Org Mobile Site
Originally Posted by rvg:
How "danish" are these guys culturally? Are there any Danes in the house who can answer this?
Anything from a third to first generation immigrant.How "danish" are these guys culturally? Are there any Danes in the house who can answer this?
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Anything from a third to first generation immigrant.
That describes literally nothing at all.Anything from a third to first generation immigrant.
Originally Posted by rvg:
How "danish" are these guys culturally? Are there any Danes in the house who can answer this?
You're basically asking "how long do you have to live in Denmark, to be considered Danish?" I don't know if you're ever going to get a reliable consensus.How "danish" are these guys culturally? Are there any Danes in the house who can answer this?
Yeah, but is having a stamp that says "danish" in your passport enough to be considered of danish culture? 
Originally Posted by lars573:
Actually in Canada the Hells Angels were the only coast to coast criminal organization. Biker gangs ARE organized crime here.
Same in Australia. We have Hells Angels, Gypsy Jokers, Nomads, The Finks, Rebels, Commancheros and Bandidos. With the Commancheros, Finks, Nomads and Rebels at war with the Bandidos, Hells Angels and Notorious. They all are generally mix-race gangs, but Notorious is mostly Arabic/Pacific Islander/other Middle Eastern and the Gypsy Jokers and Finks are predominantly white.Actually in Canada the Hells Angels were the only coast to coast criminal organization. Biker gangs ARE organized crime here.
There are also numerous South-East Asian and Chinese gangs in Sydney and still quite a few Italian families in Melbourne.
There is a disturbing rise in Middle Eastern gangs in the Sydney's Inner West, with four major gangs Dlasthr (The Last Hour or Assyrian Kings), the Muslim Brotherhood Movement, Asesinoz MC and Brothers For Life (BFL). Dlasthr is more organised, etc, while MBM, Asesinoz and BFL are involved in petty crime and Islamic extremism. They rival the Bra Boys, who are mostly white surfers, but they do have some high-profile rugby-league players in their ranks.
So I guess Horetore we have a similar situation to what y'all in Scandinavia have. And my 2 cents, the reason white-Australians here will support the white gangs, despite them all being involved in crime, is that the Middle Eastern gangs here are based around Islamic extremism, anti-Australian acts and violence against whites.
It all boils down to this, from where I am from:
There will ALWAYS be crime... Heck, I wouldnt smoke weed if it weren't! Now, what group do I support...
A) Hells Angels... These guys have the same basic belief system as me... I mean, YES they are criminals... Some of them are totally out of controll. But the main majority of them follow the common inofficial rules as are upheld by society at large...
B) Some Arabic gang... These guys rape women for dressing as whores (you know, they are not dressed like ninjas in skirts) and their prefered victim of robbery (and violation) is white men...
How could I EVER choose between them?
Get real.
There will ALWAYS be crime... Heck, I wouldnt smoke weed if it weren't! Now, what group do I support...
A) Hells Angels... These guys have the same basic belief system as me... I mean, YES they are criminals... Some of them are totally out of controll. But the main majority of them follow the common inofficial rules as are upheld by society at large...
B) Some Arabic gang... These guys rape women for dressing as whores (you know, they are not dressed like ninjas in skirts) and their prefered victim of robbery (and violation) is white men...
How could I EVER choose between them?
Get real.
A) White scum
B) Black scum
How could you choose between them... good point!
B) Black scum
How could you choose between them... good point!
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly:
A) White scum
B) Black scum
How could you choose between them... good point!
Thank you for your contribution to the debate. You CLEARLY rocked my world.A) White scum
B) Black scum
How could you choose between them... good point!
You CLEARLY rocked my world.
I get that a lot....
I get that a lot....
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
It all boils down to this, from where I am from:
There will ALWAYS be crime... Heck, I wouldnt smoke weed if it weren't! Now, what group do I support...
A) Hells Angels... These guys have the same basic belief system as me... I mean, YES they are criminals... Some of them are totally out of controll. But the main majority of them follow the common inofficial rules as are upheld by society at large...
B) Some Arabic gang... These guys rape women for dressing as whores (you know, they are not dressed like ninjas in skirts) and their prefered victim of robbery (and violation) is white men...
How could I EVER choose between them?
Get real.
It all boils down to this, from where I am from:
There will ALWAYS be crime... Heck, I wouldnt smoke weed if it weren't! Now, what group do I support...
A) Hells Angels... These guys have the same basic belief system as me... I mean, YES they are criminals... Some of them are totally out of controll. But the main majority of them follow the common inofficial rules as are upheld by society at large...
B) Some Arabic gang... These guys rape women for dressing as whores (you know, they are not dressed like ninjas in skirts) and their prefered victim of robbery (and violation) is white men...
How could I EVER choose between them?
Get real.
