Denmark: Rapes Soared 196 PERCENT Since Liberal Government Took Power, Invited Refugees

[Fweethawt]

https://www.10news.one/denmark-rapes-soared-196-percent-since-liberal-government-took-power-invited-refugees/

 

Since the self-proclaimed Conservative party Venstre (meaning “Left”) with their slogan “Denmark’s Liberal party” took power in June 2015, the number of rapes reported to the police has soared by a shocking 196 percent, according to the Danish state’s bureau of statistics.

 

This rise in rape attacks coincides with the liberal government’s opening of Danish national borders to refugees that primarily are from Islamic countries.

[Jds22]

Or could it be the way rapes are reported and recorded?

 

According to a consultant to the Danish National Police, the sharp increase is due in part to police districts better recording rape reports. 

 

“We are very pleased that we now have more accurate numbers on how many men and women have reported rapes. Previously there were many cases that were treated under the category of ‘investigation numbers’ that did not get included in the statistics of reported rapes,” Thomas Brædder told Metroxpress. 

 

Last year it was reported that an investigation by the Ministry of Justice indicated that as many as 700 rape cases per year were being filed incorrectly by police. 

 

https://www.thelocal.dk/20170201/reported-rapes-in-denmark-double-in-two-years

[Thurisaz]

Yeah let's be careful here. Are there more rapes now? Could be. Or are more rapes reported, for whatever reason?

 

And that's ignoring the possibility that people are sowing out entire fields of fake news to influence public opinion. Our rightards have been busily doing that here too in recent years.

[sorenG]

As a Dane I have to correct a few things. Our government is presently a right-wing coalition depending on support form a rabid nationalist party. That the leading party calling itself "liberal" for allmost 100 years is misleading. At that time it was purely about the economic policies, wich can be compared with the present Libetarianism.

There has been no openign of the borders. Denmark is very closed, and are even refusing to take a very small quota of refugees via the UN, against a convention Denmark signed.This refugees is mostly cronically ill or disabled.

We have made a law allowing the government to confiscate personal items to make refugees pay for their stay

The danish minister for for immigration went on Facebook with a cake, celebrating that she has made 50 laws against rights for immigrants and refugees.

I am ashamed of being danish.

 

And of the rapes. There is no connection between the refugee situation and increase in rapes. But it is good news that women that has been raped is now more intent on reporting it - and the statistics is kept up.

SorenG

[Vigile]

21 minutes ago, sorenG said:

As a Dane I have to correct a few things. Our government is presently a right-wing coalition depending on support form a rabid nationalist party. That the leading party calling itself "liberal" for allmost 100 years is misleading. At that time it was purely about the economic policies, wich can be compared with the present Libetarianism.

There has been no openign of the borders. Denmark is very closed, and are even refusing to take a very small quota of refugees via the UN, against a convention Denmark signed.This refugees is mostly cronically ill or disabled.

We have made a law allowing the government to confiscate personal items to make refugees pay for their stay

The danish minister for for immigration went on Facebook with a cake, celebrating that she has made 50 laws against rights for immigrants and refugees.

I am ashamed of being danish.

 

And of the rapes. There is no connection between the refugee situation and increase in rapes. But it is good news that women that has been raped is now more intent on reporting it - and the statistics is kept up.

SorenG

 

You're really putting a damper on folks who are convinced Europeans are being overrun by hordes of raping Muslims who are going to bring Sharia law and out populate white Europeans in just the matter of a generation or two Soren.

[Thurisaz]

Thanks for the valuable insider perspective Soren

[florduh]

5 hours ago, sorenG said:

As a Dane I have to correct a few things. Our government is presently a right-wing coalition depending on support form a rabid nationalist party. That the leading party calling itself "liberal" for allmost 100 years is misleading. At that time it was purely about the economic policies, wich can be compared with the present Libetarianism.

There has been no openign of the borders. Denmark is very closed, and are even refusing to take a very small quota of refugees via the UN, against a convention Denmark signed.This refugees is mostly cronically ill or disabled.

