONE perp has been caught
The Good Hungrians have formed a bloody malitia, because when someone is different than you, you kill them

But clearly the problem is with the gypsies

But there different so they brought it on themselves, if they had just been docile, if they had just acted more like ME

But then again Vuk never grew up with this so I guess I should give him a pass, If you don't know how these people operate then there fearmongering is quite seductive but I've known enough segragation era Southerners to know deep down once you peel back all the layers and all the bull pseudo science that for so many years was propagated as truth, you are left with nothing but good old fasioned hate

[HoreTore]

I don't believe blatant racism is worthy of a decent response.

[Furunculus]

lol, apparently if the EC demands changes to hungary's media laws then it will have an immediate impact on the media laws in Germany, France and the Netherlands who all have similar legal strictures:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2011/01/hungarys_media_law

:D

[al Roumi]

As for my solution? lol, Don't kill them? Let them be? If they break a law arrest them?

Can someone else tell him he's wrong? I don't think he'll listen to me. Maybe a short history of all the groups he just presented as nice and docile minority groups. I could give him nice picture books with all the forced assimaltion and ethnocide, of Jewish babies being ripped from there mothers arms and Amish farms being burned, all for the sake of "WELL THEY REPRESENT A DANGER" A 2% DANGER

The real danger here is the bloody government which is already qaushing expression and the ultimate expression is being a minority group

To my mind the best equivalent minority group is the Australian aborigines, the forced assimilation Vuk prescribed in his early posts sounds very much like what the (well meaning?) Australian (British?) government did -breaking apart families, fostering aboriginy children with white families, denial of the existence of an aboriginal culture...

I am so going to sig Vuk's line of "not packing heat" as a form of cultural sensitivity... LOL

[Furunculus]

damn it, my big replies rarely ever get a response, is it because my 'controversial' views are just too mundanely reasonable?

[al Roumi]

damn it, my big replies rarely ever get a response, is it because my 'controversial' views are just too mundanely reasonable?

LOL, I think that by comparison to Vuk, you appear reasonable. You are Stalin to Churchill if Vuk is Hitler :laugh:

If you want a response, I think your blanket ethnographic characterisations were crude and wholely beneath you. I depsise the BNP and EDL, that doesn't mean I would least like to live next to a white family, yet for the same reason you will not contiguously exist next to any Muslims because of Islam4UK?

[Furunculus]

hah, i didn't say "any" muslim.

i deliberately referred to the "radicalised population of bradford", and then referred to this generalisation in the following statement.

on a similar note, i wanna find me some "headscarf girls"! :rockstar:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,737683,00.html

[al Roumi]

hah, i didn't say "any" muslim.

i deliberately referred to the "radicalised population of bradford", and then referred to this generalisation in the following statement.

Indeed you did Joseph, but not providing any other type of Muslim in your analysis is pretty suggestive.


on a similar note, i wanna find me some "headscarf girls"! :rockstar:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,737683,00.html

:S that's a strangely serendipitous comment to make on the same day as this article:

Grooming and our ignoble tradition of racialising crime
Dubious claims about Muslim men grooming white girls hide legitimate worries about a system that fails victims of abuse
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/07/grooming-racialising-crime-tradition

[Furunculus]

Indeed you did Joseph, but not providing any other type of Muslim in your analysis is pretty suggestive.



:S that's a strangely serendipitous comment to make on the same day as this article:

Grooming and our ignoble tradition of racialising crime
Dubious claims about Muslim men grooming white girls hide legitimate worries about a system that fails victims of abuse
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/07/grooming-racialising-crime-tradition

i don't subscribe to the hard-coded notion that fairness can only be demonstrated by the overscrupulous reinforcement of a positive trend if you wish to demonstrate a negative trend, if we really wished to get picky I might point out that 'other' muslims should be implicit from the reference to Commonwealth countries, but it simply isn't in my nature to care that much about how others perceive me.

i'm not sure how your link to Komment Macht Frie does anything to challenge my link..........?

[al Roumi]

i don't subscribe to the hard-coded notion that fairness can only be demonstrated by the overscrupulous reinforcement of a positive trend if you wish to demonstrate a negative trend, if we really wished to get picky I might point out that 'other' muslims should be implicit from the reference to Commonwealth countries, but it simply isn't in my nature to care that much about how others perceive me.

It's not about how people see you, it's about how people think you see them.


i'm not sure how your link to Komment Macht Frie does anything to challenge my link..........?
It doesn't, it's just funny (?) to see you (a white blocke) saying you'd like to meet a Muslim girl who has to have her sexual encounters in insalubrious conduitions when there was some thing on how Asian gangs are supposedly quite widely involved in abusing/pimping white girls.

