Germany: Migrant Sex Crimes Double in One Year

Started by Stigma3 pages

Germany: Migrant Sex Crimes Double in One Year

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10522/germany-migrant-sex-crimes

An interesting read:

An annual report — Criminality in the Context of Migration (Kriminalität im Kontext von Zuwanderung) — published by the Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt, BKA) on April 27 revealed an increase of nearly 500% in migrant sex crimes (defined as sexual assaults, rapes and sexual abuse of children) during the past four years.

The report showed that migrants (Zuwanderer, defined as asylum seekers, refugees and illegal immigrants) committed 3,404 sex crimes in 2016 — around nine per day. This was a 102% increase over 2015, when migrants committed 1,683 sex crimes — around five per day. By comparison, migrants committed 949 sex crimes in 2014, around three per day; and 599 sex crimes in 2013, around two per day.

According to the report, the main offenders in 2016 were from: Syria (up 318.7% from 2015); Afghanistan (up 259.3%); Iraq (up 222.7%); Pakistan (up 70.3%); Iran (up 329.7%); Algeria (up 100%); and Morocco (up 115.7%).

Germany's migrant sex-crime problem is being exacerbated by its lenient legal system, in which offenders receive relatively light sentences, even for serious crimes.

Wow they actually reported about the migrant sex crimes and not in a "these totally aren't happening we swear!" kind of way? I'm shocked.

Unfortunate, but not in the least bit surprising.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/gatestone-institute/

Notes: The Gatestone Institute, formerly Stonegate Institute, is a “not-for-profit international policy council and think tank based in New York City” with a specialization in strategy and defense issues. Gatestone Institute is anti-Islamic, pro-Christian and Jewish/Israel. Many of the articles will link back to sites that don’t say what they claim or make the same rash judgments, without proof. Example: Obama tells Christians to not protest in Egypt then has no quotes or sources saying he said that. (M. Allen)

Lmao, I'm loving it 👆

And who checks the site you linked? Who made them an authority on the subject of other media? 😬

TBH No media outlet is really unbiased, but as long as liberals will hand-wave information they don't like, trying to imply it's always fake, there will be a dissonance between honesty and liberal politics.

In 2011[23] and 2012,[5] Gatestone published articles claiming that Europe had Muslim "no-go zones", describing them variously as "off-limits to non-Muslims"[5] and "microstates governed by Islamic Sharia law".[23][24] The claim that there are areas in European cities governed by Sharia is false,[5][23] although many of the areas deemed as "no-go zones" have high levels of unemployment and crime.[24] Gatestone's claims were picked up by many outlets, including FrontPageMag,[23] and Washington Times.[24] The idea of no-go zones originated from Daniel Pipes,[23] who later retracted his claims.[5]

On November 18, 2016, Gatestone originally published an article that said the British Press was ordered to avoid reporting the Muslim identity of terrorists by the European Union. Snopes rated the claim "false". Snopes pointed out that the report only made a recommendation and it was issued by the Council of Europe, not the European Union.[6] Gatestone subsequently corrected the article and apologized for the error,[25] before removing it entirely from its website.

Well Snopes, shiiiit! Game, set, match.

Originally posted by Stigma
And who checks the site you linked? Who made them an authority on the subject of other media? 😬

TBH No media outlet is really unbiased, but as long as liberals will hand-wave information they don't like, trying to imply it's always fake, there will be a dissonance between honesty and liberal politics.


The New Year's Eve attacks in Cologne were just the tip of the ugly iceberg and quite portentous. I've no doubt that there was an increase in migrant sex offenses in Germany in the last years. If not 500%, then 400% or 300%.

About https://mediabiasfactcheck.com, I've checked it out and I think it correctly identifies biases in media outlets.

@ Steve,

Um...my previous reply fits here again. You made no further point that I had not addressed already:

Originally posted by Stigma
And who checks the site you linked? Who made them an authority on the subject of other media? 😬

TBH No media outlet is really unbiased, but as long as liberals will hand-wave information they don't like, trying to imply it's always fake, there will be a dissonance between honesty and liberal politics.

I just find it amusing suddenly Steven now seems to care about apparent media bias lol. He only seemed to care, though, when he seemed to think he could imply a bias from the right over something.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
The New Year's Eve attacks in Cologne were just the tip of the ugly iceberg and quite portentous. I've no doubt that there was an increase in migrant sex offenses in Germany in the last years. If not 500%, then 400% or 300%.

About https://mediabiasfactcheck.com, I've checked it out and I think it correctly identifies biases in media outlets.