We have made a law allowing the government to confiscate personal items to make refugees pay for their stay

The danish minister for for immigration went on Facebook with a cake, celebrating that she has made 50 laws against rights for immigrants and refugees.

I am ashamed of being danish.

 

And of the rapes. There is no connection between the refugee situation and increase in rapes. But it is good news that women that has been raped is now more intent on reporting it - and the statistics is kept up.

SorenG

These days many Americans have no use for facts even from people actually living in the country of interest. Forget that the US leads by a large margin in all violent crimes worldwide. Forget anything else that doesn't show "liberals" in a bad light. We're America, goddamit!

[bornagainathiest]

2 hours ago, Burnedout said:

I was at a local Walmart near where I live and ran into a lady whom I found out was from France.  She was there with her young daughter approx 13 or 14, my guess.  I asked her if she was on vacation and she told me 'no'. She said that she was immigrating from France.  I asked her what brought her here.  She said back in France, the Muslim men, mostly young men of late teens and twenties, were making it difficult for women to even leave the house to do errands and go shopping, let alone do anything fun outside and the police would do NOTHING.  She said she was able to come here because her husband had some American citizenship due to the fact his father was American, married a French woman,  his mother,  and stayed in France.  This lady's husband managed to get a job at a US military base as a civilian and then was able to angle and get a transfer to the states.  She was from the Riviera, approx 50 Kilometers from the Spanish border. I have ran into several German women married to retired and some to active duty American military personnel and I heard similar stories.  They are trying to figure out a way to help their family members get out, NO SHIT. You can believe the media or you can believe people who have lived there and left. 

 

And what of the third option?

[bornagainathiest]

1 minute ago, Burnedout said:

 

 

Such as?

 

The one presented 9 hours ago in this thread, in the 4th post.

[bornagainathiest]

1 minute ago, Burnedout said:

I guess it depends upon where you get your information from.  If they lived there first hand, where you lived, if you are male or female, and other factors.  I can say this, no matter who it is, if they were to hastle my wife, daughter, or members of my family or friends  in MY state in this country, I would be justified both morally and legally  in blowing their head off with a firearm because what was going on there would be deemed assault here.  

 

But you presented a false dichotomy, when you wrote...

 

 You can believe the media or you can believe people who have lived there and left.

 

sorenG is a citizen of Denmark and not either of the two options you presented.

 

So where did you get your information from when you presented only those two options?

 

Not sorenG, it would seem.

 

His information was there for you to see, but somehow you didn't see it.

 

Do you see it now?

 

 

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

Just now, Burnedout said:

 

I got mine from mainly women who were living in Europe and had first-hand info.  Should I ignore them and assume they are lying?  

 

Please answer the question.

 

Do you see sorenG's post?

[sorenG]

As the stories are told by the media, it depends which side you choose to believe. There has sadly been incidents of harassment and rapes, and even one is too many, but the extent is grossly exaggerated by the tabloids, who cannot (read will not) se the difference between refugees from war and migrants, mostly from North Africa. This has scared many, especially elder people.

 

I can guess that it is this stories that are told in US, also to scare to be afraid of foriegners.

The numbers of attacks and arson on fugitives in North Europe is far, far greater problem.

 

But as I said, you must decide whar you want to believe...

SorenG

 

[bornagainathiest]

7 minutes ago, Burnedout said:

 

Yes...I did, but my information was in addition to what SorenG said.  I knew Denmark was not having quite as bad a situation as other European countries, but the migrant/Muslim situation is a European-wide issue.  

 

And to pick up sorenG's point about us deciding what we want to believe is true...

 

...I'll always go with what I can verify for myself and not with what I can't verify. 

 

Can what you've posted about women living in Europe by verified by me or must I treat it as hearsay, BO?

 

(I mean the Walmart conversation you mentioned.)

