• A truck ploughs through Christmas market in Berlin
    267 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;51557553]I don't know about this study but I saw a European article (I think it was German, I'll try to find it) where they conveniently lumped Islamic violence in with "right wing terrorism". I'm glad you made this distinction here though. Sometimes "terrorism" or "hate crimes" are defined as simple shit like shouting nigger at someone or drawing a swastika somewhere. Not exactly on the same level as this incident.[/QUOTE] Yes, that kind of stuff most likely falls under the first two categories ("Propagandadelikte"/'illegal propaganda incidents' and "Volksverhetzung"/'hate speech') as well as "Beleidigung"/'insults'. Overall, the kinds of incidents listed are: [quote]Propagandadelikte - illegal propaganda incidents [I think] Volksverhetzung - hate speech Sachbeschädigung - property damage Beleidigung - insults [Yes, this is illegal here. You'd have to go really quite far to actually get sentenced over it, though.] Körperverletzung - assault Sonstige - other Versammlungsgesetz - [This literally translates to] law of assembly[. I assume these are protests staged without prior announcement.] Bedrohung - threats Widerstand - resistance [I assume against law enforcement] Branddelikte - arson (incidents) Diebstahl - theft Landfriedensbruch - trespassing Erpressung - extortion Raub - robbery Eingriffe in den Straßenverkehr - traffic impairment incidents[/quote] The perpetrator categories listed are: [quote]Rechts - right wing Links - left wing Ausländer - foreigners StoepM/Staatsschutzkriminalität ohne explizite politische Motivation - [This is hard to translate, but it's probably something like] state protection crimes without explicit political motivation[. I have no idea what this specifically is.][/quote] and the last column and row are just the sum of incidents of each kind. For those reading this who understand German: The Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung ('federal centre for political education', I think) has [URL="http://www.bpb.de/politik/extremismus/"]fairly comprehensive resources on extremism of all kinds here in Germany[/URL]. The main topics are native/traditional left- and right-wing extremism of course, but there are also quite a few resources on Islamism in general and Salafism in particular. The percentage of Islamist Muslims (defined as those that would prefer Islamic legislation over our current political system here) is somewhat significant according to the site (around 1% of German Muslims, if I don't misremember), but even of them the percentage trying to effect that through violence was very low. It's certainly worth monitoring and counteracting where possible, but so far it hasn't been something to freak out over. That said, there now also are groups like Salafists and ISIS, that I think fall into a different category compared to what we've seen previously. ([URL="http://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeitgeschehen/2016-12/salafismus-golfstaaten-deutschland-saudi-arabien-unterstuetzung"]Salafism is being pushed and funded here by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar[/URL][url=https://archive.is/IR74m][/url] (unofficially of course, but probably with the governments' tacit permission), while ISIS probably counts more as foreign aggressor than as primarily cultural threat). They're linked though, if I'm not mistaken. They still aren't close to being the overall largest domestic threat, but definitely worth cracking down on hard since they are focused on violence and promote hatred. The state is doing precisely that though, outlawing (and raiding) Salafist organisations and monitoring extremists to prevent terror attacks.
[QUOTE=Crumpet;51557800]lets start from the bottom. what do you think drives people to commit acts of terror? if 'islam', then that is wrong. you forget the fact that nearly a quarter of people are muslims. so, what else? surely the treatment of them and inane fear would be the next logical place to go. so what about that?[/QUOTE] "Nazism/anti-semitism wasn't the cause of the Holocaust. Lots of Germans were Nazis/anti-semites and most never harmed anyone!" This is not an argument.
[QUOTE=Crumpet;51557800]lets start from the bottom. what do you think drives people to commit acts of terror? if 'islam', then that is wrong. you forget the fact that nearly a quarter of people are muslims. so, what else? surely the treatment of them and inane fear would be the next logical place to go. [I][B]so what about that?[/B][/I][/QUOTE] I think it's bollocks tbh Jihadi John was treated really badly and was consumed with inane fear. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihadi_John#Early_life[/url]
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;51557875]"Nazism/anti-semitism wasn't the cause of the Holocaust. Lots of Germans were Nazis/anti-semites and most never harmed anyone!" This is not an argument.[/QUOTE] Nazism is politically motivated anti-semitism (and a whole bunch of other stuff) that's used specifically to gain political power though. Equating it to 'plain' anti-semitism is (roughly) like saying Islamism equals Islam. I can't say I'm keen on any of these (I'm not a fan of organised religion and the other ones go without question I think.), but there are more or less three categories here and one of them is orders of magnitude more dangerous than the others.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51557441]Well it shows there isn't a comparison. [url]http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/652765/Terrorist-attacks-Germany-Terrorism-Foiled-plots-Threat-Security-Islamic-State-ISIS[/url] [editline]20th December 2016[/editline] Your deflection style of debate is transparent, you never address the actual post.[/QUOTE] Did he just link an express article :suicide:
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;51557875]"Nazism/anti-semitism wasn't the cause of the Holocaust. Lots of Germans were Nazis/anti-semites and most never harmed anyone!" This is not an argument.[/QUOTE] hm no that's wrong, the correct thing would have been 'not all nazis committed anti-semitic atrocities' but even then the nazi ideology promotes anti-semitism so that's not equatable.
[QUOTE=Crooky14;51557938]Did he just link an express article :suicide:[/QUOTE] yeah, very reasoned argument, why not try and disprove what is written rather than attacking the source. It's not a banned source, by the way.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51557909]I think it's bollocks tbh Jihadi John was treated really badly and was consumed with inane fear. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihadi_John#Early_life[/url][/QUOTE] i forgot jihadi john accounts for the tens of thousands of european muslim defectors to isis. also you have missed the point. just because you can live a life fine with that you are given does not mean you are fine with discrimination.
[QUOTE=Crumpet;51557971]i forgot jihadi john accounts for the tens of thousands of european muslim defectors to isis. also you have missed the point. just because you can live a life fine with that you are given does not mean you are fine with discrimination.[/QUOTE] oh so discrimination gives you the right to murder innocent people? Who is missing the point here? European muslims really must have had it tough.
[url]http://www.az-online.de/politik/berlin-verdaechtiger-naved-b-falsche-mann-zr-7140210.html[/url] The guy they took in is free again. They got the wrong guy. How embarassing.
[QUOTE=Crumpet;51557957]hm no that's wrong, the correct thing would have been 'not all nazis committed anti-semitic atrocities' but even then the nazi ideology promotes anti-semitism so that's not equatable.[/QUOTE] Nazism promotes anti-semitism but Islam doesn't promote terrorist violence?
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51557984]oh so discrimination gives you the right to murder innocent people? Who is missing the point here? European muslims really must have had it tough.[/QUOTE] No but its much easier to radicalise an individual if they feel vulnerable and hated in their society, feelings which would be caused by discrimination
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51557984]oh so discrimination gives you the right to murder innocent people? Who is missing the point here?[/QUOTE] clearly the world is black and white for you. how can people be expected to argue properly when you consistently strip down what people are saying and misrepresent their arguments. [editline]20th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Pantz Master;51558001]Nazism promotes anti-semitism but Islam doesn't promote terrorist violence?[/QUOTE] again, only circles. seeing as i debunked your point why don't you try again because all youve done is ask me the question i asked you.
