Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Monday April 09 2018, @04:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the people-kill-people dept.

Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956

As tens of millions of Americans come to grips with revelations that data from Facebook may have been used to sway the 2016 presidential election, on the other side of the world, rights groups say hatemongers have taken advantage of the social network to widely disseminate inflammatory, anti-Muslim speech in Myanmar.

The rhetoric is aimed almost exclusively at the disenfranchised Rohingya Muslim minority, a group which has been the target of a sustained campaign of violence and abuse by the Myanmar military, which claims it is targeting terrorists.

Human rights activists inside the country and out tell CNN that posts range from recirculated news articles from pro-government outlets, to misrepresented or faked photos and anti-Rohingya cartoons.

[...] Zuckerberg told Vox hate speech is "a real issue, and we want to make sure that all of the tools that we're bringing to bear on eliminating hate speech, inciting violence, and basically protecting the integrity of civil discussions that we're doing in places like Myanmar, as well as places like the US that do get a disproportionate amount of the attention."

Source: When Facebook becomes 'the beast': Myanmar activists say social media aids genocide


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 10 2018, @02:52PM (42 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 10 2018, @02:52PM (#664964)

    Because the present people aren't responsible for that past.

    They aren't responsible for the past, but they are repeating it today. They have a battle plan laid out in the Koran, and they are following it. They absolutely need to be held accountable for this ongoing and unending fight. As long as they accept the content of that book, they are on a path to destroy modern civilization. This is sadly a battle to the death, and a refusal to fight will ensure a loss.

    You at the doctor: "Well, that little bit of cancer isn't crushing an organ at the moment, so just leave it. Please only take out the lumps that are crushing my organs right now."

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 10 2018, @03:11PM (41 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 10 2018, @03:11PM (#664977) Journal

    They aren't responsible for the past, but they are repeating it today.

    Not seeing it myself.

    They have a battle plan laid out in the Koran, and they are following it. They absolutely need to be held accountable for this ongoing and unending fight.

    Why again are only they being held accountable for some imaginary conflict?

    As long as they accept the content of that book, they are on a path to destroy modern civilization.

    As opposed to Christians and the Bible, Communists and Das Kapital, or the many other religions and ideologies with a violent history? What makes Islam so special?

    I grant that Islam is relatively violent and unaccepting of other belief systems, but I draw the line at harming innocents merely because they have Islamic cooties. It's far better to punish or reward based on behavior than on beliefs.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 10 2018, @05:57PM (6 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 10 2018, @05:57PM (#665039)

      Why again are only they being held accountable for some imaginary conflict?

      1. It's not imaginary. If you can't see this, it isn't for lack of evidence. It's willful.

      2. Nobody else has to be held accountable because nobody else is doing that shit.

      As opposed to Christians and the Bible, Communists and Das Kapital, or the many other religions and ideologies with a violent history? What makes Islam so special?

      Christians nearly never kick off a holy war or go attack people for their beliefs. In a world of billions of people you may find a few exceptions, but they are nothing compared to the intense violence of Islam. A few exceptional cases does not make the religions equivalent.

      Communists were vigorously opposed. We had that whole nuclear arms race, the proxy wars (Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, etc.), the trade restrictions against Warsaw Pact nations, the painful effort to chase down communists in the USA, the stand-off with Cuba, etc. This is the minimum effort that should be applied to dealing with Islam.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday April 11 2018, @04:44AM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday April 11 2018, @04:44AM (#665227) Journal

        It's not imaginary. If you can't see this, it isn't for lack of evidence. It's willful.

        Bullshit. You've had a chance to show evidence. But all we see is a) a Muslim ethnic group only part of which are immigrants, and b) a small rebellion which could be dealt with in a far gentler and just way than genocide. Really here the bottom line is that you're advocating the persecution and murder of innocent people and you've yet to come up with a reason why we should take you seriously.

        We have to look at what's actually going on, not your bullshit fantasies. Anyone can claim anyone is doing wrong without even the pretense of evidence and demand genocide in response. It'll be heavily Orwellian, of course. But if you're not interested in truth, then it doesn't matter to you.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday April 11 2018, @02:26PM (4 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday April 11 2018, @02:26PM (#665374) Journal
        I forgot to comment on this part:

        Christians nearly never kick off a holy war or go attack people for their beliefs.

        They did plenty of times in the past. Why are Christians given a pass? Answer: because they don't do that any more, due in large part to huge cultural shifts to peaceful, accepting belief systems, laws against such things, and religious freedom. We simply apply the same processes of culture and law to Islam to get the same results.