 

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

6 minutes ago, Burnedout said:

 

 

Here is the thing.  You have to decide for yourself.  The media outlets have been shown to often to be lying or using hype.  The official government records often originate from an agenda based on the policys of people in power.  You have people who are eye-witnesses.  I am just saying what I have been told.  You don't have to agree with me.  No skin off my back. I don't really care.  

 

But you cared enough to somehow not see sorenG's post and then present a false dichotomy about this issue.

 

 

 

Thanks, but no thanks, BO.

 

I don't accept your hearsay because I can't do anything to verify it for myself.

 

But using Google and Youtube I've found information that verifies some of what sorenG has written about.

 

 

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

I have to log off now, BO.  But here's something interesting that I'll leave for you.

Yesterday, hours before sorenG made the post you failed to see in this thread, I wrote this about you in another thread.  

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/77106-climate-change-sceptics-suffer-blow-as-satellite-data-correction-shows-140-faster-global-warming/?page=8&tab=comments#comment-1151859

 

And as far as I can see, this pattern is playing itself out here in Ex-C.

When it comes to certain things, End3 could be swapped for BO and the pattern (not the content) of their posts would stay pretty much the same.  

Both players seem to begin from a position of deeply-held personal belief.

Both players seem to have problems with adopting a neutral, open-minded and skeptical mind set.

Both players seem to have a latent distrust of certain authorities and organizations.

Both players seem to have a poorly-developed understanding of what constitutes good practice in data gathering. 

Both players seem to practice confirmation bias by selecting evidence that confirms their beliefs and de-selecting evidence that doesn't.

Both players seem to place too much emphasis on the subjective and too little on the objective.

Both players seem to over-rely on their personal experiences, taking their limited, subjective and highly specific data as a reliable indicator of widespread and global generalities and trends.

 

Yup!  You did that today, right here in this thread.

 

You practiced confirmation bias by de-selecting sorenG's evidence, because it did not agree with your beliefs.  

 

Looks like I was right about what you do, before you went and did it.

 

 

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

5 hours ago, Burnedout said:

BAA,  

 

You are ignoring something in your haste to accuse me.   If you read the Koran,  then the Muslims committing the acts,  are simply being consistent with their scripture.  Additionally, with enough stories coming out of Europe, not ALL may be true,  but that does not mean that all are wrong.  Buy you saying I am using confirmation bias,  you do error.  If something woman tells you that she was harassed,  or worse,  do you call her claim baseless? Just because information is not packaged in your nice neat ideal presentation does not make it wrong. If you do,  you commit the fallacy fallacy.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy

 

While we're at it,  who made you the arbiter if that which is logical on here?

Why are you trying to be the gate keeper?

 

Second point first, BO.

 

All members of Ex-C are equal.

None has any special rights or privileges or power or authority over any other.  But what each and every member can do is to question and challenge any other member on what they post and how they post it.  That is ALL I'm doing here.  Nothing more and nothing less.  You can challenge and question me (as you did with the Argument from fallacy, above) and I can challenge and question you.  That's how the cookie crumbles around here.  If you don't like it, then... tough.

 

First point, second.

I did not say that the information from those women you met in Walmart was wrong (your accusation) I said it was unverifiable hearsay from you.  Two different things.  So your accusation that I'm committing the Argument from fallacy is wide of the mark.

 

And my point still stands.

I called you on your habit of deselecting information that doesn't square with your agenda (sorenG's post) before you went and did it.

[bornagainathiest]

5 hours ago, Burnedout said:

Folks, 

 

BAA likes to interject himself as an uninvited referee deciding what is logical or factual rather than letting you decide for yourself.  I guess he thinks you are not smart enough to do that on your own. 

 

Not true.

 

I am acting fully within my rights as a member of Ex-C to challenge or question what another member has posted and how they have posted it.

 

BurnedOut has challenged and questioned me by accusing me of committing the Argument from Fallacy.

 

So, by his own logic, he's acting just as much as an uninvited referee of what is logical, as he claims I am.

 

That's because the Argument from Fallacy is a formal logical fallacy.  

