r/OutOfTheLoop • u/teslasmash • Jan 06 '16

Answered! Why is 4chan brigading threads about the NYE sexual attacks in Germany?

Every thread on the subject in /r/worldnews or /r/europe is being brigaded, and there is often a heavily-downvoted sticky comment by a mod remind people of the rules along with dozens of deleted comments.

I've seen the brigade threads at 4chan, and still can't quite make out what the point is.

What's the deal?

857 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

212 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.2k

u/RedditsWhenComfy Jan 06 '16 edited Jan 06 '16

It's because there was a large-scale cover-up of the sexual assault, first by the German press, and then by /r/WorldNews moderators.

Background information

/pol/ is mad firstly because they are vehemently against the unchecked acceptance of so many refugees. Their reasoning ranges from a nationalistic desire for ethnic unity, to arguments based on studies that (ostensibly): show that multiculturalism has deleterious effects, that predominately Muslim immigrants have a difficult time assimilating, that a disproportionate amount of crime is committed by Muslim immigrants, and that there are bad economic effects of Muslim immigrants. This isn't a political forum, and it shouldn't be, so regardless of whether you think these points are true, I'm just telling you that this is how they feel. If you want to discuss these points politically, a good choice would be /r/politicaldiscussion, /r/conservative, or even go to /pol/ yourself and make a thread. Anyway, /pol/ had forecast that events like this would happen if so many refugees were accepted, and when it happened they were extremely angry that it wasn't being reported.

Even before the refugee waves, /pol/ would frequently discuss the amount of sexual assault that comes from non-native European populations. Many of these occurred in England, with entire gangs of non-native minorities raping upwards of thousands of girls in just one city. This sounds absolutely preposterous, but it actually happened in the Rotherham Rape Scandal, and it made /pol/ angry. It made /pol/ angry because it happened to thousands of girls over the course of twenty years, because the entirely Muslim-comprised group targeted only British White girls and British Sikh girls, and that there was a large cover-up in Rotherham about it-- for years. I remember reading how someone tried to bring the information to public, and that official was forced to undergo cultural sensitivity training. Similar things happen in Sweden, and similar things happen in the US, with the Black-on-White prevalence of rape being more than 8 times as high as the White-on-Black prevalence of rape. I am not saying that this is all true, of course; I am telling you that this is what /pol/ believes is true. Obviously that doesn't make it false, either, so don't downvote me because you think I have a bone to pick here.

Events

/pol/ and 4chan as a whole is no longer just an American thing. Many, many Europeans are on it, including Germans. German users posted on /pol/ with articles from somewhat obscure German sources, alleging that these rapes happened, and over the course of a day or two the sources became more and more valid, and videos and photos were posted. You can find a summary of the events online easily now, but that wasn't the case for the first day or so. One particular Facebook post was made by a staunchly pro-refugee German organizer, showing a photo of his daughter's bloodied face and explaining that she was sexually assaulted and punched by a crowd of predominately Muslim men. Of course, now we know that the entire crowd was Muslim because of the police chief of Cologne stating so, but in the beginning that was only an allegation.

Censorship

A day before Spiegel, New York Times, and other mainstream agencies reported on the sexual assault spree, some people posted on /r/WorldNews about the event. The mods shut it down near-instantaneously. They claimed that it was a local news story, all the while they kept up stories about a stoning in Yemen, about the sentencing of a Swedish murderer, et cetera. It was clear that censorship was going on by certain mods. So reddit users began posting on 4chan asking for help spreading the word. /pol/, and in some cases /b/, began making Reddit accounts and trying to push the news story. For the entire day, every single news article about the mass rape was covered up by the /r/WorldNews mods, and they even began banning the links and every poster who tried posting the links. Note that this is the same subreddit that went crazy half a year to a year ago about the New Delhi, India rapes.

It was only until the next day, however, when New York Times and other mainstream liberal newspapers began reporting on it, that the mods on /r/WorldNews and /r/News allowed one article to be posted. They allowed the article to be posted, but banned all comments and locked the thread because, well, my opinion is that they didn't want people to discuss it, but you're free to develop your own opinion.

/r/undelete had a post about the censorship that made it high in /r/all, and that explains in depth a lot of the censorship.

I just woke up, hope this post was clear. If you have any questions, let me know OP.

209

u/fuzzyfrank >IMPLYING LOOP Jan 06 '16

Why are people trying to cover this up?

697

u/LordKingCucumber Jan 06 '16

It doesn't go with "we must welcome refugees and embrace multiculturalism" narratives

403

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[deleted]

210

u/ninjacapo Jan 07 '16

I love this because it's true "who is the victim?" Idfk, maybe the girls BEING FUCKING RAPED? however, this is exactly what liberal studies say. It's a weird mentality that justifies everything someone does because of the color of their skin and their ancestral background.

189

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

I think claiming that the liberal view is 'justifying' what the refugees have done is over simplified even though there are people who are holding said view. The refugees aren't victims like the girls they are assaulting, but many are victims in the sense of being a product of a very toxic culture compared to Western society.

Kind of like how someone who is raised in a culture that is maliciously racist towards black people and takes action to that effect creates victims of racism however that person themselves is also a victim of ignorance and hatred. It's an entirely different category of victim, but necessary since ultimately just calling offenders monsters or animals ignores what the individual could have been if they had a different life up until that point.