+lol at the Komment macht frei.

[Furunculus]

i treat everyone i meet on an absolutely impartial basis, and weigh them on their merits.
where i employ my judgement and make assumptions based on knowledge and experience (aka discrimination) is where i do not have the privilege of first hand knowledge.

when i talk of preferences with regards to who is my neighbour i talk merely of idle preference, not remonstrations or restrictions.
to put this another way; the people i would choose to live next to in order of preference are as follows:
1. pleasant, none interfering, and law-abiding
2. none interfering, and law-abiding
3. law-abiding
4. average joe.
5. unpleasant
6. unpleasant, and interfering
7. unpleasant, interfering, and unlawful

in the absence of perfect knowledge, i.e. without a brain scan of all aspiring neighbours (and the ability to forbid them the house next door) i am reduced to discrimination (again, i refer you to the dictionary definition).

from personal experience, and knowledge otherwise acquired, i'm pretty sure that living next to a random Jewish family will meet a category #1 desirable neighbour.
therefore that family will sit high on my list of desirable neighbours.

from personal experience, and knowledge otherwise acquired, i'm pretty sure that living next to an attendant of (insert random radical mosque) is less likely to meet the criteria of a category #1 desirable neighbour.
therefore that family will be less likely to sit so high on my list of desirable neighbours.

from personal experience, and knowledge otherwise acquired, i'm less likely to purchase an IBM/Hitachi or Seagate hard-drive because i understand that many people have had problems in the past with them.
even tho i know that there is a 99.9% probability of just such a drive functioning perfectly today.
does that mean i will immediately junk an IBM/Hitachi or Seagate hard-drive if one happens into my possession? no, i will weigh it on its merits.
does that mean i will petition the gov't to forbid the sale of IBM/Hitachi or Seagate hard-drive from favoured retailers? absolutely not.

in my example i deliberately chose not to write off an entire sector of society because it is not right to do so in the absence of first hand-knowledge of every individual within that sector, which is an impossibility so i did not.

the reason why i say this is not because i really care about immigration or particular colours/creeds, because i do not, it is because i disapprove to the subversion of behaviour that is perfectly healthy in the name of political correctness.
i likewise disapprove of the subversion of language including such words as "discriminate".

i expect all friends family and associates to discriminate and use good judgement, it is a prerequisite for a none-destructive life given that the alternative leaves fate to random chance, but that in no way implies i support, advocate, or otherwise encourage sectarianism.

outside of the bare essentials for a functioning civic society the attribute I most prize is none-interference in the lives of others, both ways round, and that which i like least is unwarranted interference in my life. that is a personal 'prejudice'.

as to the comment is free joke, my pleasure.

do you really believe this is an unworthy personal characteristic, and is that merely because it is 'uncomfortable' to discuss such things in anything other than banal equivocations?

funnily enough, i have just found that my new 2TB samsung drive is duff, from a manufacturer that is generally considered to have an excellent record of reliability. who'da thunk it?

[HoreTore]

lol, apparently if the EC demands changes to hungary's media laws then it will have an immediate impact on the media laws in Germany, France and the Netherlands who all have similar legal strictures:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2011/01/hungarys_media_law

:D

I was unaware that the ruling parties of Germany, France and the Netherlands assign party comrades to work with journalists i opposition to the current regime.

And by similar, do you perhaps by any chance mean "completely different"?

[Louis VI the Fat]

:S that's a strangely serendipitous comment to make on the same day as this article:

Grooming and our ignoble tradition of racialising crime
Dubious claims about Muslim men grooming white girls hide legitimate worries about a system that fails victims of abuse
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/07/grooming-racialising-crime-traditionAh, I see:




But what has not emerged is any consistent evidence to suggest that Pakistani Muslim men are uniquely and disproportionately involved in these crimes, nor that they are preying on white girls because they believe them to be legitimate sexual quarry, as is now being suggested.

The Times investigation is based around 56 men convicted in the Midlands and north of England since 1997, 50 from Muslim backgrounds. Granted, such prosecutions are notoriously difficult to sustain, but, nonetheless, this is a small sample used to evidence the "tidal wave" of offending referred to by unnamed police sources. Martin Narey, the chief executive of Barnardo's, which has run projects in the areas concerned for many years, tells me that, while he is pleased to see open discussion of child sexual exploitation, he worries that "decent Pakistani men will now be looked at as potential child abusers". He insists: "This is not just about Pakistani men, and not just about Asian men. And it is happening all over the country."

