Europe submits voluntarily

[LordKiran]

I was thinking of "seized" as in eminent domain--where you do get compensated. That's what usually happens when the state seizes something for it's use.

This aside LP, may I ask what is so unreasonable about using empty buildings to temporarily house people who have been bereaved of all their belongings through no fault of their own with suitable compensation to the property owners?

Because the compensation is almost certainly too low. The usual game is to figure something like reasonable - the cost of fighting to get it as what they'll pay. And if they left the property empty there probably was a reason. My memory is that English law is very unfriendly to landlords, to the point that owners often choose leaving it vacant as better than renting it out.

Eminent domain is not typically used for things like temporary housing measures.

Further, who decides if the compensation is too low or not? These are people in need of immediate housing, not wealthy tenants for whom money (Or property for that matter...) is no object. If the property owner decides his or her compensation is not sufficient then he or she can plead their case to the courts.

I was using it as an illustration, not saying that's exactly what would happen.

Yeah, they can plead their case to the courts--which is why the compensation is likely fair - a bit less than the cost of taking it to court.

And I note that you don't seem to mind if the property owner loses on this. Anything to take from the "rich".

The land owner is likely turning a profit on the taxpayer's dime, or at the very least a tax deduction comparable in worth. That's not losing. Government sponsored tenants are easily the safest source of income from a land owner because the income is guaranteed and they are potentially protected from damages related to tenants. Also, you're the only one who seems to think that any of this matters.

 

[angelo]

Of course given the opportunity Corbyn would ensure the whole of Gt Britain was of equal status. No such thing as rich or poor. All would be poor!

It's possible that some would be poorer than others. To be honest the Conservatives are so useless during the past few years anything would be an improvement.

An islamic pm? Already there are many Muslim mayors including the mayor of London. It wouldn't be a giant step.

 

[bilby]

It's possible that some would be poorer than others. To be honest the Conservatives are so useless during the past few years anything would be an improvement.

An islamic pm? Already there are many Muslim mayors including the mayor of London. It wouldn't be a giant step.

Would make a refreshing change from all the fucking Christians.

Certainly couldn't be any worse.

But highly unlikely to get elected in the face of the Daily Mail brigade of neo-Goebbelsites.

 

[angelo]

An islamic pm? Already there are many Muslim mayors including the mayor of London. It wouldn't be a giant step.

Would make a refreshing change from all the fucking Christians.

Certainly couldn't be any worse.

But highly unlikely to get elected in the face of the Daily Mail brigade of neo-Goebbelsites.

So it's fine if England, and or Europe have an Islamic government as long as it's not xtianity?
Got you! What a reformed version of islam or in it's present state with sharia?

 

[DrZoidberg]

BTW, I'm not rejecting that Europe will see a steep increase in Islamic militants now when ISIS is falling. I think we will. All those Islamic fighters who are really really well motivated and convinced will be flooding out of Syria and into Europe. I think we will see a steep increase in attacks the coming years. Now is when we seriously need to worry. Before we didn't.

So it's quite possible that this is what the head of the Swedish secret police was talking about. I'm not denying that this could be the case. I was just explaining that his statements are too vague for us to take anything concrete from it.

I'm just hoping that the histrionics from the anti-Islamic conspiracy theorists haven't desensitised people. If we are suspicious about all Muslims instead of the dangerous Muslims we're going to fail at catching them. This is not the time to alienate the secular and western oriented Muslims.

 

[bilby]

Would make a refreshing change from all the fucking Christians.

Certainly couldn't be any worse.

But highly unlikely to get elected in the face of the Daily Mail brigade of neo-Goebbelsites.

So it's fine if England, and or Europe have an Islamic government as long as it's not xtianity?
Got you! What a reformed version of islam or in it's present state with sharia?

No.

They have Christians as PMs without being a Christian theocracy; and they could equally well have a Muslim PM without an Islamic theocracy.

As would be obvious to anyone who wasn't completely brainwashed by the tabloid press.


LOL @ 'Got you!'. Seriously? You need to get out of bed a LOT earlier to 'get' me. This is reality, not some sad sporting event where you get to crow if your team wins.