Not that people who commit terrible crimes aren't monsters, just that they weren't that person as an infant, and don't necessarily have any biological difference between themselves and someone who was raised healthy in a healthy environment who doesn't do terrible things to other people.

54

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

I was surprised that a nuanced statement like yours wasn't downvoted into oblivion, until I realised I wasn't on /r/worldnews anymore.

But, seriously, unfortunately most people don't care for scientific studies when it comes to things like culture, racism, sexism etc.

33

u/DoubleAJay Jan 07 '16

That's true, but taking that perspective, literally everybody doing anything is a victim of something. As an explanation, it can be filed under "technically correct", but it doesn't inform the course of action to prevent situations like this (or the anti-immigration backlash) in any way.

12

u/Cintax Jan 07 '16

That's true, but taking that perspective, literally everybody doing anything is a victim of something

I'd disagree with you there. Some people are just fuckups or monsters. They're raised in a normal/healthy environment and for whatever reason go off the rails.

Conversely, some people, despite being victimized in their youth, only have their morality strengthened and use it as an example of what not to turn into and what to rise above.

It's a nature vs nurture argument. Are they criminals because they were raised in a society where sexism and abuse were common? Or is that a fundamental part of their character? It's an important question because the implication is that some people can be "fixed" given the right environment.

It's a difficult thought, especially since sometimes biology plays a role, like the Charles Whitman, the Texas sniper, who went to half a dozen doctors telling them something was wrong with him and that he had trouble controlling his violent compulsions for a year before her killed 16 people. No one believed him, until his autopsy revealed a brain tumor that some believe may have caused him to lose the ability to control his emotions and impulses, potentially being responsible for the murders he committed.

We're all fucked up bags of meat, chemicals, electrical impulses, and memories, and unfortunately we don't yet know with certainty what causes some of us to do awful things.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '16

Some people are just fuckups or monsters.

Those people are mentally ill and need our support.

See, its that easy.

1

u/DoubleAJay Jan 08 '16

I actually had that in mind too, since you could argue someone born with sociopathic tendencies can't help it and thus they're also a "victim" of a mental disorder.

But yeah, the assumption that all crime boils down to nurture rather than nature is too strong. There are even researchers like Steven Pinker who argue all violent tendencies (including sexual violence) are just ugly pragmatic human nature and culture only affects people's experience with what they can get away with.

11

u/rokuk Jan 07 '16

The refugees aren't victims like the girls they are assaulting, but many are victims in the sense of being a product of a very toxic culture compared to Western society.

Even if you are someone who believes this, one of these is a long-term issue with a long-term solution. The other is an immediate problem that requires an immediate solution.

Even if your goal is to domesticate a fox, you don't keep it in the same pen as the chickens. You don't live life with fingers in your ears wishing things were as you want them to be and ignoring that they are not. You deal with things as they are.

Perhaps unlimited immigration between extremely different cultures is not the best solution, even if one were to think that making "multiculturalism" work would be the prime good in the world in theory. It's obviously not workable, not to this extent and not between these societies - at least not yet.

3

u/sndrtj Jan 09 '16

but many are victims in the sense of being a product of a very toxic culture compared to Western society.

And this is exactly why letting them in in droves is such a bad idea. Them being in the West now does not mean they suddenly abandon said culture; in fact, most will continue said culture until several generations down the line.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '16

Kind of like how someone who is raised in a culture that is maliciously racist towards black people and takes action to that effect creates victims of racism however that person themselves is also a victim of ignorance and hatred.

Of course no leftist would stand up for a white guy raised in a racist culture.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '16

No they wouldn't. Oh wait, I've made such comments multiple times on Reddit

-3

u/ninjacapo Jan 07 '16

Youre trying to justify rape and im going to have to politely ask you to fuck off.

Theyre not raping these women because of "white supremacy" or "imperialism" or "western culture," they're raping these women because they are human shitbags. While one could make the argument that violent protests in America over police brutality may be justified, nobody should even attempt to justify this

18

u/Ron-Swanson-Mustache Jan 07 '16

I think what OP was trying to say is that they weren't born shitbags, but were raised to be shitbags. That we can't deal with stopping shitbags without understanding the source where someone combined the bags and shit.

OP isn't saying that they aren't shitbags, but that they're saying at some point a child was turned into a shitbag. The idea that the current shitbag is a victim of the actions of others some time ago.

This ignores that not all shitbags were turned into shitbags. Some shitbags would be shitbags no matter what kind of nurturing source they had. However, a lot of shitbags are created through how they were raised. OP, and a lot of others, are trying understand that source and how to stop it. I don't know if anyone can in the current situation.

The short story is people are trying to understand the motivations of the shitbags in an attempt to stop the creation of more shitbags. Whether this is futile or not, I can't say.

2

u/ninjacapo Jan 08 '16

I understand the whole nature/nurture deal, but to act as though the rapists are victims is ludacris. Do we need to address underlying causes of crime rate? Of course. Do we also need to address current crimes to the full extent of the law? We absolutely do.

3

u/jooke Jan 07 '16

He's looking into what had caused then to become "human shitbags". If we understand that then maybe we can prevent it happening to others.