While Narey acknowledges that "in the Midlands and north of England there does seem to be an over-representation of minority ethnic men in [offending] groups", he argues strongly that no useful conclusions can be drawn until the government undertakes a serious piece of research into what is a nationwide problem. (Keith Vaz, who chairs the Commons home affairs select committee called for such an inquiry today.) Narey also refutes the allegation that Muslim men are grooming white girls because of cultural assumptions about their sexual availability, as girls from minority backgrounds have been similarly abused.

Thus no official data exists on the ethnic or religious background of perpetrators of this form of child abuse, and local charities have stated publicly that they do not consider it a race issue.

50 out of 56 offenders belong to a single minority group. Then follow several paragraphs of mental exercises why this is, of course!, a useless statistic. :juggle2:

The quote above shows why Fragony is right.

[HoreTore]

50 offenders? Yes, the actions taken by those 50 offends should influence how we treat the million law-abiding ones...

Stop focusing on percentage, start focusing on actual number of offendrs. Also realize that every assault rape is reported, nearly every rape where there isn't a pre-existng relationship between the victim and offend is reported(which would be the case with most newly arrived immigrants) and that almost no rapes are reported when there is a pr-existing relationship and/or alcohol is involved.

Also, the black numbers are so extreme when it comes to rape that any avaiable numbers are basically junk that no sane person would dare draw a conclusion from.

[Furunculus]

I was unaware that the ruling parties of Germany, France and the Netherlands assign party comrades to work with journalists i opposition to the current regime.

And by similar, do you perhaps by any chance mean "completely different"?

i'm not a lawyer to understand the intricate ins and outs of the comparitive media laws of those countries, so i'm not in a position to explain why the economist is wrong to report this 'allegation', perhaps you would be so good as to enlighten me..........?

[HoreTore]

Uhm, the economist reported the Hungarian PM claiming that. the economist didn't touch the comment.

Understandably.

[Furunculus]

granted, i wasn't just going to be so blase as to write off the allegation. it's not as if i like hungary's ridiculous laws.

[HoreTore]

An easy way to check the truth in that statement, would be to turn on a german, french or dutch radio station right now and see if they're playing any hip hop....

I'm betting 10 dollars they are.

[Furunculus]

An easy way to check the truth in that statement, would be to turn on a german, french or dutch radio station right now and see if they're playing any hip hop....

I'm betting 10 dollars they are.

i'm afraid that is rather valueless if we wish to assess the legal principles upon which the law was based because it takes no account of how the law is interpretted in different legal jurisdictions.

it isn't the fact that hip-hop has been banned that matters, it is the fact that arbitrary laws exist which permit the censorship of public material for no 'good' reason.

[HoreTore]

i'm afraid that is rather valueless if we wish to assess the legal principles upon which the law was based because it takes no account of how the law is interpretted in different legal jurisdictions.

it isn't the fact that hip-hop has been banned that matters, it is the fact that arbitrary laws exist which permit the censorship of public material for no 'good' reason.

No, what a law is in theory is irrelevant, what matters is how it is applied in practice.

As an example, Norway had a blasphemy law until the socialist government removed it a couple of years ago(2008 IIRC). The law was quite similar to the tribal laws against blasphemy you find in Pakistan. Does that mean that we wwere the same as Pakistan in that area? No, of course not, because while Pakietans law is actively used, our law had not been used since the Øverland case in the 30's, which was even dismissed by the courts even though it was a clear violation.

If France has a law that could in theory ban Ice-T in the afternoons, but never uses it, then you cannot say that France's laws are similar to Hungary's.

[Furunculus]

If France has a law that could in theory ban Ice-T in the afternoons, but never uses it, then you cannot say that France's laws are similar to Hungary's.

no, you can say that france and hungary have different judicial outcomes.

what is funny is that the EU will have to be very careful at how it attempts to apply pressure on hungary, for if it deems the law incompatible with its goals then that will perforce have an impact on other countries with similar laws.

in the end, the EU may be forced to grin and bear hungary's silly law that is foolishly applied, for it lacks the levers to do anything about it.

[HoreTore]

I rathere doubt that any Frenchman will cry over a dead law that is overturned.

Desperation from an idiotic Hungarian PM, nothing less. Kinda like what we see from every other dictator whenever they implement a new law of oppression: "but country X does Y!!11".

Read China Daily's articles on Liu Xiaobo. All of their arguments are based on "western country X does/would do Y". And most of the time, they do point at real inaccuracies in our laws abd behaviour, but its stll completely besides the point and completely irrelevant when it comes to China's criminal behaviour. Just like french media laws are comletely irrelevant to Hungarys criminal behaviour.

Especially since hip hop is played in France all day long.

[Furunculus]

no argument there.

------------------------------

more on the fiduz business:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2011/01/european_politics
http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2011/01/european_politics_0