Why would you need to voice your support for either group? The only side you should be on is the law, and that places you against both of those groups of criminals. To do otherwise (by your argument, anyways) is only a sign of both racism and ignorance, things which our world certainly doesn't need anymore.
Originally Posted by Megas Methuselah:
Why would you need to voice your support for either group? The only side you should be on is the law, and that places you against both of those groups of criminals. To do otherwise (by your argument, anyways) is only a sign of both racism and ignorance, things which our world certainly doesn't need anymore.
Makes perfect sense to me, if the Hell's Angel's don't affect my life, but arab gangs do, I would be more positive about the Hell's Angels. I don't really care about organized crime, it's the shadow-ecomomy, I do care about granny's being robbed.Why would you need to voice your support for either group? The only side you should be on is the law, and that places you against both of those groups of criminals. To do otherwise (by your argument, anyways) is only a sign of both racism and ignorance, things which our world certainly doesn't need anymore.
Originally Posted by Husar:
Yeah, but is having a stamp that says "danish" in your passport enough to be considered of danish culture?
This is the great question of the age.Yeah, but is having a stamp that says "danish" in your passport enough to be considered of danish culture?
The follow-up question is "Should people always behave in a way that the majority in a society feel happy and comfortable with?"
Then the question after that is "To what extent do individuals have rights of belief and expression?"
Of course, as ever, none of you see the historical parrallels. The development of fascism in the early 20th century was due to the creation of new, potentially disparate nations. When Germany and Italy were created out of the various smaller states they had to impose an ideal of nationhood. Everything had to branded with the mark of the new nation. Germany still has Bundes-everything. The side-effect of this is it left a large number of people with questionable loyalty. Catholics (to Rome), Gypsies and Jews.
The answer to the age old question is very simple, that freedom ends where someone else's freedom begins, where that is different for every culture but ignoring said rule is asking for trouble. There, I just saved the world.
Originally Posted by Idaho:
The follow-up question is "Should people always behave in a way that the majority in a society feel happy and comfortable with?"
Then the question after that is "To what extent do individuals have rights of belief and expression?"
Of course, as ever, none of you see the historical parrallels. The development of fascism in the early 20th century was due to the creation of new, potentially disparate nations. When Germany and Italy were created out of the various smaller states they had to impose an ideal of nationhood. Everything had to branded with the mark of the new nation. Germany still has Bundes-everything. The side-effect of this is it left a large number of people with questionable loyalty. Catholics (to Rome), Gypsies and Jews.
No, to use an old English saying; "do whatever you want, just don't scare the horses", i.e. its not my business to interfere in your life, just make sure you don't interfere in mine.The follow-up question is "Should people always behave in a way that the majority in a society feel happy and comfortable with?"
Then the question after that is "To what extent do individuals have rights of belief and expression?"
Of course, as ever, none of you see the historical parrallels. The development of fascism in the early 20th century was due to the creation of new, potentially disparate nations. When Germany and Italy were created out of the various smaller states they had to impose an ideal of nationhood. Everything had to branded with the mark of the new nation. Germany still has Bundes-everything. The side-effect of this is it left a large number of people with questionable loyalty. Catholics (to Rome), Gypsies and Jews.
Every right up to the point it interferes in someone else's life. eg, british jews. They look funny, they keep themselves apart, the east funny food, have a funny religion, but who cares, because they live there lives without imposing that view on others.
Then for example you have the millions of ME/muslim immigrants the UK is trying to 'assimilate'. They look funny, they keep themselves apart, the east funny food, have a funny religion, but find themselves the object of distrust from the native population, because that native population perceives a noisy grievance culture from the newcomers which is forcing the natives to adjust their lives to accommodate a griping minority who really ought to be grateful they got citizenship and quietly set about making themselves British, i.e. the italicized English idiom above.
Some of us see those exact problems in the attempt to forge a federal europe.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
The answer to the age old question is very simple, that freedom ends where someone else's freedom begins, where that is different for every culture but ignoring said rule is asking for trouble. There, I just saved the world.
Your freedom ends where my freedom begins.The answer to the age old question is very simple, that freedom ends where someone else's freedom begins, where that is different for every culture but ignoring said rule is asking for trouble. There, I just saved the world.
In other words your freedom to do what you want ends where my freedom to make you do what I want begins.
Originally Posted by Furunculus:
Every right up to the point it interferes in someone else's life. eg, british jews. They look funny, they keep themselves apart, the east funny food, have a funny religion, but who cares, because they live there lives without imposing that view on others.
Then for example you have the millions of ME/muslim immigrants the UK is trying to 'assimilate'. They look funny, they keep themselves apart, the east funny food, have a funny religion, but find themselves the object of distrust from the native population, because that native population perceives a noisy grievance culture from the newcomers which is forcing the natives to adjust their lives to accommodate a griping minority who really ought to be grateful they got citizenship and quietly set about making themselves British
The actual examples of natives having to adjust their lives are remarkable thin on the ground, and yet remarkably prevalent in the media. I certainly have never had to adjust my life in any way shape or form. Nor has anyone I know or met. However all have read the stories in the newspapers.Every right up to the point it interferes in someone else's life. eg, british jews. They look funny, they keep themselves apart, the east funny food, have a funny religion, but who cares, because they live there lives without imposing that view on others.