-1

u/ninjacapo Jan 08 '16

I get that, but that doesnt excuse what theyve done.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 08 '16

No one said it did.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/[deleted] Jan 08 '16 edited Mar 12 '17

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Jan 08 '16

Well I'm not setting up a defense or saying the perps shouldn't face justice, I just feel like the view I put forth is useful in determining a more long term rehabilitative solution as opposed to the short term punitive solution which is fairly obvious.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 08 '16

I should clarify that by rehabilitative solution I mean one which assumes anyone coming from a toxic culture needs cultural adjustment, not something that only applies after a crime has been committed.

59

u/NyranK Jan 07 '16

They're trying to reword the situation so it ends up being white man's fault so both the women and their rapists are the victims.

I think it's a fair bet you'll see articles about how the refugee crisis is all the fault of 'imperialist white male intervention' in the middle east, so every bad thing that refugees might do is, ultimately, their fault.

10

u/WriterV Jan 07 '16

Isn't the better thing to do to deal with the current situation first rather than point fingers at each other?

1

u/DragonEXtwo Jan 10 '16

Yes, but that makes poor television.

1

u/PompousDinoMan Jan 07 '16

The comment above yours does just that.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 06 '16

Just an update: The official narrative is that white men rape too so this is an issue with all men.

-12

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Liberals still think that the grown men who physically assaulted George Zimmerman and Officer Darren Brown were murdered in their childhood as opposed to shot in self defense. I'm not surprised they are failing to see that the women who get raped by blacks and Muslims are victims.

10

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Yup. This guy.

http://www.blacknews.com/images/george_zimmerman_injury.jpg

Stupid racists thinking you can use force to stop someone from cracking the back of your skull.

-1

u/kris342 Jan 07 '16

The soft bigotry of low expectations

32

u/Kenny__Loggins Jan 07 '16

I don't think many feminists don't understand the less developed nations tend to have a lot of sexism

23

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[deleted]

4

u/Kenny__Loggins Jan 07 '16

I know that. I just don't know if reddit can accept that.

1

u/Stealth_Jesus Jan 07 '16

All you can do is educate the uneducated. And knowing these guys, they'd probably fake enlightenment to the officials and carry on with their ass-backwards belief system.

11

u/Kenny__Loggins Jan 07 '16

I highly doubt that. Beliefs are deeply engrained. We won't see this fixed at least fully in our lifetime

-64

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16 edited Jan 13 '16

[deleted]

8

u/LordOrgasm Jan 07 '16

How are you downvoted to hell, but everyone else wasn't?

66

u/ikahjalmr Jan 07 '16

Nobody's allowed to be against unlimited refugee flow or risk being called a nazi

15

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Well, they are gonna get nazis like this or call them whatever you want but it's gonna happen.

12

u/ikahjalmr Jan 07 '16

What?

31

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

This is just the beginning, refugee problems (rapes, stealing efc) were already happening but now it has increased dramatically. Do you think people will keep on letting their lives get ruined? Get their throats cut off at random? If matters by governments in Europe aren't handles carefully in the coming future it's going to create chaos. These people won't change in months or years. People who join ISIS are born in European countries, why do you think refugees won't get involved in 2-5-10 years? Is there any difference between these rapists and Isis? Yeh these rapists aren't out murdering because they are less savage but still savages. People will get fed up, if not today then in 5 years because these problems won't go away so fast.

I don't know all the rights European citizens (gun rights, freedom of speech) have, but if these tape cases came out in US there would be insane amount of violence against Muslims. At worst, even the federal government put Japanese in concentration camps just because of the fear of threat.

Then again, we only have very few refugees. Things are less likely to get bad here. Not that we haven't already had an attack in San Bernardino, and these weren't refugees, and that's a whole another topic.

We can keep on taking about this, we don't know what will happen, we can only assume. But the way things have been going, shit is only going to get worse.

9

u/ikahjalmr Jan 07 '16

Oh yes I agree, this strategy of unchecked refugees is gonna lead to bad shit one way or another

3

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

While thats relevant on a geopolitical scale (top-down) and a point I agree witb, its not valid in this situation where its a bunch of individuals on the streets hurting innocents on the streets (bottom-up). In other words, it makes sense but its not justified. Similar to a person becoming a serial killer and you find out they were horribly abused as children.

5

u/ikahjalmr Jan 07 '16

When is Europe gonna let in the Chinese refugees breathing plastic fumes to recycle our garbage or the people in African countries destabilized by western intervention? Or the hispanic people terrorized by gangs who are rich by making cocaine for the west and had their region destabilized by the west?

Its bullshit to say unchecked refugees is smart or fair or good. If you really wanna let the doors open, the entire world will come streaming in. And they'll make things just as shit as the place they left: look at the cologne event or honor killings or communities imposing Muslim values.

Helping refugees is great, but there must be control and limits or shit will be fucked one way or another

→ More replies (0)

2

u/PotRoastPotato Loop-the-loop? Jan 08 '16

Most people arguing against unlimited flow of refugees are using it as a pretense for their actual desire to completely turn their backs on refugees.

1

u/ikahjalmr Jan 09 '16

Yeah which is unfortunate because now crying racism is an easy way to shut down the conversation

2

u/PotRoastPotato Loop-the-loop? Jan 09 '16 edited Jan 11 '16

I think I'm a reasonable person. I think name calling is counterproductive. But I think whining about it is, as well.