        Nobody else has to be held accountable because nobody else is doing that shit.

        Exactly my problem with this whole thing. You claim, completely without justification, that Islam "does that shit". But we're speaking of people not ideology. What has the Islamic refugee done? At worst, it's have too many kids and be in the wrong place. That's a really pathetic accusation. They aren't doing holy wars - given the numbers, there would be huge numbers of deaths from the resulting fighting, if there was a real holy war going on rather than an imaginary one.

        And that's the huge problem with this. There's no evidence to support your argument. You're pulling this fantasy out of your ass.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11 2018, @08:06PM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11 2018, @08:06PM (#665512)

          We simply apply the same processes of culture and law to Islam to get the same results.

          Good luck with that. Please don't drag me along for the ride.

          You are so confident that they will see the superiority of your own culture. You think that, surely, they will abandon their stone-age barbaric ways. They will see the light!

          This is not a gamble that a wise person would make.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 12 2018, @03:50AM (2 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @03:50AM (#665732) Journal

            We simply apply the same processes of culture and law to Islam to get the same results.

            Good luck with that. Please don't drag me along for the ride.

            Won't need luck. Sorry, Islamic cooties aren't that fierce.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2018, @07:11AM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2018, @07:11AM (#665788)

              Sorry, Islamic cooties aren't that fierce.

              You're proven wrong in every place within the past 100 years. The only places where it isn't instantly obvious are the ones where the muslim population consists of a handful of well-paid and well-educated people... and even there, we see problems.

              It's as crazy as claiming that communism will work, or that gendered behavior is purely social conditioning, or that gun-free zones will work better than drug-free zones.

              Islam defends itself. Those who question it are attacked. Those who "reinterpret" the Koran are attacked. Those who leave are attacked. Those who fail to join are attacked. Nobody is free to leave, to speak out, to be moderate, or to argue against the most barbaric interpretation. This is why Islam is probably unstoppable and will never be reasonable about anything.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 12 2018, @12:07PM

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @12:07PM (#665866) Journal

                You're proven wrong in every place within the past 100 years.

                Name one such place.

    • (Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday April 11 2018, @08:27AM (12 children)

      by Bot (3902) on Wednesday April 11 2018, @08:27AM (#665289) Journal

      > As opposed to Christians and the Bible

      Source? because now you are going to cite a passage where JHVH gives orders to israelites and ignore the two liner of instruction that have been left FOR YOU. Good. Then why not go to work, and perform a task the boss gave you one year ago, no matter if it's been already done and the situation changed. See how well it turns out.

      It is funny people consider this behavior normal, but they do. Else they would laugh in the face of sionism, which substitutes the messiah for a piece of land which has already been delivered once.

      --
      Account abandoned.
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday April 11 2018, @02:13PM (11 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday April 11 2018, @02:13PM (#665366) Journal

        because now you are going to cite a passage where JHVH gives orders to israelites and ignore the two liner of instruction that have been left FOR YOU.

        Just like a bunch of people in the past ignored those lines for their own purposes, including rationalizing genocide and slavery. Ideologies based on absolute authority and/or black and white thinking always have the problem that their adherents can interpret the ideology in any conceivable way without any moral or ethical brake on their behavior. We see that in this discussion with one or more ACs having decided that Islam is bad and an ethnic minority in Burma/Myanmar should be driven out of their homes and/or killed merely because they happen to be Islamic.

        One even sees you, Bot claiming [soylentnews.org] that innocence doesn't matter.

        Is it fair to the innocent rohingya? nope. Guess what, war ain't fair.

        Since when has the "unfairness" of war been a desirable outcome?

        They and you could have similarly decided that Islam is the one true religion and infidels should be persecuted since your beliefs aren't based on any rational or objective standard. Keep in mind that your loony argument is based merely on one existing and having the wrong belief system. One could just flip the bit flag from "Islam bad" to "Islam good" and have an equally valid system.

        It is funny people consider this behavior normal, but they do. Else they would laugh in the face of sionism, which substitutes the messiah for a piece of land which has already been delivered once.

        So why do you do that again? Why aren't you "laughing" in the face of your own beliefs?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11 2018, @08:21PM (6 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11 2018, @08:21PM (#665524)

          They and you could have similarly decided that Islam is the one true religion and infidels should be persecuted since your beliefs aren't based on any rational or objective standard. Keep in mind that your loony argument is based merely on one existing and having the wrong belief system. One could just flip the bit flag from "Islam bad" to "Islam good" and have an equally valid system.

          Um, yeah, so???