[QUOTE=Tamschi;51557487]Right-wing politically motivated violence against other people, yes. There were 93 such cases in 2015 in Saxony-Anhalt alone (compared to 41 left-wing ones and 1 committed by a foreigner) [URL="http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/afd-kleine-anfrage-in-sachsen-anhalt-belegt-straftaten-von-rechts-a-1110324.html"]according to the reply to a statistics request by the afd[/URL][URL="https://archive.is/DXTC6"].[/URL] I assume it varies depending on the area though.[/QUOTE] Well, then actually the left-wing extremism is worse: [thumb]https://abload.de/img/wiju2.188kwo.jpg[/thumb] Straight from the Polizeiliche Kriminalstatistik 2015
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51557984]oh so discrimination gives you the right to murder innocent people? Who is missing the point here?[/QUOTE] and you wonder why people don't want to address you? yeah dude, he totally said discrimination gives you the right to murder. he also claimed to be iron man, the queen of england, and the last surviving dodo bird
[QUOTE=Crooky14;51558008]No but its much easier to radicalise an individual if they feel vulnerable and hated in their society, feelings which would be caused by discrimination[/QUOTE] Ah, so it's not their fault, it's the discriminators? [editline]20th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Zukriuchen;51558073]and you wonder why people don't want to address you? yeah dude, he totally said discrimination gives you the right to murder. he also claimed to be iron man, the queen of england, and the last surviving dodo bird[/QUOTE] so what was his point? another deflective post, stick to the topic for a change instead of trying to take it in another direction. you talk about putting words in people's mouth's, where did I say that I wonder why people don't want to address me? do you also claim to be the king of england? See, anyone can debate like this, it's easy.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51558107]Ah, so it's not their fault, it's the discriminators? [editline]20th December 2016[/editline] so what was his point? another deflective post, stick to the topic for a change instead of trying to take it in another direction.[/QUOTE] no no, [I]you[/I] have still yet to address peoples valid points. you didn't understand it, said something that clearly indicated you didn't understand it and now we have to move on?
[QUOTE=Crumpet;51558153]no no, [I]you[/I] have still yet to address peoples valid points. you didn't understand it, said something that clearly indicated you didn't understand it and now we have to move on?[/QUOTE] I was being sarcastic, move on. [QUOTE]oh so discrimination gives you the right to murder innocent people? Who is missing the point here? [/QUOTE] Answer my questions that I asked before demanding I answer yours!
[QUOTE=Firewarrior;51558050]Well, then actually the left-wing extremism is worse: [thumb]https://abload.de/img/wiju2.188kwo.jpg[/thumb] Straight from the Polizeiliche Kriminalstatistik 2015[/QUOTE] This lists vandalism/destruction of property too, if I'm not mistaken. For example, one category on the left (that doesn't exist on the right) is called 'violence against the state, its facilities and symbols' which just plain doesn't make sense to me if we talk about violence against people. (Could you point me point me to the document you got this from? I'd like to see the context, since I really can't tell for sure with just that graph. [editline]edit[/editline] I tried looking it up myself, but [URL="https://www.bka.de/DE/AktuelleInformationen/StatistikenLagebilder/PolizeilicheKriminalstatistik/PKS2015/pks2015_node.html"]there are quite a few[/URL][URL="https://archive.is/eOBWd"].[/URL]) That said, left-wing extremist crime is a serious problem here that is often underreported. It's listed more prominently than Islamism by the BPB for a reason.
[QUOTE=Tamschi;51558179]This lists vandalism/destruction of property too, if I'm not mistaken. For example, one category on the left (that doesn't exist on the right) is called 'violence against the state, its facilities and symbols' which just plain doesn't make sense to me if we talk about violence against people. (Could you point me point me to the document you got this from? I'd like to see the context, since I really can't tell for sure with just that graph. [editline]edit[/editline] I tried looking it up myself, but [URL="https://www.bka.de/DE/AktuelleInformationen/StatistikenLagebilder/PolizeilicheKriminalstatistik/PKS2015/pks2015_node.html"]there are quite a few[/URL][URL="https://archive.is/eOBWd"].[/URL]) That said, left-wing extremist crime is a serious problem here that is often underreported. It's listed more prominently than Islamism by the BPB for a reason.[/QUOTE] You are right, vandalism shouldn't really be in the same statistics as violence against other people. This is often a problem with those "xx-wing crime rises by 50%" articles, they often contain vandalism, use of illegal symbols and similar Both and actually all kinds of extremism are a problem. [URL]https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Broschueren/2016/pks-2015.pdf?__blob=publicationFile[/URL] Should be this one, not 100% sure though as I got mine from a file I saved some time ago
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51558107]Ah, so it's not their fault, it's the discriminators? [/QUOTE] You need to understand that there's many contributing factors to this, not just one big cause.