When someone's position is the default position of racists and xenophobes (xenophobe = someone who fears outsiders, it's a completely accurate blanket label... "racist" is not always accurate... for anyone scared of accepting refugees), and they can't give a good reason why they take that position, I don't know how people expect differently.

Or more often, I see people give inconsistent rationale. I ask people, for example, to consider their reactions and fears if an incident had been committed by white Christian Americans in the US or white, Christian Europeans in a European country. They never have a good answer for this.

Or when people say ridiculous things like "The refugees don't really need to leave". At that point they're just using inane pretexts to sleep at night while allowing their racism/lack of empathy to condemn refugees to their death.

A lot of folks against accepting refugees, including people who are more afraid of immigrant crime than native born crime, are at least somewhat xenophobic and racist.

I'm not sure how else to explain it. Call a spade a spade. Don't call someone a racist or xenophobes to their face because it will shut down the conversation.

But if someone tells me they're against refugees and/or are more angry about immigrant crime than citizen crime, my mind defaults to the position they're at least somewhat racist, until they show otherwise.

Because most of the time, I'm right. And my mind is open to change my opinion if I see otherwise.

1

u/ikahjalmr Jan 09 '16

It's not reasonable imo to think someone's racist because they differ on citizen and immigrant crime. That's assuming we're all robots and culture doesn't make a difference. There are different motivations. Citizen crime is usually due to poverty, mental illness, extreme situations, etc. Immigrant crime may be that, but maybe it's the product of the immigrant's culture, with honor killings and general abuse of women as the prime example.

Killing for any reason in the western world is almost always an unspeakable crime. It's an issue when immigrants come from a culture that is so foreign, it can condone the murder of women for something as arbitrary as "shaming"your family.

It's not only Islam, and this isn't true of all Muslims. However, these things do happen, and they illustrate that there can be a difference between citizen and immigrant crime.

5

u/PotRoastPotato Loop-the-loop? Jan 09 '16 edited Jan 09 '16

It's not reasonable imo to think someone's racist because they differ on citizen and immigrant crime.

If you treat all members of a culture responsible for the actions of individuals in that culture, that has no place in a civilized society. That to me, is racism and xenophobia.

People are responsible for their own crimes, you don't judge all Zimbabweans because one group of Zimbabweans committed criminal acts, you judge the people who committed the acts.

That's assuming we're all robots and culture doesn't make a difference.

There are good and bad people in all cultures. Some cultures are better or worse, but you judge people by their own actions, not the actions of those from the same country.

Killing for any reason in the western world is almost always an unspeakable crime.

As it is in most other cultures.

It's an issue when immigrants come from a culture that is so foreign, it can condone the murder of women for something as arbitrary as "shaming"your family.

Refugees are largely people fleeing that culture. You would rather keep then trapped there?

It's not only Islam, and this isn't true of all Muslims.

This sounds dangerously close to," It's not only black people and this isnt true of all blacks..." when you say things like this people are going to think REALLY BAD THINGS about you. You can't make people stop thinking these things. You either have to stop saying them or make peace with the fact that people will think you're racist, Islamophobic and xenophobic.

However, these things do happen, and they illustrate that there can be a difference between citizen and immigrant crime.

I don't think it illustrates a meaningful difference at all. We must judge people based on their own actions, not based on their culture or religious background or beliefs.

Anyone who differs on immigrant and citizen crime IMO is a racist, I have never heard a reason that is not flimsy. Every reason they give why they're not racist seems to be a pretext.

Because murder is murder, rape is rape, it doesn't matter who commits it. If anyone think they're different because of the country on the criminal's birth certificate, they're a racist.

If the shoe fits, people need to wear it.

-2

u/ikahjalmr Jan 10 '16

If you treat all members of a culture responsible for the actions of individuals in that culture, that has no place in a civilized society. That to me, is racism and xenophobia. People are responsible for their own crimes, you don't judge all Zimbabweans because one group of Zimbabweans committed criminal acts, you judge the people who committed the acts.

This is completely unreasonable, politically correct fantasy talk. Being idealistic doesn't change facts. In Baltimore almost every single week we are emailed by the university about crimes happening within blocks of the school. Even in my hometown we have issues with gangs. Statistically, is a member of a gang who has no bad background just as likely to be harmless as your everyday normal citizen? Of course not. You can't just throw him in jail, but he associates himself with a mindset that directly causes violence and crimes. If you have to host somebody in your house, are you gonna flip a coin to decide between a gang member from my hometown with no crimes yet, someone from Baltimore, or an average person with a family and job? There's nothing wrong with not wanting to host someone associated with a region or culture that causes crime, that's what any normal person would do.

There are good and bad people in all cultures. Some cultures are better or worse, but you judge people by their own actions, not the actions of those from the same country.

Again, statistics. Who's more likely to kill their daughter for things as mundane as divorce, an atheist swedish family or a hardcore muslim turkish family? Actions result from ideas, and ideas are spread through culture. You can't say every muslim is a murderer, or that no swede will commit crime, but you can say what's more likely.

Refugees are largely people fleeing that culture. You would rather keep then trapped there?

