Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,182 posts, read 13,469,799 times
Reputation: 19501
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by herenow1
YEt the murdered girl family has stated: Lola's family last week demanded that people "immediately stop using the name and image of their child for political ends", both at public gatherings, and on the internet.
Yes it is very sad what happened, but out of the family of the murdered girl respect I choose not to use the murder of the child for political ends.
TBF - there have been numerous disgusting child murders and vile paedophiles gangs in most countries.
In Britain, there were the Moors murders, the Murder of Bernard Oliver , who was found cut up in a suitcase in Suffolk in the 1960's, with the two prime suspects being two paedophile doctors.
Then you had the likes of Robert Black, Peter Tobin, Levi Belfield etc as well as vile disgusting peadophile gangs led by people like Sidney Cooke, and that's just a couple of these evil depraved people.
Crimes such as the Soham murders also sickened the entire British nation.
Last edited by Brave New World; 02-08-2023 at 08:28 AM..
Actually it is a good enough reason to banish an entire group. Why would anyone want to take such a risk? Why does this group get the benefit of the doubt.
If you show up at a party, and one of your friends starts acting like a total douche, it reflects badly on your group. Would you be surprised if the host asks your whole group to leave? Of course, its always up to the host though.
Now it goes both ways. If someone in the host party behaves badly, should anyone be surprised everyone leaves eventhough some of the hosts are gracious?
But again, its always a choice, but the chooser has the right to decide either. To think otherwise is asinine.
I reject your analogy. Immigrants to a country are not like guests at a party. Many have no relationship to one another be it based on blood or being friends. Reasons for migration often involve fear of being harmed in one's home country, famine, or loss of a home. I have heard some experts talk about two separate concepts: Migration; and flight. Migration is voluntary. Flight involves a situation where conditions in the home country are so horrible the only thing to do is leave and look for another place to live. Attending a party, of course, is a totally voluntary act.
I do not claim countries do not have any right to control their borders or to restrict immigration on some level. However, it is not productive to demonize immigrants. It would be more productive to analyze why immigrants are coming and to look towards ameliorating the reasons for flight perhaps by aiding the home country in some fashion.
Is the victim a native French or a migrant herself?
It does indeed matter. If the victim is French and not a migrant or 1st gen, then this crime is all that much worse. Because now the migrants are attacking the natives. If you are a migrant, your whole group must be on their best behavior and you individually must do all you can to ensure.
If this girl is of the Algerian community, it is still bad, but at least the issue has no spilled onto the host.
The victim likely to be French and her name is Lola Daviet. A blonde hair blue eyed girl. In western society that is a symbol beauty and vitality. Anyway if a blonde hair girl is murdered in western society it brings a lot more publicity than a brown or black skinned girl or woman. It has always been the case.
Actually I support the death penality for people that commit killing of children. It is very barbaric. Sure far right parties and many people within the Right can bring the anti immigrant rhetoric in it, however in France I can point that among the worst serial killers in France recent history is the French guy Michel Fourniret who confessed to killing 12 people in France and Belgium between 1987 and 2003. Most of the victims were females. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel...%20and%202003.
I reject your analogy. Immigrants to a country are not like guests at a party. Many have no relationship to one another be it based on blood or being friends. Reasons for migration often involve fear of being harmed in one's home country, famine, or loss of a home. I have heard some experts talk about two separate concepts: Migration; and flight. Migration is voluntary. Flight involves a situation where conditions in the home country are so horrible the only thing to do is leave and look for another place to live. Attending a party, of course, is a totally voluntary act.
I do not claim countries do not have any right to control their borders or to restrict immigration on some level. However, it is not productive to demonize immigrants. It would be more productive to analyze why immigrants are coming and to look towards ameliorating the reasons for flight perhaps by aiding the home country in some fashion.
If you are fleeing, and give yourself over to someone's else protection, then it is an even bigger deal that you are on your best behavior. The refugee literally has no powers, no rights in that case. Refugees are completely at the mercy of the host. Now of course humans try to create a less absolute/uncompromising situations by creating silly "humanitarian" rules that stifle one side. Aside from that, the natural law is such, and how things ought to be.
