What changed in 23 years

Link up. Because I found a site that says these stats are false.

 
Link up. Because I found a site that says these stats are false.

Hardly. While the figure is likely suspect, this link's reply is equally suspect.

It uses equivocation--weasel wording--to make its point:

The police crime statistic differentiates between German and non-German suspects. The criterion is nationality. Any migration background is not taken into account, as the voluntary nature of such information means that consistent recording is not guaranteed.

It then goes off on a tangent about other European nations and their crime which is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

I'm not saying that Anders Vistisen is correct. I'm saying that the article doesn't do much to prove him wrong. It's a poor argument likely heavily tainted with political bias as the tone of it seems to be one opposed to Vistisen's politics in general.
 
Link up. Because I found a site that says these stats are false.

When have facts ever gotten in the way of a Volsrock racist dick dance?
 
Link up. Because I found a site that says these stats are false.

my post didn't say 60%
 
Link up. Because I found a site that says these stats are false.

1776733196007.png
 
I would question how thoroughly rapes were reported in 2000.

Say, didn't I read that Iran was going to rape Bita Hemmati with her husband watching before they murdered them both, so she couldn't be admitted to paradise.

But we must NEVER criticize Islam - for anything. Rape is their culture and must be celebrated.
 
Hardly. While the figure is likely suspect, this link's reply is equally suspect.

It uses equivocation--weasel wording--to make its point:

The police crime statistic differentiates between German and non-German suspects. The criterion is nationality. Any migration background is not taken into account, as the voluntary nature of such information means that consistent recording is not guaranteed.

It then goes off on a tangent about other European nations and their crime which is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

I'm not saying that Anders Vistisen is correct. I'm saying that the article doesn't do much to prove him wrong. It's a poor argument likely heavily tainted with political bias as the tone of it seems to be one opposed to Vistisen's politics in general.
I don't see a link in volsrock's post.
 
Back
Top