[QUOTE=Crooky14;51558338]You need to understand that there's many contributing factors to this, not just one big cause.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE] [QUOTE=Crooky14;51558008]No but its much easier to radicalise an individual if they feel vulnerable and hated in their society, feelings which would be caused by discrimination[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE] you said this, not me.
[QUOTE=Overhauser;51557996][url]http://www.az-online.de/politik/berlin-verdaechtiger-naved-b-falsche-mann-zr-7140210.html[/url] The guy they took in is free again. They got the wrong guy. How embarassing.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.euronews.com/2016/12/20/german-prosecutors-free-berlin-market-attack-suspect[/url] This is the reason about why the police is asking internet to do not spread rumors and let them do their work. However the people understood it as a way to "cover up" the attack.
[QUOTE=Maestro Fenix;51558366][url]http://www.euronews.com/2016/12/20/german-prosecutors-free-berlin-market-attack-suspect[/url] This is the reason about why the police is asking internet to do not spread rumors and let them do their work. However the people understood it as a way to "cover up" the attack.[/QUOTE] Is there any connection that they actually did it ? Not asking this in a "i doubt this" way, really just asking for a connection other than a terror organization embracing free PR.
[QUOTE=Firewarrior;51558226]You are right, vandalism shouldn't really be in the same statistics as violence against other people. This is often a problem with those "xx-wing crime rises by 50%" articles, they often contain vandalism, use of illegal symbols and similar Both and actually all kinds of extremism are a problem. [URL]https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Broschueren/2016/pks-2015.pdf?__blob=publicationFile[/URL] Should be this one, not 100% sure though as I got mine from a file I saved some time ago[/QUOTE] I think it might be a a third-party graph compiled from the original tables, judging by the legend, or maybe it's from some other supplementary document. There's a note on page 118 of the file you linked that says the Polizeiliche Kriminalstatistik ['the police's crime statistic', roughly] doesn't really track politically motivated violence ("Politisch motivierte Kriminalität (PMK)"), though, and I couldn't find the graph's categories in the tables via [I]ctrl+f[/I]. I definitely agree with you on the overall problem. There are far too many people who will turn a blind eye to this kind of stuff when acknowledging its existence doesn't suit them, even if they aren't really extremists themselves. (This really goes for all these categories in my opinion, whether they harm others directly or not. There are easily enough channels that let people broadcast their opinions effectively and efficiently without causing damage.)
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51558361]you said this, not me.[/QUOTE] and? since when are "it's easier to radicalize people who are vulnerable" and "there's many contributing factors" mutually exclusive?
If you actually care about the spread of radical Islamism then instead of bitching about Muslims and refugees you could propose productive solutions, like writing your politicians to pressure the US to stop selling billions of dollars worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia and drone striking several countries and killing innocent people.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51558361]you said this, not me.[/QUOTE] I mentioned one factor, I didn't say discrimination was the main cause.
Some newspapers report that Polish truckers are complaining about security in Germany and mistreatment. I know they really do have a point from experience. Can anyone confirm that the discussion is as big as media makes it out to be?
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;51558641]If you actually care about the spread of radical Islamism then instead of bitching about Muslims and refugees you could propose productive solutions, like writing your politicians to pressure the US to stop selling billions of dollars worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia and drone striking several countries and killing innocent people.[/QUOTE] Yeah, won't happen. People might lose their jobs in the arms industry.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.