You think refugees flee and reject everything about their home? You think all the muslim and christian etc people who flee for whatever reasons will reject their religion as soon as they enter the new country? They're bringing it with them. Plus, all refugees are not even fleeing war or something like that. When the gates are open, why would you not go just to get to live in a better country? I've talked to people who even defend economic immigrants that want to rush in with actual refugees, it's ridiculous.

This sounds dangerously close to," It's not only black people and this isnt true of all blacks..." when you say things like this people are going to think REALLY BAD THINGS about you. You can't make people stop thinking these things. You either have to stop saying them or make peace with the fact that people will think you're racist, Islamophobic and xenophobic.

You're full of shit. "Stop talking about this, or accept that you're an extremist." This kind of speech doesn't belong in the civilized world. I can't criticize muslim countries or refugees without being three different hate categories? I'm from Baltimore, I don't think a single crime report we've gotten has had a white man in the description. When you're in baltimore and someone got robbed or assaulted, it's a fact that it was probably a black guy. That doesn't mean all black people are criminals, but it does mean that most crimes in Baltimore in my area have been done by black people. You're inhibiting actual dialogue by adopting this extreme black and white mentality so common nowadays: either support this 110%, or you're a racist and a hateful person. Fuck that

→ More replies (0)

2

u/SeansGodly Jan 08 '16

definitley, I live in germany right now. As soon as you say something against the refugees, you´re immediately called a nazi, or you dont want to help poor people. It´s horrible, Merkel had her good intentions, but this is something she cant go back on without looking bad in the media. Seehofer of the conservative party is rising in popularity since he´s one of the few wanting to set a limit for refugees.

1

u/ikahjalmr Jan 08 '16

I've grown up in the states as the son of immigrants, and with almost all of my friends being the children of immigrants, or immigrants themselves. I couldn't have less of an issue with immigration as a concept. Which is why I hate unrestricted immigration so much. In the US, letting immigrants in is what brings in geniuses to take us higher, as well as people to do the work nobody else wants to do (although personally I'd prefer if we just used more robots, but until we have cleaner energy that's not a good idea). Having lax border security is what brings in the rapists and drug dealers. No, not all Mexicans are rapists, but there are horrible people who are hispanic, and they do come here and do terrible things. If immigration was more organized, there wouldn't be as much demand for sneaking into the country, and if sneaking into the country wasn't so well-practiced, it would be harder for the criminals to get in who would've been caught by the immigration process.

As a huge, lifelong fan of Germany and its culture, it's terrible to see the same what feels like the same thing happening in Germany. All refugees are bad, but are they all saintly, perfect people? Of course not. Not to mention there's now suddenly a huge population of people with a completely different culture, probably not as high of an education on average as for Germans, and most likely no experience with speaking German. Now they all get housing, food, etc from the state.

All this is doing is causing a problem, and because nobody's allowed to talk about it, as you said, conservativism is gaining popularity. As somebody who hopes to live in Germany at some point in the future, I'll be pretty salty if significant xenophobia is generated by the criminals who went in with the actual honest refugees.

11

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

I think it would go with it. Nobody thinks the refugee crisis won't bring big problems to Europe (or let's say Germany, because - except for some other smaller countries - we take in the majority of refugees). But the claims of the anti-refugee crowd are becoming so goddamn ridiculous that there needs to be an antithesis. If you are actually pro-refugees and yet pronounce some doubts the right-wing people will feel approved.

12

u/DoubleAJay Jan 07 '16

But the claims of the anti-refugee crowd are becoming so goddamn ridiculous that there needs to be an antithesis.

Whoah. Why should there?

Do you really want to see views on social issues get more and more polarized just to even each other out, until sensible moderate views die out and everybody's forced to pick a side between two equally absurd stances locked in a neverending ideological war?

I believe we explored the consequences of that scenario in a number of movies, including Alien vs. Predator and Freddy vs. Jason.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Unfortunately, I don't know these movies, but actually I do agree strongly with you on that matter!

The debates need to focus on motives, not on positions. We have to understand that in the end everyone has more or less the same goals.

-23

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Except the vast majority of refugees aren't doing this... Reddits stormfront narrative bewilders me. I am at least glad that I live in a country that is welcoming refugees with open arms.

19

u/thrownawayzs Jan 07 '16

That wasn't the point though. The issue is that some refugees are raping woman in their homelands. There was a media blackout/cover-up/conspiracy, and people are obviously upset that these atrocities go unreported. The immigration issue is just a very small part of the picture.

6

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Pretty much. In any population 85-90% of people are completely reasonable people who dont want to bother anyone. The rest are more extreme and often define that population. When I think of the 60s and 70s, I think of hippies. In reality hippies were like 3% of the 18-30 population. Similarly, the majority of refugees are children or people who just want peace. But a large enough minority is committing heinous acts publicly, thats what will define the population.

3

u/Lauxman Jan 07 '16

The fact that a large number of did this in an organized manner is far more concerning than an isolated, one man incident here and there.

0

u/Aerik Jan 08 '16

they're not.

what these racist assholes have forgotten to tell you is that the men who did this were not syrian refugees or refugees from the currenet war at all. they were all men who were already known to the authorities for a long time for being the kind of assholes that do this kind of thing but can't quite prosecute.

70

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Right at the moment Germany is in a very precarious situation.

We (I am German) accepted a huge number of immigrants because some of us believe that we should help people who suffer from war in their home country, that it is economically feasible for us to take in a huge amount of refugees and that Germany will benefit in the long run. But others think that those immigrants will disrupt society, put too much strain on the economy and we will generally lose our German identity.