 

[angelo]

I suggest as many people as possible read an excellent book by Douglas Murray, [no he's not an islamphobe] ' The Strange Death of Europe.' To see what's in store for Western Culture.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I suggest as many people as possible read an excellent book by Douglas Murray, [no he's not an islamphobe] ' The Strange Death of Europe.' To see what's in store for Western Culture.

I haven't read it, but read this review

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/may/06/strange-death-europe-immigration-xenophobia

This is from the review

More surprising, however, is the author’s inability to define the culture supposedly in jeopardy. If Europe should more aggressively defend its unique identity, the least one might expect is a clear definition of this precious thing it’s supposed to be defending: the values, experiences and ideas in danger of being lost. But apart from beer and churchgoing, padded out with scorn for anyone trying to distinguish between Islam or Muslims in general and Islamist terrorists in particular,there’s little here to cling to. At one point the author is reduced to suggesting that he thinks the future Europe will stand or fall on its “attitude to church buildings”.

This high-lights what I think is the problem with the alt-right or the new nationalistically oriented conservatives. They all seem to agree on that they're against something. But they seem to have a harder time identifying what they're against.

Newsflash, western culture is dying. So is oriental culture. They're all dying, all the time. And new cultures are being born all the time. You're right now guilty of the death of the old Western culture by using the Internet. Yes, the Internet is destroying the culture we had before it. The same goes for any new technology or innovation that has a major impact on society.

Change is normal. It's going to happen. With the ever increasing rise in globalisation cultures will start to become more like each other. Differences between cultures will slowly erode away. And it's not like we can go back to what we had before. This modern IT world is too lucrative. We want the fruits of it. And if we pick the fruit, we're going to have to deal with the poop that comes with it.

If you think Western cultures have changed a lot since the Rivers of Blood speech, it's nothing compared to the Middle-East and Africa. Islam is right now undergoing it's greatest identity crisis in Islamic history.

My point is that it's an illusion that there's any kind of stable and monolithic Western culture rubbing up against a stable and monolithic Islamic culture. as if there's a struggle of who will win. Both are in constant change. Both will lose and both will win. And none of us will recognise ourselves in the world 50 years from now.

I only see two choices. Embrace multiculturalism or accept that the west will, yet again, become a poverty-stricken backwater of this planet. There's no going back. That's not an option. So we might as well go forward.

 

[TSwizzle]

This must be more of the new normal, for France;

A driver with a gun has died after ramming a police van on the Champs-Élysées in a car filled with weapons and a gas bomb.
His car burst into flames moments after impact having deliberately aimed at a line of police vans with a boot full of Kalashnikov rifles, handguns and gas bottles. A police officer was videoed stripping clothes from the unconscious assailant to check for a suicide bomb as the assailant, who was a known extremist in France, lay dying in the street. Witnesses in the capital said he heard shots being fired and smoke coming from the silver Renault Megane which was used by the 31-year-old perpetrator in what is being considered an attempted suicide attack, though nobody was injured.
France remains under a state of emergency after a string of deadly Islamic extremist attacks in the country.

DailyMail

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We are, however, talking about low income people. No real recourse if they damage the place.

We are talking about the government; They have pockets that are plenty deep enough to pay for any hypothetical damage caused by tenants that they put into a given property. There is absolutely no reason to think that landlords would not be protected from any losses that might arise due to this hypothetical government policy, that has been neither detailed nor adopted; The assumption that it would necessarily be bad for the landlords is completely unwarranted, but judging from the hysterical reportage of the Mail, you would get the idea that Corbyn was planning something little short of putting the landlords in concentration camps, and stabling pigs in their family homes.

Deep enough, sure--but would they?

The problem remains that the situation is so screwed up over there that leaving a property vacant is often considered a better choice than renting it out, yet you want to make involuntary landlords of those who have decided that market price is nowhere near enough to make it worthwhile.

- - - Updated - - -

I was thinking of "seized" as in eminent domain--where you do get compensated. That's what usually happens when the state seizes something for it's use.