          I happen to value western civilization. I will defend it, violently when required.

          Sure, you can say there is no "rational or objective standard" for my belief that Muhammed was a pedophile for rubbing his penis on a 6-year-old and having sex with her at age 9. You can say there is no "rational or objective standard" for my belief that chucking LGBT from rooftops isn't very nice. You can say there is no "rational or objective standard" for my belief that women shouldn't be traded like cattle. I'm fine with that degree of being supposedly irrational and subjective. I don't have to cast aside any and all morality/ethics that lacks mathematical rigor.

          Western culture is simply better. I don't need a formal proof of this.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 12 2018, @03:59AM (5 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @03:59AM (#665738) Journal

            I happen to value western civilization. I will defend it, violently when required.

            You aren't defending it now. Religious and ideological freedom is a big part of what western civilization is. That includes not losing your shit just because someone else happens to be Muslim.

            Sure, you can say there is no "rational or objective standard" for my belief that Muhammed was a pedophile for rubbing his penis on a 6-year-old and having sex with her at age 9.

            And I would be right because that doesn't rationalize oppressing Muslims today. Nor do any of your other examples do that.

            Western culture is simply better. I don't need a formal proof of this.

            Then why are you so concerned about an inferior belief system? Just triumph over it.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2018, @06:07AM (4 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 12 2018, @06:07AM (#665766)

              Then why are you so concerned about an inferior belief system? Just triumph over it.

              It is inferior in terms of human rights and freedom... but Western culture foolishly tolerates an enemy that is determined to end western culture. This is essentially a matter of the "freedom" to accept being enslaved. We're giving people the right to ruin everything.

              Western culture is better from my perspective. I doubt that it will survive, but I'll do my part toward that goal. My culture is probably doomed, to be replaced by something like that of Somalia or Yemen or Afghanistan.

              Prediction: by the year 2200, the population of the Earth is 99% Muslim and 90% under sharia. At least a dozen billion infidels will have been slaughtered. Modern infrastructure and supply chains will have collapsed, causing many more billions of people to die.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 12 2018, @12:06PM (2 children)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @12:06PM (#665865) Journal

                Prediction: by the year 2200, the population of the Earth is 99% Muslim and 90% under sharia.

                Prediction: it won't be, because 99% of the world's population won't be interested. You don't even have movement in this direction, let us note.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @03:07AM (1 child)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @03:07AM (#666312)

                  Depending on exactly how you ask the questions, roughly a quarter of the muslims living in western nations want the full deal. They want sharia, dead infidels, bombings, and so on. They want to live like it is the 7th century, except perhaps with modern toys. The other 3/4 will not oppose, due to apathy and fear.

                  Put that together with the number of muslims in the world, and it should be obvious that it is wrong to claim that "99% of the world's population won't be interested". Right today, without the projected population changes, well in excess of 5% of the world is wanting the 7th century lifestyle.

                  The number of muslims in the world will surpass the number of christians near the year 2050. In the various western nations, muslim minorities have much higher birth rates. Pew research says "the average Muslim woman in Europe is expected to have 2.6 children, a full child more than the average non-Muslim woman (1.6 children)." and of course that is a matter of exponential growth/decay. Under 2 means extinctions, and over 2 means growth.

                  Turkey, once an oddly secular nation full of muslims, is moving away from being secular. That was the only notable example of a muslim country that was secular. Yep, we have movement in the direction.

                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday April 13 2018, @07:33AM

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 13 2018, @07:33AM (#666351) Journal

                    Depending on exactly how you ask the questions, roughly a quarter of the muslims living in western nations want the full deal.

                    Depending on how you ask the questions, you can get a significant fraction of people, not just Muslims, to agree to anything.

                    The other 3/4 will not oppose, due to apathy and fear.

                    And the poll showed that, right? Or is that your uninformed opinion butting in?

                    Put that together with the number of muslims in the world, and it should be obvious that it is wrong to claim that "99% of the world's population won't be interested".

                    Or we could just not waste our time with that dead end argument.

                    Turkey, once an oddly secular nation full of muslims, is moving away from being secular. That was the only notable example of a muslim country that was secular. Yep, we have movement in the direction.

                    It's merely shifting its ideologies from Kemalism [wikipedia.org] to some flavor of Islamic populism. A century ago, it was murdering [wikipedia.org] hundreds of thousands of Armenians, Assyrians, and other minorities who just so happened to be mostly non-Islamic. It's not doing that today. So it is an improvement despite your assertion.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday April 13 2018, @07:52AM

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 13 2018, @07:52AM (#666355) Journal

                Prediction: by the year 2200, the population of the Earth is 99% Muslim and 90% under sharia. At least a dozen billion infidels will have been slaughtered. Modern infrastructure and supply chains will have collapsed, causing many more billions of people to die.

