Arkady
President
Relevance?He was in Italy for the Election.
Relevance?He was in Italy for the Election.
If you'd like to link to a story in a reputable outlet about such a thing, I'd be happy to discuss.1) The stories of ambulances and fire trucks stoned or police buildings closed because they feel unsafe says otherwise when it comes to no go zones all over Europe.
It's unclear from that video what he did to provoke the confrontation. Certainly he went there hoping for trouble. He had a story he was hoping to tell, and we only saw the bits of video he chose to show us. Given the fact Tommy Robinson is a serial criminal, who has been arrested repeatedly for his law breaking (including illegal immigration to the US, ironically), a person would have to be foolish to assume his videos are an honest recounting of events.2) When the second guy shows up to investigate he too is attacked.
Not that I know of. Europe is a very big place, so even with unusually low rates of violent crime (by US standards), a dedicated cherry-picker will be able to turn up genuine stories of terrible crimes like that.How about the other assaults described by the "propagandist?" Also, untrue?
We all know that UK, German, and Swedish law enforcement [Unwelcome language removed] the crime numbers for socialist political reasons. Coincidence you'll say that isn't true? I don't think so.Not that I know of. Europe is a very big place, so even with unusually low rates of violent crime (by US standards), a dedicated cherry-picker will be able to turn up genuine stories of terrible crimes like that.
We don't know that. That's just something you've asserted because you don't like what the numbers say. We could as easily assert, in the other direction, that the US fudges its crime numbers for capitalist political reasons, and that therefore the stats of the UK, Germany, and Sweden are even more impressive, in relative terms.We all know that UK, German, and Swedish law enforcement [Unwelcome language removed] the crime numbers for socialist political reasons.
We don't know that. That's just something you've asserted because you don't like what the numbers say. We could as easily assert, in the other direction, that the US fudges its crime numbers for capitalist political reasons, and that therefore the stats of the UK, Germany, and Sweden are even more impressive, in relative terms.
I wouldn't be surprised if, consistent with your Telegraph piece, there were isolated examples of "dishonesty"' in every country. But is there any sign that it's worse in some than in others -- much less enough of a difference to explain the MASSIVE differences in the numbers. For example, maybe there are a few more of those isolated examples of dishonesty in Germany than in the US. Or maybe there are a few more in the US than in Germany. But when the US murder rate is nearly six times as high as the German murder rate, it seems unlikely such reporting glitches are making a difference in the big picture. That's especially true when it comes to homicide, where the fact of a dead body makes it a lot tougher to play reporting games the way you might with a vaguer line like whether something was an "assault" or an "aggravated assault."https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10558567/Scotland-Yard-chief-admits-claims-of-crime-figure-manipulation-contain-some-truth.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/20/london-now-dangerous-new-york-crime-stats-suggest/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4260908/Swedish-policeman-blames-migrants-violent-crime.html
This is my line. ha haThat's especially true when it comes to homicide, where the fact of a dead body makes it a lot tougher to play reporting games the way you might with a vaguer line like whether something was an "assault" or an "aggravated assault."
So an area where you aren't allowed to go into because of the threat of violence (consequences) is NOT a "no go zone"...To be clear, that video is not an indication of a "no go zone." It's an incident where a reporter who is filming a bunch of homeless people gets confronted about the filming (presumably because they don't want to be identified by authorities). That's not to excuse any violence, but obviously it's a far-cry from a no-go zone.
No clue what you're talking about.This is my line. ha ha
I use it all the time when exposing black criminality in America.
Nice theft.
If a "no go zone" were any place you can't go without an absolute guarantee there won't be violence, the whole planet would be a no-go zone.So an area where you aren't allowed to go into because of the threat of violence (consequences) is NOT a "no go zone"...
Of course not. You retain your title as the dumbest poster on the forum!No clue what you're talking about.
Your take on the story.What are you claiming is untrue -- my recounting of what is in those stories, or the news as was recounted by those stories?
That he was there anyway.Relevance?
Britain has, for most of our history, had open door immigration but the main mass immigrants of the past were of religious refugees from Europe who did integrate and were hard working. This is a folly of and a left over of Empire which is a mass immigration of people who are not willing to integrate, who live in purposeful segregation, and are now openly hostile to the indigenous population. One could say 'serves 'em right' but they threw us out of their lands - a stubborn political narrative of denial disallows us to do the same.Unfortunately that is happening far to much here in the US as well. Multiculturalism doesn't work, and never did. Immigrants need to respect our ways or they can't be allowed to stay.
You approve of The Times, don't you?If a "no go zone" were any place you can't go without an absolute guarantee there won't be violence, the whole planet would be a no-go zone.
No. Do you?You approve of The Times, don't you?
Sometimes - are you saying that you have no respect for any of their reporters - including Andrew Norfolk?No. Do you?
What would make you imagine that's what I was saying? I never even mentioned Andrew Norfolk.Sometimes - are you saying that you have no respect for any of their reporters - including Andrew Norfolk?
He was the speaker in the video.What would make you imagine that's what I was saying? I never even mentioned Andrew Norfolk.