This aside LP, may I ask what is so unreasonable about using empty buildings to temporarily house people who have been bereaved of all their belongings through no fault of their own with suitable compensation to the property owners?

Because the compensation is almost certainly too low. The usual game is to figure something like reasonable - the cost of fighting to get it as what they'll pay. And if they left the property empty there probably was a reason. My memory is that English law is very unfriendly to landlords, to the point that owners often choose leaving it vacant as better than renting it out.

Eminent domain is not typically used for things like temporary housing measures.

Further, who decides if the compensation is too low or not? These are people in need of immediate housing, not wealthy tenants for whom money (Or property for that matter...) is no object. If the property owner decides his or her compensation is not sufficient then he or she can plead their case to the courts.

I was using it as an illustration, not saying that's exactly what would happen.

Yeah, they can plead their case to the courts--which is why the compensation is likely fair - a bit less than the cost of taking it to court.

And I note that you don't seem to mind if the property owner loses on this. Anything to take from the "rich".

The land owner is likely turning a profit on the taxpayer's dime, or at the very least a tax deduction comparable in worth. That's not losing. Government sponsored tenants are easily the safest source of income from a land owner because the income is guaranteed and they are potentially protected from damages related to tenants. Also, you're the only one who seems to think that any of this matters.

Around here renting to a section 8 tenant doesn't protect you from damage they might do. You have some evidence it's different over there?

 

[Jayjay]

Doesn't look too promising for Sweden;

The number of violent Islamist extremists in Sweden has soared from 200 in 2010 to 'thousands' today as an intelligence chief said 'this is the new normal'. We would say that [the number] has gone from hundreds to thousands now,' Sapo chief Anders Thornberg told news agency TT in an interview, describing the situation as 'serious'. 'This is the "new normal" ... It is a historic challenge that extremist circles are growing,' he said.

DailyMail

The new normal.

No he didn't. This is a lie. As most things is in the Daily Mail. He said that following the earlier terror reports the number of anonymous tips of suspicious activities as skyrocketed. Well... duh. Of course, after an attack, people are going to worry more and report stuff that they otherwise wouldn't. He's also saying that they worry just as much about reprisal attacks from "white power" groups. Those reports have also skyrocketed.

Here's the words that he's actually saying:

https://tv.aftonbladet.se/abtv/articles/218455

Daily Mail does what they usually do, make ... up.

WTF! Isn't this an English speaking forum?

It's not my fault he said it in Swedish. But that is the source.

Newsweek:

Sweden has witnessed a surge in Islamist extremists: from 200 less than a decade ago to “thousands,” in 2017, the Scandinavian country’s spy chief said Friday.

“We have never seen anything like this before," Anders Thornberg, chief of the Swedish Security Service (SAPO), told the country’s TT news agency.

“This is the 'new normal'...It is a historic challenge that extremist circles are growing,” he added.​

The Local:

The number of militant extremists living in Sweden has soared from a couple of hundreds a few years ago to thousands today, the security police Säpo believes.
"We have never seen anything like it before," said Säpo chief Anders Thornberg in an interview with Swedish news agency TT.

The vast majority of the extremists support violent Islamist ideologies, according to Säpo, whose security experts in a report in 2010 estimated that there were around 200 such sympathizers in Sweden.

"We would say that it has gone from hundreds to thousands now," said Thornberg.

However, he stressed that the security service believes few of them have the ability to, or even intend to, carry out a terror attack in Sweden.

READ ALSO: These are Sweden's terror travellers – in stats

The security police are working on putting together new, more exact, figures, reports TT. Thornberg described the situation as serious.

"This is the 'new normal' … It is an historic challenge that extremist circles are growing," he said.​

It's not your fault he said it in Swedish; but there are other people besides you capable of telling us what Swedish words mean. And while it's possible that neither the DM nor Newsweek has a fluent Swedish speaker on staff and didn't understand what Thornberg meant, I think we can be pretty confident that The Local has fluent Swedish speakers on staff.
So what is the lie you are asserting that the DM made up? And are you asserting that Newsweek and The Local are liars too?