Then for example you have the millions of ME/muslim immigrants the UK is trying to 'assimilate'. They look funny, they keep themselves apart, the east funny food, have a funny religion, but find themselves the object of distrust from the native population, because that native population perceives a noisy grievance culture from the newcomers which is forcing the natives to adjust their lives to accommodate a griping minority who really ought to be grateful they got citizenship and quietly set about making themselves British
Originally Posted by Husar:
Your freedom ends where my freedom begins.
In other words your freedom to do what you want ends where my freedom to make you do what I want begins.
Yes but I think I said it better, more compact.Your freedom ends where my freedom begins.
In other words your freedom to do what you want ends where my freedom to make you do what I want begins.
Originally Posted by Megas Methuselah:
Why would you need to voice your support for either group? The only side you should be on is the law, and that places you against both of those groups of criminals. To do otherwise (by your argument, anyways) is only a sign of both racism and ignorance, things which our world certainly doesn't need anymore.
I do not support either group. However, with my support or not, they are there. And if I have to choose between them, I'd go with HA. Why would you need to voice your support for either group? The only side you should be on is the law, and that places you against both of those groups of criminals. To do otherwise (by your argument, anyways) is only a sign of both racism and ignorance, things which our world certainly doesn't need anymore.
They do not interfere in my everyday life, arabic gangs do.
Originally Posted by Idaho:
The actual examples of natives having to adjust their lives are remarkable thin on the ground, and yet remarkably prevalent in the media. I certainly have never had to adjust my life in any way shape or form. Nor has anyone I know or met. However all have read the stories in the newspapers.
this would be one example:The actual examples of natives having to adjust their lives are remarkable thin on the ground, and yet remarkably prevalent in the media. I certainly have never had to adjust my life in any way shape or form. Nor has anyone I know or met. However all have read the stories in the newspapers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_...atred_Act_2006
Originally Posted by Furunculus:
this would be one example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_...atred_Act_2006
So.....this would be one example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_...atred_Act_2006
How have you changed your life because of it?
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
So.....
How have you changed your life because of it?
Well maybe he can be prosecuted for insulting someone's imaginary friend?So.....
How have you changed your life because of it?
Originally Posted by Furunculus:
this would be one example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_...atred_Act_2006
Yeah it's really put a crimp on my day now that I can't:this would be one example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_...atred_Act_2006
Originally Posted by :
Section 29B:
(1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred
Section 29B:
(1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Well maybe he can be prosecuted for insulting someone's imaginary friend?
This was about someone having changed their behaviour because of immigration.Well maybe he can be prosecuted for insulting someone's imaginary friend?
I'm very curios as to what situation Furunculus would have said something before, where he now kept his mouth shut because of this law.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
This was about someone having changed their behaviour because of immigration.
Go to an enriched area and ask the locals how immigration have changed their behaviour, preferably in pink This was about someone having changed their behaviour because of immigration.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Go to an enriched area and ask the locals how immigration have changed their behaviour, preferably in pink
I already live in what you call an "enriched area", Frags.Go to an enriched area and ask the locals how immigration have changed their behaviour, preferably in pink
Actually, I've lived in two such places. For 19 of my 22 years.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
So.....
How have you changed your life because of it?
perhaps, as a fan of the English common-law approach of making few laws and applying them rigourously, i object to yet more laws banning things that don't need to be banned.So.....
How have you changed your life because of it?
Originally Posted by Furunculus:
perhaps, as a fan of the English common-law approach of making few laws and applying them rigourously, i object to yet more laws banning things that don't need to be banned.
So in other words;perhaps, as a fan of the English common-law approach of making few laws and applying them rigourously, i object to yet more laws banning things that don't need to be banned.
No, immigration haven't changed your life.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
I already live in what you call an "enriched area", Frags.
Don't we all, two Turkish bakers and a kebab-shop I already live in what you call an "enriched area", Frags.
Have some patience.
Originally Posted by Fragony:
Don't we all, two Turkish bakers and a kebab-shop
Have some patience.
I don't have the exact numbers anymore, but I believe it's around 40% immigrants.Don't we all, two Turkish bakers and a kebab-shop
Have some patience.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
I don't have the exact numbers anymore, but I believe it's around 40% immigrants.
Like I said, have some patience, the negative effects are already beginning to show in Oslo, and it's going to get worse. Like everywhere.I don't have the exact numbers anymore, but I believe it's around 40% immigrants.
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/lo...icle190268.ece <- quality!
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO