Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
What if he didn't have a criminal record before he arrived, and presuming he didn't write "to rape kids" on his asylum papers asking why he came?
sexual emergency
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
What if he didn't have a criminal record before he arrived, and presuming he didn't write "to rape kids" on his asylum papers asking why he came?
As a lone male who has wife and kids elsewhere he should have been sent back the moment he stepped into the EU.
Indeed, it's one of the most bizarre arguments that has kept cropping up recently
Exactly, people need to understand that the sociality of a refugee can potentially be very damaging to our own society. It's not difficult to ascertain whether someone could potentially be a credit to our society. No one should be allowed to even attempt to integrate until they have passed a thorough psychological evaluation in addition to any usual background checks.
People coming here legitimately via a sponsor have a completely different mentality to completely random people who flood another country because their country has been bombed, and that is what some people have trouble differentiating.
For starters a lot will not have any inherent respect for our country and values whatsoever. Compared with where they're coming from they see it as a 'better' opportunity. Single men who come are going to be inclined toward criminality because to them, the worst that could happen is that they'll get fed in a cell.
The thing about this particular story is there's something I don't understand about the people who say this wouldn't have happened if he wasn't let in....
Have you ever considered that a child getting raped is diabolical no matter where it happens? Stopping children getting raped should be a global effort. If that man had never gone to Vienna he would have been continuing to rape Muslim children today and for the rest of his life. Oh but Muslim children don't matter do they? How utterly despicable some of you are, you should be ashamed.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,257
The thing is asim18, if he had not went to vienna, he might not have raped anyone.
Rapes are often crimes of opportunity.
I will not automatically assume that a rapist will undoubtly rape someone no matter what.
Most rapes occur by people who are known to the victim, clearly not in this case, but if the man wasn't there, then we can say, for certain, that child would not have been raped.
It doesn't automatically follow that he would have raped someone else.
-edit and yes, i have said at every post that child rape is abhorrent, and should be prevented, and punished harshly
Rapes are often crimes of opportunity.
I will not automatically assume that a rapist will undoubtly rape someone no matter what.
Most rapes occur by people who are known to the victim, clearly not in this case, but if the man wasn't there, then we can say, for certain, that child would not have been raped.
It doesn't automatically follow that he would have raped someone else.
-edit and yes, i have said at every post that child rape is abhorrent, and should be prevented, and punished harshly
Soldato
He said he did it because he hadn't had sex for 4 months, so if he was back in Iraq with his wife it probably wouldn't have happened.
Do you have children? Would you like to take the opportunity to house some of these single, male immigrants near you and your children?
And if your children get raped, would you be so quick to say, "It's good that he came here and got caught with my son. It means he won't be sodomising young boys in Iraq any more."
I can't see any parent wanting to take that risk.
Man of Honour
People who hate the west aren't flocking to the west. That makes zero sense for them to do that.
It makes plenty of sense. It's often easier to conquer a place if you're already inside it. Political manipulation if you can get enough power legally (which just requires successful lobbying or merely just enough voters). Criminal activity to decrease stability, freedom and security in the country you're targetting. Terrorism to do the same. Providing money, shelter and/or resources to external groups or members of them. There's a lot you can do to conquer a place from within that you can't do from outside. If you have enough numbers, you can just conquer culturally and politically without even using violence.
And yet asim18 is framing this as a victory for the west.
His logic is that by bringing the criminals here, there is less crime in Iraq
Amazing, isn't it.
More cultural enrichment, and some people on here think we should open our doors to more of this scum, as if we don't already have enough of them, born here or not.
I just heard on the news before the judgement that they were all having a good laugh.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-35524340
I just heard on the news before the judgement that they were all having a good laugh.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-35524340
We really need to make it so theres the option to make people serve sentences consecutively for violent/sexual crimes.
Most of those men got mulitple sentences for crimes but they'll only serve the sentence for whichever was longest and do thier 3 jail terms all concurrently.
And yet asim18 is framing this as a victory for the west.
His logic is that by bringing the criminals here, there is less crime in Iraq
Amazing, isn't it.
You have serious reading comprehension problems. I'm framing this as a victory for the global effort against rape. One less raping peado is a good thing whether it's here, Iraq or anywhere in the world for goodness sake.
You must be pretty retarded if you think bringing one criminal here doesn't mean one less criminal wherever he came from? It's a logistical certainty. So I'm not sure what's flawed in my logic? It's what everybody is suggesting in this thread to stop blindly importing criminals among refugees from overseas?
Unless you're saying more crime In EU and less crime in Iraq is a good thing??? You are a complete disgrace even for contemplating such things.
Isn't everybody saying we're bringing criminals here by flooding ourselves with refugees? Even I just explained the reasons these people are more inclined toward criminality here than they are in their home country. So I'm really not sure what you're whining about me for?
Last edited:
Yep!
Big fan of "Three strikes" and "Truth in sentencing" myself.
However, in this case, (Is Germany doing air strikes in Syria??) I think he should be fitted with a parachute and strapped to a pylon on a bomber and the next time there is a mission over Syria he can be dropped off along with the rest of the post!
Ahem...
There is no "global effort against rape" as you well know. It's "normal" in some of these cultures. See: Afghanistan.
We don't need or want to bring them here to prey on our own kids. Simple, really.
Un believable.
You have no sympathy if a innocent child gets raped as long as he's from Afganistan?
You have no sympathy for crimes against children as long as it's the cultural practice???
Stop I don't want to talk with you further you are clearly discriminative, and now you're discriminative about what nationality an innocent child has to be for it to be OK for him to get raped.
By your discriminatory logic, FGM is OK if it happens to an African girl or whatever because, and I quote, it's "in their culture"?
You're sickening, well and truly sickening.
Last edited:
Un believable. You have no sympathy if a Muslim child gets raped?
Stop I don't want to talk with you further.
You also didn't answer my other question.
Show me the parent who would choose to have their own child raped even once by an imported foreign criminal, instead of a child in a that criminal's own land being raped.
Show me the parent who would put a positive spin on this.
Frankly it's not our fault that these people are rapists, and that their culture accepts and tolerates their behaviour. It's for them to fix, and not for us to import their criminals, then have to keep them in our own prisons.
These people should be kept at arm's length and outside our country, and I'd rather deport them back to their own country than pay for them to be well kept in British jails.
Yes we had pedo priests and Jimmy Saville. But they are/were the exception not the norm. And in 2016 Britain pedos have to hide their activities. Getting caught means jails or worse. If it were the same in Iraq or Afghanistan then you might have a point.
But the probability of rape is higher with these people, as in their home lands you can get away with it. They don't even seem to think it's wrong :/
Un believable. You have no sympathy if a innocent child gets raped as long as he's from Afganistan?
Stop I don't want to talk with you further you are clearly discriminative, and now you're discriminative about what nationality an innocent child has to be for it to be OK for him to get raped.
By your discriminatory logic, FGM is OK if it happens to an African girl or whatever because, and I quote, it's "in their culture"?
You're sickening, well and truly sickening.
No, you're saying that's what I'm saying. Actually it's clear what I was saying.
No country wants to import another country's criminals. If a country (or culture) is notorious for engendering a large number of child rapists, you can be sure I don't want to bring them over here.
Their children getting raped is a problem for them to fix. Sad, but true. When we start bringing them here to rape our children, it's a self-inflicted wound.
What is this crap?
You assume that if a child is raped by a person sharing the same nationality as the parent/child that somehow the crime is less abhorrent and the parent will be less angry, well maybe if they're racist, but the child doesn't know its worse because the rapist was a foreigner for goodness sake!!!
Anyway I've made my stance clear already,
I don't think this needs to go any further. It's simply fuelling lots of random assumptions and making me feel more sickened than I already am.
Last edited:
You don't seem to be grasping this. We want to minimise risk to ourselves.
Importing large numbers of people from cultures where child rape is practiced openly is a risk. A risk that we can choose to mitigate, by not bringing them here.
If they continue to rape children in their own lands, that is no doubt appalling, but we are at least protecting ourselves.
Our government has a mandate to protect British citizens, and frankly they do not have the same responsibility to protect other nation's citizens abroad.
That is reality. Does that make sense to you?