What he said was pretty straight forward. He also said things he worries about. He worries that we have a lot of Islamic militants in Sweden. He said that to calm people down. There's a perception that our government isn't taking the Islamic treat seriously. Now he communicated that they are.

The biggest problem in Sweden right now aren't Islamic terrorists but nationalists. It's people like "the soldiers of Odin". They do a lot of damage. Its a delicate situation right now. I think he said what he did to show that the police was on top of it, so that our Nazi vigilantes will stay at home.

Sorry for the spelling. Mobile

I don't know about sweden, but in Finland where the "Soldiers of Odin" thing started they are mostly just neighbourhood watches who sell mugs and t-shirts online. I don't think they are the ones you need to worry about doing any damage.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I don't know about sweden, but in Finland where the "Soldiers of Odin" thing started they are mostly just neighbourhood watches who sell mugs and t-shirts online. I don't think they are the ones you need to worry about doing any damage.

In Sweden the Soldiers of Odin are mostly neo-Nazis. They've been involved in a number of serious incidents. Once they went on a rampage through central Stockholm beating up anybody foreign looking and young.

https://www.thelocal.se/20170108/twelve-arrested-after-swedish-extremist-groups-clash

In Sweden they're basically the nationalist variant of ISIS. Same same. Just white and less beard

 

[angelo]

I haven't read it, but read this review

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/may/06/strange-death-europe-immigration-xenophobia

This is from the review

More surprising, however, is the author’s inability to define the culture supposedly in jeopardy. If Europe should more aggressively defend its unique identity, the least one might expect is a clear definition of this precious thing it’s supposed to be defending: the values, experiences and ideas in danger of being lost. But apart from beer and churchgoing, padded out with scorn for anyone trying to distinguish between Islam or Muslims in general and Islamist terrorists in particular,there’s little here to cling to. At one point the author is reduced to suggesting that he thinks the future Europe will stand or fall on its “attitude to church buildings”.

This high-lights what I think is the problem with the alt-right or the new nationalistically oriented conservatives. They all seem to agree on that they're against something. But they seem to have a harder time identifying what they're against.

Newsflash, western culture is dying. So is oriental culture. They're all dying, all the time. And new cultures are being born all the time. You're right now guilty of the death of the old Western culture by using the Internet. Yes, the Internet is destroying the culture we had before it. The same goes for any new technology or innovation that has a major impact on society.

Change is normal. It's going to happen. With the ever increasing rise in globalisation cultures will start to become more like each other. Differences between cultures will slowly erode away. And it's not like we can go back to what we had before. This modern IT world is too lucrative. We want the fruits of it. And if we pick the fruit, we're going to have to deal with the poop that comes with it.

If you think Western cultures have changed a lot since the Rivers of Blood speech, it's nothing compared to the Middle-East and Africa. Islam is right now undergoing it's greatest identity crisis in Islamic history.

My point is that it's an illusion that there's any kind of stable and monolithic Western culture rubbing up against a stable and monolithic Islamic culture. as if there's a struggle of who will win. Both are in constant change. Both will lose and both will win. And none of us will recognise ourselves in the world 50 years from now.

I only see two choices. Embrace multiculturalism or accept that the west will, yet again, become a poverty-stricken backwater of this planet. There's no going back. That's not an option. So we might as well go forward.

You expected a real true review from The Guardian?

 

[DrZoidberg]

I haven't read it, but read this review

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/may/06/strange-death-europe-immigration-xenophobia

This is from the review



This high-lights what I think is the problem with the alt-right or the new nationalistically oriented conservatives. They all seem to agree on that they're against something. But they seem to have a harder time identifying what they're against.

Newsflash, western culture is dying. So is oriental culture. They're all dying, all the time. And new cultures are being born all the time. You're right now guilty of the death of the old Western culture by using the Internet. Yes, the Internet is destroying the culture we had before it. The same goes for any new technology or innovation that has a major impact on society.

Change is normal. It's going to happen. With the ever increasing rise in globalisation cultures will start to become more like each other. Differences between cultures will slowly erode away. And it's not like we can go back to what we had before. This modern IT world is too lucrative. We want the fruits of it. And if we pick the fruit, we're going to have to deal with the poop that comes with it.

If you think Western cultures have changed a lot since the Rivers of Blood speech, it's nothing compared to the Middle-East and Africa. Islam is right now undergoing it's greatest identity crisis in Islamic history.

My point is that it's an illusion that there's any kind of stable and monolithic Western culture rubbing up against a stable and monolithic Islamic culture. as if there's a struggle of who will win. Both are in constant change. Both will lose and both will win. And none of us will recognise ourselves in the world 50 years from now.

I only see two choices. Embrace multiculturalism or accept that the west will, yet again, become a poverty-stricken backwater of this planet. There's no going back. That's not an option. So we might as well go forward.

You expected a real true review from The Guardian?

I did. Because The Guardian has damn good book reviewers IMHO. But there is another reason why I thought that the Guardian would review it fairly... Murray is a contributor to the Guardian. He occasionally works there!

Compare that review with this:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...on-identity-islam-by-douglas-murray-bffq3tdtf

This one isn't half as kind. Reviews for this isn't easy to find. The New York Times and the Washington post couldn't even be bothered to review it. They will review anything of any merit. So they must think this is too trashy to be bothered with.

The rest of the reviews I found was either from tabloids (=they'll misquote anything for a click) or from alt-right websites. Well... I don't know about you but can we agree on that alt-facts are actually falsehoods?

Looking at his other book, Islamophilia... almost zero splash anywhere. Nobody cared. I'm not questioning whether the book is well written or not. I'm just wondering whether it has any academic weight to it? I get the impression that he's mostly just a polemicist? Murray isn't an academic. He's just a journalist.

But I'll read it. I've got three weeks of beech to look forward to. So far I only have two books in the pipe. So one more will do nicely If I can find it for a reasonable price.

 

[angelo]

You expected a real true review from The Guardian?

I did. Because The Guardian has damn good book reviewers IMHO. But there is another reason why I thought that the Guardian would review it fairly... Murray is a contributor to the Guardian. He occasionally works there!

Compare that review with this:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...on-identity-islam-by-douglas-murray-bffq3tdtf

This one isn't half as kind. Reviews for this isn't easy to find. The New York Times and the Washington post couldn't even be bothered to review it. They will review anything of any merit. So they must think this is too trashy to be bothered with.

The rest of the reviews I found was either from tabloids (=they'll misquote anything for a click) or from alt-right websites. Well... I don't know about you but can we agree on that alt-facts are actually falsehoods?

Looking at his other book, Islamophilia... almost zero splash anywhere. Nobody cared. I'm not questioning whether the book is well written or not. I'm just wondering whether it has any academic weight to it? I get the impression that he's mostly just a polemicist? Murray isn't an academic. He's just a journalist.

But I'll read it. I've got three weeks of beech to look forward to. So far I only have two books in the pipe. So one more will do nicely If I can find it for a reasonable price.

This is exactly what this book reports about. The apathy of the media, politicians and police sweeping under the carpet any criticism of the 'religion of peace.'

 

[DrZoidberg]

I did. Because The Guardian has damn good book reviewers IMHO. But there is another reason why I thought that the Guardian would review it fairly... Murray is a contributor to the Guardian. He occasionally works there!

Compare that review with this:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...on-identity-islam-by-douglas-murray-bffq3tdtf

This one isn't half as kind. Reviews for this isn't easy to find. The New York Times and the Washington post couldn't even be bothered to review it. They will review anything of any merit. So they must think this is too trashy to be bothered with.

The rest of the reviews I found was either from tabloids (=they'll misquote anything for a click) or from alt-right websites. Well... I don't know about you but can we agree on that alt-facts are actually falsehoods?

Looking at his other book, Islamophilia... almost zero splash anywhere. Nobody cared. I'm not questioning whether the book is well written or not. I'm just wondering whether it has any academic weight to it? I get the impression that he's mostly just a polemicist? Murray isn't an academic. He's just a journalist.