If in this situation a refugee commits a heinous crime against its protector; the one that offers its protection for no reason other than just being nice, then this crime is the utmost betrayal. None can be worse. Benedict Arnold is not worse.
Perhaps it is not fair to the rest of the migrants, but why should the protectors burden themselves by putting themselves in harms way just for the sake of some refugees? If the host could simply reject any and all refugees from the gitgo, certainly they have every right to go back if they realize the price is too high.
The victim likely to be French and her name is Lola Daviet. A blonde hair blue eyed girl. In western society that is a symbol beauty and vitality. Anyway if a blonde hair girl is murdered in western society it brings a lot more publicity than a brown or black skinned girl or woman. It has always been the case.
Actually I support the death penality for people that commit killing of children. It is very barbaric. Sure far right parties and many people within the Right can bring the anti immigrant rhetoric in it, however in France I can point that among the worst serial killers in France recent history is the French guy Michel Fourniret who confessed to killing 12 people in France and Belgium between 1987 and 2003. Most of the victims were females. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel...%20and%202003.
In a host nation where beauty standards are already set, then its logical to think such is the case, regarding the news coverage/publicity.
It will of course be different in say Central Africa if a blonde hair blue eyed Alpha Male brutalizes a local black african beauty queen vs another white European tourist. Without a doubt, the local black african beauty queen will get all the publicity.
If you are in Japan, a marine raping a local Okinawan girl is going to make more headlines, then say the guy from USC raping his spring break date who is also from America in the hotel room. Why should Japan not care about the former more?
Certainly every country has crime. There is no need to import more crime from abroad. If a migrant/refugee community brings more of it than they are worth, then it is definitely a matter of discussion. And yes public opinion is valid. It is the public's decision after all; unless it a dictatorship.
A sickening case. However, I resent the way one crime like this is used to condemn an entire group and say we must stop them all from immigrating whether in Europe or anywhere.
See what your saying but it still remains that many immigrants have criminal records back in their own countries but still pouring into other countries ... The amount of young men coming to the UK shows that its not families in warzones who need help.. seems strange its mostly young men... and the amount of crimes.. drug and people trafficking is growing..
See what your saying but it still remains that many immigrants have criminal records back in their own countries but still pouring into other countries ... The amount of young men coming to the UK shows that its not families in warzones who need help.. seems strange its mostly young men... and the amount of crimes.. drug and people trafficking is growing..
I suspect most of these men are simply in the UK to find honest work. Again, the UK has the right to control its borders, but there are some practicalities involved. The other thing I am lead to believe is that the crime rate among people legally in a country is higher than that of the crime rate among immigrants.
I do wonder though about countries that are badly run, in a constant state of civil war etc. with high rates of emigration. I wonder at some point if the leadership has lost the right to rule that country and if it ought be done by some sort of international organization like the UN. For example, I don't feel Europe ought to have to tolerate the way Bashir Assad runs Syria and the west has to accept hundreds of thousands of refugees from his country.
The only way to stem the tide of immigration from Africa and the Middle East is to change those countries into un-failed States whose educational systems and economies actually provide real opportunities for people to make a living there. People need to believe that there will be a decent future for them, where they live. In other words, they need to become First World countries. But when is THAT going to happen????? Same goes for the countries south of the USA in Latin America. Those places are all one big cluster-****.
The EU countries have done a very bad job in assimilating these immigrants, and the numbers are huge.
The only way to stem the tide of immigration from Africa and the Middle East is to change those countries into un-failed States whose educational systems and economies actually provide real opportunities for people to make a living there. People need to believe that there will be a decent future for them, where they live. In other words, they need to become First World countries. But when is THAT going to happen????? Same goes for the countries south of the USA in Latin America. Those places are all one big cluster-****.
The EU countries have done a very bad job in assimilating these immigrants, and the numbers are huge.
Still there's no way they're worse than Ukrainian immigrants, aka 'drunk nazis'.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