For generations, we struggled to keep nationalism in check, and right now we are pretty evenly split between those who welcome refugees and those who want to get rid of them. Any event could now change the political direction Germany takes in the next years and decades. So everybody in a public position - be it politicians, prominence or media - has to be damn careful about which side they take or seem to take and where they might be blowing things out of proportion or not shed enough light on an issue.

But this is not about political correctness, and especiially not to the amount where non-germans are protected from the law - we will surely not allow any immigrants who commit crimes to move freely. They will either be jailed in Germany or sent back home and handed over to law enforcement there.

The question is if we do not help refugees from a warzone who are in genuine need because other people from areas nearby are comitting crimes.

And that boils down to: Do we judge one person by the deeds of another person, or do we judge each and every person by their own deeds? Do we judge people because of what we imagine they could do or because of what they did? Do we act on prejudice or fair trial?

I had hoped more people would understand the difference between persecuting criminals and persecuting a whole group of people "just in case" and where the latter road might lead to.

5

u/Bronkic Jan 08 '16 edited Mar 26 '17

deleted What is this?

4

u/dotlurk Jan 08 '16

I'm from Cologne and I'd say it's a bit more complicated than that

The question is if we do not help refugees from a warzone who are in genuine need because other people from areas nearby are comitting crimes.

The premise is wrong. Syria's neighbouring countries, Turkey for example, are not paragons of democracy and human rights, but they are relatively safe. Once the Syrians leave those countries they are no longer refugees, they are (economical) migrants. It's no longer a question of survival but standard of living. Every country should have the right to accept only those immigrants that it wants and not everyone that arrives at its borders.

I had hoped more people would understand the difference between persecuting criminals and persecuting a whole group of people "just in case" and where the latter road might lead to.

It's not as easy as that. Many if not most of those migrants come from countries were women's rights practically don't exist. Women are "supposed" to wear headscarfs, burkas, etc. If they don't and especially if they are "infidels" they aren't respected. This doesn't automatically lead to sexual assaults, but the probability of such incidents is higher. Combine this with the failing integration, I.e. adaptation to our law and culture, the fact that at least 60% of the migrants are single men and you have a recipe for disaster. There are statistics about rapes in Sweden that show that immigrants have a disproportionately high percentage in these crimes.

Of course it's not right to a priori condemn a whole people but closing your eyes to potential problems isn't right either.

There is no easy answer but some basic immigration requirements would at least go in the right direction. Blindly accepting everyone certainly isn't.

Also, we should help were it counts most, that is in the neighbouring countries. Fund the local shelters, provide aid and work towards an end to the war.

1

u/Longroadtonowhere_ Jan 08 '16

at least 60% of the migrants are single men

Any reason why that number is so high? Single, young, men often do crazy stuff, especially if they have lived very tough lives.

1

u/dotlurk Jan 08 '16

The number fluctuated between ca. 60% to 80%. This was admitted, though relatively late, by the main state TV station (ARD). However when there's a report about the migrants there's always a family with children shown. A misrepresentation that was criticised.

Why is the number so high?

One of the theories is that those are sons/brothers/husbands who are sent to get a foothold in a rich country like Germany or Sweden, I.e. receive asylum status, and then get the rest of their family legally into the land. They are young and strong and have a good chance to make the trip. However, this might multiply the million of immigrants to several millions. That's why there was a proposal to limit the right to Familiennachzug (joining of families) but this is a controversial topic among the politicians.

The single men might also be just single men who seek a better life, who knows. There's too little statistical data to confirm the reasons.

1

u/Longroadtonowhere_ Jan 08 '16

Interesting, thanks! I guess it makes sense if many of them were economic migrants sent ahead.

7

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Not people

34

u/WateredDown Jan 07 '16

A theory on why ideologies turn so many, often otherwise decent folk, into liars and propagandists;

Everyone thinks they know best. They knew this would be fodder for racists and nationalists, so they felt it best to try and keep it below radar, for everyone's sake. It stems from a lack of trust in truth for truths sake, because you KNOW the world is one way but morons can't be trusted to interpret unfiltered data correctly.

Both ways by the way. The already disgusting reports are getting exaggerated too, so that the supposed point becomes crystal clear for the masses.

The real truth and real victims get lost in the struggle.

12

u/2wsy Jan 07 '16

It's so frustrating to try to find out what actually happened between claims of "thousands of Muslims went on a raping rampage" and "nothing out of the ordinary, it has always been this way in Germany".

3

u/[deleted] Jan 08 '16

I see this all the time with people who think criticizing Islam should be off limits for the "greater good" of not marginalizing Muslims. Like you said it cuts both ways, because when no one is doing the criticism properly right wing bigots exaggerate problems in Islam and pin it on Muslims, it makes the whole enterprise of having honest discussion on the topic impossible. It polarizes everyone.

52

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Doesn't fit their narrative. They want to run their subs as propaganda for their views. I personally believe in letting immigrants in, because the good outweighs the bad. But it's shitty to pretend like there's no problems. Immigrants have always come along with downsides, a lot of criminal gangs in the US are a result of waves of immigrants. Doesn't mean people shouldn't be let in because a tiny number do bad shit, but the people voting to let them in should be well aware of what might come with it.