But I'll read it. I've got three weeks of beech to look forward to. So far I only have two books in the pipe. So one more will do nicely If I can find it for a reasonable price.

This is exactly what this book reports about. The apathy of the media, politicians and police sweeping under the carpet any criticism of the 'religion of peace.'

What do you mean apathy? Book reviewers work damn hard. The book review page is typically the most expensive page to print in a magazine. Because there's no article that takes more hours to produce. Of course they were sent the book. All major media outlets are always sent a copy of any mass market book for review. I think it's a safe bet that they read it, or at least enough of it to get an impression. These guys read a colossal amount of books.

It's not apathy that makes them not write about a book. The reason is always something else. It's funny how often unknown authors of polemic books talk about a cover up or a suppression of ideas. The idea that it just might be a bad book or have a wrong conclusion rarely enters their minds.

I've two friends who are married. She's a scientist and he is a journalist. When they are having a friendly discussion about some contentious topic and he does his best to convince with arguments, she often says "now you're being a journalist again". Meaning that he's not in a head space of listening and increasing understanding. He's already decided what is right, and now doing his best to cleverly support that argument, even though he knows that her point of view is solid.

This is an example why academic books carry more weight than texts by polemic authors. They write for different reasons. Both styles of writing are important for having a healthy public debate. But polemic books just aren't going to do as much of an impression, because their foundation is weaker.

Murray is a polemicist. His books are just food for thought. They aren't supposed to be read like rigorous works on subjects.

Contrast Murray's book with Yuval Harari's Sapiens. Hariri is an academic, and his book was reviewed everywhere. It wasn't loved universally, and much criticised. But everybody gave a shit, because this book was written by an author who is known for having well supported arguments. How come everybody is apathetic when it comes to Murray, but not when it comes to Hariri?

 

[TSwizzle]

In Sweden they're basically the nationalist variant of ISIS. Same same. Just white and less beard

And less be-headings I presume ?

Anyway, more cultural enrichment in Sweden.

The shocking scale of female genital mutilation (FGM) in a Swedish school, where every single girl in one class had been subjected to the procedure, has been revealed. School health services in Norrköping, eastern Sweden, discovered 60 cases of FGM since March, according to the Norrköpings Tidningar newspaper.

Independent

 

[DrZoidberg]

And less be-headings I presume ?

Both groups have done zero beheadings in Sweden. But Swedish Nazis have executed people. This is in rececent years. Swedish Islamists have yet to execute anybody.

Anyway, more cultural enrichment in Sweden.

The shocking scale of female genital mutilation (FGM) in a Swedish school, where every single girl in one class had been subjected to the procedure, has been revealed. School health services in Norrköping, eastern Sweden, discovered 60 cases of FGM since March, according to the Norrköpings Tidningar newspaper.

Independent

That school has broken all manner of Swedish laws and has had their licence to teach revoked. Its a newly started school.

In Sweden the responsibility to educate children is on the state, and not parents. According to the law teaching kids that genders aren't equal is illegal. That's the law that they broke. Its also illegal to teach creationism as science. They did that to.

They recently changed the law to allow for private schools. Lots of religious communities took the oportunity. Not fully realising that they weren't allowed to teach what they please. This is one of those schools.

Its actually a quite big scandal here. The school is called Kunskapsljuset. They ordered it closed in 2013. It was closed. Then immidiately re-opened. Same name. Same place. Same teachers. But a new contract with a New head-master. This has been done over and over. Its a systematic abuse of the system. But most seriously is that the money they get from the state has just been lifted out into simebodys private account.

The whole school is just a blatant scam and abuse of the Swedish rules. So they need to fix the laws regulating this.

 

[angelo]

Dr, i suppose the rape of Swedish females by muslims isn't true either, but just reports by islamaphobes!

 

[DrZoidberg]

Dr, i suppose the rape of Swedish females by muslims isn't true either, but just reports by islamaphobes!

That one is a lie. Yes, it is reports by Islamophobes making shit up. There's zero support för the theory. Its completely taken out of thin air. Its twisted statistics taken completely out of context. Immigrant aren't overrepresented in Swedish rape statistics