Looks like feminists have finally been graced with the "rape culture" fantasy they've always craved in the small German town of Magdeburg, where there were now 4 rapes in 4 weeks.

We only know about this, because the local TV station has published the report due to the fact that all 4 rapes (5 women in total - once they raped two 19 year olds and a woman at a graveyard) have been done by a group of 3 men. It seems that they rape 1-2 girls per week to get their supply of sex. I think that they shared some girls. It also seems that the police only shared the information, because they were so consistent in their serial raping and would have continued.

Where do these refugees go if Europe rejects them?
Where? What other parts of the world are willing to take refugees?

How do we house these refugees?

huh?

Why does it matter? It's not our responsibility to save these people from themselves. First-world countries should not have to reform their entire culture for the sake of accommodating a bunch of third-world authoritarians.

Lmao. Do these idiots really think they can out breed bullets and missiles? The middle east will be a radioactive wasteland before they islamify the west. Fuck em. Turn these dregs back to the shitholes they come from.

Funny that you bring up the Amerindians, as it's an argument in favor of migrant control, as european parties like the Italian pro-immigration restriction party "Lega Nord" have used in their posters and rethoric.



"“They didn’t have immigration laws and now they live on reservations!”"

Fortunately, the immigration waves earlier in American history were brief and immigration was restricted in various acts before it became too problematic. The said, various groups like the Irish, Germans,etc were (far) more desirable and easier to culturally assimilate than the various low IQ and low/no skilled dregs that Europe is receiving now from Africa and SW Asia that practice marriage with 12 yos, female genital mutilation, honor killings and various other culturally refined practices. The notion that the latter is going to become well integrated democratic citizens of these countries is "magic dirt" fallacy at it's finest, as evidenced by the various "no-go" zones in places like Malmo,Sweden, the Charlie Hebdo killings in France, Theo Van Gogh's stabbing death in the Netherlands,etc.

The refugees would still be expected to follow the laws of the nation.
The culture (which let's face it changes over time anyway) would not be suddenly reformed because of a bunch of new comers.

As for responsibility. This is not a matter of obligation.
We don't have to do anything. Not a thing. There is no obligation to help out the refugees.
If we do nothing however, there is a good chance that they'll starve to death.

We know that now in hindsight, yes, but at that time people were no less convinced they would overtake their new home country than you are right now.

And what makes you so convinced of this, anyway -- a few unruly individuals? I'm sure that was the same basis for fear of immigrants in the past. It always comes back to bad experiences.

I mean, maybe, just maybe, there are groups of people within these refugee populations who simply want to start their life over quietly/peacefully and not live in a rotting hellhole in the earth. People who can no more make their fellows act the right way than you or I could convince each other of our views on this topic -- we can try our best, but it is ultimately not in our control.


I just thought it was kind of funny to fear the erosion of culture due to incoming migrants if the guy is white man in the 'States, seeing as it would mean either his own ancestors faced the same sentiments, or they were the only case where this was shown to be true.

I'm going to take issue with the examples you've listed. The so-called "no-go zones" are BS, often reported by sources with a clear agenda, and have on several occasions been debunked. Are people really trying to insinuate that government/law-enforcement lack the resources to deal with problems arising within ethnic enclaves? If so, then immigrants are the least of that country's problems.

And I don't think Charlie Hebdo and Theo Van Gogh killings reflect on the groups of people coming into Europe, unless this is broadly a matter of religion. If so, again, show me a religious group without some deviant followers. As it relates to the Muslims, I think people fail to realize that this is a very, VERY large group of people we are talking about and that what you get from these people is basically a crapshoot.

I simply think there is a disproportionate amount of reporting of these groups in the media; it makes them seem a lot more prevalent than they truly are. 

Plus to prevent the social security and economy of a country imploding under the weight of supporting migrants, many of which will be unskilled manual labourers which will have to be supported by the state via taxation.

The result is the economic depression of lower wages, combined increased strain exerted on social systems and inflation in property values required to house such migrants.

Migration of this nature is a disaster waiting to happen. Many of these migrants will never contribute to the state in any way. They will drain resources and maybe their children or children's children may contribute. In the meantime the economic cost if supporting such migration is staggering.

No one will actually say this though as it's considered bigoted. The cold hard facts of economics and finance don't lie however.