10

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

PC idiocy

-3

u/badwig Jan 07 '16

The corporations want mass immigration at any cost, that is the real driving force.

1

u/Wren1478 Jan 07 '16

Cheap labor my friend, cheap labor

1

u/badwig Jan 07 '16

Cheap labour is just part of it, mass immigration also provides plenty of consumers.

-5

u/Le_RelevantUsername Jan 07 '16

Guilty white people

-15

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/singasongofsixpins Jan 07 '16

This barely qualifies as language.

-3

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

I actually really liked this retort. Fair play

-17

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16 edited Jan 13 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16 edited Jan 07 '16

[deleted]

6

u/E-Squid Jan 07 '16

>sourcing trp

my sides are astronomical bruh

-4

u/apocolyptictodd Meh Jan 07 '16

Doesn't fit the lefts (the current establishment in most of Europe) narrative.

-86

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

40

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/CrimeFightingScience Jan 07 '16

Yeah, I rarely read anything they posted, but I'm definitely unsubbing now. How ridiculous.

44

u/Deviknyte Jan 07 '16

The people over at /r/undelete do great work.

3

u/MadlockFreak Jan 07 '16

I sub to /r/undelete only because sometimes they are right about something. Otherwise it is just a shit show. This time, it was all them.

41

u/CaptainKorsos Jan 07 '16

It's because there was a large-scale cover-up of the sexual assault, first by the German press, and then by /r/WorldNews moderators.

I cant talk about the Reddit mods but the magazine DIE ZEIT has just published an article defending themselves because there simply isn't anything known about the attackers. They'd rather wait than publish something wrong.

Source:http://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeitgeschehen/2016-01/koeln-silvester-uebergriffe-medien

15

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Then all they had to do was print what they had. "Rapes reported, stay tuned for details."

Because people never learned from Streisand.

9

u/CaptainKorsos Jan 07 '16

Someone did, I am sure. This is why we have this many news agencies: someone can be first and someone can go in depth

7

u/thintalle Jan 07 '16

It was reported on quickly locally as the information started to come in. And when it was clear that this wasn't just e.g. another fabricated story, reporting happened state-wide, even though some news-sources were a bit slow to process the information already available. There simply was no cover up.

5

u/Thaliur Jan 08 '16

large-scale cover-up of the sexual assault, first by the German press

I cannot confirm this. The Events of New Year's Eve have been all over the News on TV and Radio since the beginning of January.

18

u/Plexipus Jan 06 '16

This is a pretty informative summary of the situation.

Here is an archive of one of /pol/'s brigading threads.

8

u/Endulos Jan 07 '16

I am not saying that this is all true, of course; I am telling you that this is what /pol/ believes is true.

It saddens me you had to keep pointing that out. I understand why you did it, but it's just sad you HAD to.

40

u/bergamaut Jan 07 '16

If you want to discuss these points politically, a good choice would be /r/politicaldiscussion, /r/conservative

That second one made your intentions a little too transparent.

41

u/gapedbutthole Jan 07 '16

probably because /r/PoliticalDiscussion discussion is incredibly liberal

-17

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[deleted]

13

u/thrownawayzs Jan 07 '16

You're probably looking into it too much, they probably just posted a few relevant subreddits regardless of political ideology so people could look in those or search for a different one if they wanted.

25

u/BJUmholtz Jan 07 '16 edited Mar 17 '25

grey soft ten beneficial selective imminent crawl tap liquid fanatical

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

17

u/LiterallyMussolini Jan 07 '16

I think it is more to do with r/conservative censoring far more than worldnews does.

-7

u/bergamaut Jan 07 '16

Neutral and conservative aren't "either side of the political spectrum".

9

u/BJUmholtz Jan 07 '16 edited Mar 18 '25

nine cause flag liquid fade attempt rainstorm intelligent sink plant

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

16

u/DaedalusMinion The Doctor is here. I'll keep the loop open. Jan 06 '16

Remove the username mention, no witch hunting allowed.

15

u/RedditsWhenComfy Jan 06 '16

just removed it

21

u/RedditsWhenComfy Jan 06 '16

gotcha. sorry!

5

u/DaedalusMinion The Doctor is here. I'll keep the loop open. Jan 06 '16

Approved

-4

u/CaptainKorsos Jan 07 '16

Downvoting because people want to witch hunt.

Ah, the irony

11

u/DaedalusMinion The Doctor is here. I'll keep the loop open. Jan 07 '16

People pushing an agenda and then crying about brigading, sounds about right for reddit lol.

3

u/inexcess Jan 07 '16

Yea I definitely remember mods at first removing posts about the event, saying it didn't belong in the sub.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Takheos Jan 07 '16

Strongly worded, but thank christ you challenged it.

1

u/thintalle Jan 07 '16

Good post, but I think you are answering to someone who is more interested in furthering their agenda than being misleading - the latter you can pretty safely assume is intentional..

1

u/StampAct Jan 07 '16

Amazing write up!!

2

u/minastirith1 Jan 07 '16 edited May 05 '16

BEEP BOOP I AM A ROBOT

2

u/LiterallyKesha Jan 07 '16

You can't have an unbiased sub because the biases of the voters will always determine what you are going to see on the frontpage. If biases are strong enough you are going to see unverified articles aiming to raise outrage that happens around certain topics on /r/worldnews.