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy

Argument from fallacy is the formal fallacy of analyzing an argument and inferring that, since it contains a fallacy, its conclusion must be false

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy

In philosophy, a formal fallacy (also called deductive fallacy) is a pattern of reasoning rendered invalid by a flaw in its logical structure that can neatly be expressed in a standard logic system, for example propositional logic.

 

So he is being an uninvited referee of the logic of my posts - which is exactly the accusation he's made about me.

 

Pot.  Kettle.  Black.

 

 

 

 

[bornagainathiest]

59 minutes ago, Burnedout said:

^^BAA why do you feel the need to be a referee?  Do you think People are too stupid to think on their own? In the past you have complained when I posted items showing flaws in peer review and you made a comparison to a Christian being a drunk and I offering that person a drink.   I said let the truth come out and let the chips fall where they May.   Now you are subtly doing the same thing.   I am only responding to you  in response to the way you responded to me. After all I posted  a post first and you responded to me.  Not the other way around.  Why do you do that?  Are you making the the assumption that the readers are too stupid to be making their own minds?

 

I have already clearly stated my position.

[bornagainathiest]

1 hour ago, Burnedout said:

 

Yes,  you SAY,  but in practice, it comes off as you attempting to be a referee.  Why?  It appears to me that you care more about form than substance. This is not a board, perhaps with slight exception in one or two subforums,  where hard form rules apply.   Why do try to insist on that? 

 

I have already clearly stated my position.

 

What I've said there adequately explains all that you need to know, BO.

[bornagainathiest]

5 hours ago, Burnedout said:

 

But it still doesn't chang the fact that you are trying to enforce form rules that are not there.  Why? Do you think readers are too stupid to make up their own minds?

 

That's not a fact.

The act of challenging and/or questioning what another member posts is not an act of enforcement.  Commanding or ordering you to do something would be.  But I'm not doing that.  I'm simply challenging and questioning you, BO.  Just as any member can challenge or question any other member.  Just as you've done with me.  Just OrdinaryClay and End3 and the Stranger have done to me in the Den.  Just as Pantheory has done to me about cosmology.  Just as I've done to them.  

 

By the logic of your argument, any challenge or questioning from any member is an attempt to enforce form rules that aren't there.

But that's clearly not the case in Ex-C, is it?  The Mods have no problem at all with members questioning and challenging each other.  That's what happens in Ex-C.  It's the norm.  The status quo.  Everyone does and everyone (perhaps, except you?) is happy with it.

 

So No, you are wrong.

I'm not trying to enforce anything.  I'm just doing what any member can do and I'm quite within my membership rights to do so.  Furthermore, I haven't abused or violated any rules or guidelines in challenging and questioning you.  Your membership rights haven't been abused or violated by me in any way, either.  

 

Face it, BO.

You'll simply have to accept that I can question and challenge you whenever I like and there's no rule, guideline or regulation you can invoke to stop me.

[bornagainathiest]

Just now, Burnedout said:

 

BAA,

 

You throw a good smoke screen, but you still will not answer WHY you insist on doing what you are doing?  Do you think other people are too stupid to make up their own mind? 

 

I don't have to answer your questions.

I'm quite within my rights to challenge and question what any member posts, just as they are entitled to question and challenge me.  Please just accept that.

[bornagainathiest]

Just now, Burnedout said:

 

What bothers you about answering WHY?  

 

You are wasting your time.

[bornagainathiest]

Just now, Burnedout said:

 

And I can keep asking.  It is within my rights.  So WHY do you keep doing what you're doing?  Do you think readers are too stupid to make up their own minds? 

 

This thread will be locked before I submit to your demands.

[bornagainathiest]

Just now, Burnedout said:

 

And I can keep asking.  So...Why do you keep doing what you are doing?  Do you think readers are too stupid to make up their own minds? 

.

[bornagainathiest]

1 minute ago, Burnedout said:

I answered your questions when you asked me, so I am asking you my questions.  Why are you doing what you are doing?  AND...Do you think readers are too stupid to make up their own minds? 

.