Indeed. 👆 Not to mention incidents and attacks that are not reported due to heavy liberal/leftism-bias in West European media.

But, as I mentioned, let's not pretend that there are media outlets that are really unbiased. However, Gatestone's approach matches the empirical experience of the Western countries with the recent migrant crisis.

Besides, as time goes by, people who warned about the migrants are proven right more and more. 👆

Sounds like Germany could use some kind of wall...

Originally posted by Stigma
@ Steve,

Um...my previous reply fits here again. You made no further point that I had not addressed already:

🙄 ❌

Allegations of anti-Muslim bias[edit]
Gatestone has been criticized for affiliating itself with Geert Wilders, who says that he "hates Islam"[17] and has been described as "anti-Muslim".[18][19] In 2012, Gatestone Institute hosted a talk by Wilders.[18] In 2016, Gatestone paid for Wilders’s flights and hotels on trips to the United States.[19][20] The Guardian noted that Gatestone publishes the writings of Geert Wilders.[17]

An opinion article in The Hill criticized Gatestone as "paranoid" for claiming that immigration to Europe was “civilization jihad” and a “Muslim invasion”.[21]

Gatestone's founder, Nina Rosenwald, has been accused of anti-Muslim bias by the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Muslim writers for the Gatestone Institute have defended the organization and Rosenwald against the claims by CAIR.[22] Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, founder and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, said, "It goes without saying, but to those who may not know Nina, and having known her now for many years, it is clear to me that she has the highest respect for Muslims who love their faith, love God, and take seriously our Islamic responsibility to defeat the global jihad and its Islamist inspiration."[22]

Inaccurate reporting[edit]
In 2011[23] and 2012,[5] Gatestone published articles claiming that Europe had Muslim "no-go zones", describing them variously as "off-limits to non-Muslims"[5] and "microstates governed by Islamic Sharia law".[23][24] The claim that there are areas in European cities governed by Sharia is false,[5][23] although many of the areas deemed as "no-go zones" have high levels of unemployment and crime.[24] Gatestone's claims were picked up by many outlets, including FrontPageMag,[23] and Washington Times.[24] The idea of no-go zones originated from Daniel Pipes,[23] who later retracted his claims.[5]

On November 18, 2016, Gatestone originally published an article that said the British Press was ordered to avoid reporting the Muslim identity of terrorists by the European Union. Snopes rated the claim "false". Snopes pointed out that the report only made a recommendation and it was issued by the Council of Europe, not the European Union.[6] Gatestone subsequently corrected the article and apologized for the error,[25] before removing it entirely from its website.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/gatestone-institute/

Notes: The Gatestone Institute, formerly Stonegate Institute, is a “not-for-profit international policy council and think tank based in New York City” with a specialization in strategy and defense issues. Gatestone Institute is anti-Islamic, pro-Christian and Jewish/Israel. Many of the articles will link back to sites that don’t say what they claim or make the same rash judgments, without proof. Example: Obama tells Christians to not protest in Egypt then has no quotes or sources saying he said that. (M. Allen)

😆

Isn't Sam Harris also routinely accused of being an anti-muslim bigot?

Not saying that site might not have a conflict of interest/clear bias, but slandering opposition with a bigotry/slander label has become so routine as to be rendered virtually meaningless..

Well maybe that wouldn't happen if they just handed out more leaflets asking not to rape .

Originally posted by cdtm
Isn't Sam Harris also routinely accused of being an anti-muslim bigot?

Not saying that site might not have a conflict of interest/clear bias, but slandering opposition with a bigotry/slander label has become so routine as to be rendered virtually meaningless..

🙄 ❌

Do you ever have any real counters other than mocking people with smileys? It's like Flytractor mocking people with trolling, it's hard to take seriously in political discussion.

@ Steve

Right.....so they were accused of bias becasue they criticised harshly Islam and the recent migrant influx.

Is that really surprising given that media milieu in the West is itself biased towards PC and liberalism? I don't think so. 👆

My original point still stands. No media outlet is unbiased. However, Gatestone's approach matches the emprical evidence seen in Western Europe (and all over the world, really).

If you want to discard them, thats fine. I've been doing it with BBC and CNN and the like for quite some time now. 👆

Originally posted by cdtm
Isn't Sam Harris also routinely accused of being an anti-muslim bigot?

Not saying that site might not have a conflict of interest/clear bias, but slandering opposition with a bigotry/slander label has become so routine as to be rendered virtually meaningless..

All good points, but I see your good points and raise you a: sad smiley shaking it's head.

Your move CDTM.