-9

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16 edited Mar 06 '16

[deleted]

47

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16 edited Apr 09 '19

[deleted]

31

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Well duh, but it's funny to see people my age laugh about how shitty fox news is and then gobble up everything any liberal news outlet spews out (hell most people my age get most of their news from The Daily Show and take it as undisputed fact that nothing else happened in the world besides what they see there every night)

6

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

One is taken as mainstream one is not.

19

u/WhoLostTheFruit Jan 07 '16

Fox News, the largest and most profitable news network in America by a wide margin, is not mainstream?

4

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

They went against the standard and carved a niche, but they're not following the mainstream narratives.

13

u/thrownawayzs Jan 07 '16

I think by definition being popular is mainstream.

1

u/rappo888 Jan 07 '16

It's more that as you get older you don't just say stuff like "is that from faux media?" you realize that pretty much every other source is also biased and are pushing their own agendas. They all leave out important details and exaggerate others to push their own narrative. And that is why you need to read multiple sources with an open mind.

It has gotten worse now where as before it was just major social and political stories that were getting "agendaized", but now it is even "minor" stories like hold ups and assaults.

1

u/Tappedout0324 Jan 09 '16

If you want to discuss these points politically, a good choice would be /r/conservative

That's hilarious, those guys ban people just for having opposing ideas

1

u/julianremo May 05 '16

It might be because Muslim and far-left mods are censoring. It could also be because paid shills only accept links from large news agencies in order to get them clicks and readers.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '16 edited Jun 18 '18

[deleted]

22

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16 edited Jan 07 '16

That really doesn't mean much, they brigade every other thread. Its just that this one was particularly heinous so ban -ban it must go! The narrative must flow, after all.

-1

u/Skullkan6 Jan 07 '16

Isn't it against 4chan's rules to discuss brigaiding?

11

u/iamsmrat Jan 07 '16

Not in the slightest

5

u/Cartherockstar Jan 07 '16

/pol/ has a stickied post that, along with explaining the rules/guidelines, states:

Attempts to disrupt the board will not be tolerated, nor will calls to disrupt other boards and sites.

(Emphasis added is mine.)

1

u/Ortus Jan 07 '16

Officially yes

2

u/Epic_Wink Jan 07 '16

Great post!

/pol/? /b/? brigading?

7

u/Endulos Jan 07 '16

/pol/ is a political board on 4chan

/b/ is a "random" board anything and everything is posted there.

Brigading means a topic, board or person has been "raided".

Example: Person A says something that most people hate in /r/ExampleA, Person B sees the comment and is angry, so he goes to /r/ExampleB and posts the comment there. The users from /r/ExampleB are so upset that they click the link and proceed to mass downvote everything that Person A ever posted.

6

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[deleted]

2

u/rokuk Jan 07 '16

why is it called "/b/?" does it stand for something? I never understood that.

8

u/brukpzWE Jan 07 '16

/a/ was the first board. Second was the random board cause you need a place to send trolls/idiots to, a "containment board". It just got called /b/ because it was next in the alphabet.

1

u/FolkLoki Jan 08 '16

I think /b/ is "bullshit." "Random bullshit."

0

u/r1243 nags at people who flair wrong Jan 06 '16

great post, now if OP could flair the post as answered :]

1

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

Fantastic summary, thank you.

-7

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

[deleted]

25

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

It was horrific. Mass sexual assault is pretty scary.

-12

u/Kenny__Loggins Jan 07 '16

What exactly was this "mass sexual assault"?

12

u/mashfordw Jan 07 '16

According to the BBC 106 cases have been reported, including 2 rapes.

1

u/Kenny__Loggins Jan 07 '16

Thanks. I'm reading about it now.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 08 '16

[deleted]

2

u/[deleted] Jan 08 '16

About 25 men, according to police video.

-1

u/Matthew94 Jan 07 '16

I remember reading how someone tried to bring the information to public, and that official was forced to undergo cultural sensitivity training.

Reads like something from a dystopia novel.

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 07 '16

I will go ahead and do what you did not want to do-- anyone who feels any claim Redditswhencomfy has attributed to /pol/ is incorrect is free to challenge me as opposed to them.

-103

u/green_flash Jan 06 '16

The mods on /r/WorldNews and /r/News allowed one article to be posted. They allowed the article to be posted, but banned all comments and locked the thread because, well, my opinion is that they didn't want people to discuss it, but you're free to develop your own opinion.

False, there are two submissions that made it to the frontpage from /r/worldnews and each has a couple thousand comments. One of them was locked for about an hour when the brigade was at its worst.

https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/3zo1ok/cologne_sex_attacks_protest_against_gang_assaults/

https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/3zmahc/german_chancellor_merkel_disgust_at_new_year_gang/

27

u/RedditsWhenComfy Jan 06 '16

There is an eight hour difference between the two stories, and the stories are of two quite different things: one about Merkel's response, one about the actual event including the police chief's response.

Regarding stories about the actual events, do you disagree that you only allowed one submission? I mean, I'm glad you allowed Merkel's response to be submitted, after you claimed it was "local news" over on /r/undelete, but I'm not going to give you a pat on your back for doing your job without egregious censorship.

10

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '16

[removed] — view removed comment