                I have a very different prediction [soylentnews.org] over that time frame. My prediction is that by 2100, more than 90% of the world, including the Middle East and the entirety of Africa, will be developed world. That includes a tendency towards democracies and secular governments. The differential fertility of the Middle East and Africa will go away.

                In addition, we'll see a massive decline in the number and intensity of wars - the developed world won't significantly war with itself, at least in that time.

                To back that prediction, I'll note that over the past century everyone from the most democratic country to all but the most repressive tyranny (that would be North Korea) has been improving the lives of its citizens in the same fashion. There is a modest Western-Islamic conflict, but it is being readily won in favor of the West.

                I won't extend my prediction to 2200 because I think way too much will change by then to make demographic predictions useful. In particular, I think it likely that we'll have created abusive ideologies over that time frame that will make our modern hysteria over Islam look extremely misguided. People will believe something. I'd rather it be relatively peaceful and constructive like Islam than destructive and consuming like early 20th Communism or Nazism/Fascism was.

        • (Score: 2) by Bot on Wednesday April 11 2018, @11:55PM (3 children)

          by Bot (3902) on Wednesday April 11 2018, @11:55PM (#665635) Journal

          >Just like a bunch of people in the past ignored those lines for their own purposes...

          Which isn't Christian. You recall the story, why did Jesus got crucified? because they did not believe he was somebody special? no, because he could not be used for the political purpose of freeing Israelites from Romans. Barabbas or Jesus? Barabbas. The symbolic meaning: trying to use god for your own purposes is anti-Christian.

          > Ideologies based on absolute authority and/or black and white thinking always have the problem that their adherents can interpret the ideology in any conceivable way without any moral or ethical brake on their behavior

          This is like telling unambiguous code always has the problem that the processor can output whatever garbage without any static of runtime check. OK, so what about ambiguous, all is grey code?

          > One even sees you, Bot claiming that innocence doesn't matter.
          Are you trolling or what. It is not a claim in general, not a theorem, and obviously it is not based on a religious or atheist system. It is a description. When Japan attacks, USA put japanese in concentration camps. When partisans attack, Nazis round up civilians and decimate them. When a coup or a revolution comes, you have trouble because of your skin color, your surname, your presence in some black list, whether it's Hutu or Tutsi into your ID card, whether you look rich, whether you look noble. When people X attack your country, you BTFO them or succumb.

          Is self sacrifice better? Is giving another chance better or will it result in more blood wasted in the long run? How is the almighty gonna judge you? These are valid questions, but not for this context.

          > They and you could have similarly decided that Islam is the one true religion.
          Sure, it could have happened. So, I would side with islamic countries and say we are counterattacking the evil west. I would also say that the israel-usa-isis-NGO-leftist axis is quite suspect. So what? the situation, from the point of view of the evil west, is the same.

          --
          Account abandoned.
          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 12 2018, @04:09AM (2 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @04:09AM (#665743) Journal

            The symbolic meaning: trying to use god for your own purposes is anti-Christian.

            And yet it happens all the time. So what?

            This is like telling unambiguous code always has the problem that the processor can output whatever garbage without any static of runtime check. OK, so what about ambiguous, all is grey code?

            Code didn't get me up in the morning.

            Are you trolling or what. It is not a claim in general, not a theorem, and obviously it is not based on a religious or atheist system. It is a description.

            Even if that were true, descriptions are irrelevant to moral arguments.

            When people X attack your country, you BTFO them or succumb.

            Who are you "describing" here (particularly, given people X aren't, as they weren't in any of your examples, attacking a country)? Sounds like a bunch of genociders who deserve to "succumb".

            • (Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday April 12 2018, @09:37AM (1 child)

              by Bot (3902) on Thursday April 12 2018, @09:37AM (#665823) Journal

              > And yet it happens all the time. So what?
              You tell me, since that it happens all the time was predicted and it's a banal prediction to make.

              > Sounds like a bunch of genociders who deserve to "succumb".
              LOL sieg heil.
              Nobody "deserves" to succumb, not even those isis warriors without uniforms scum. They do succumb if they are weak, they don't if they aren't. If you say "deserve" you imply you can set up a judicial system, but that is either imperfect or requires the attributes of god, omniscience and being out of time. By being inside time, you exit morality and enter contingency, you can do like proper religious men do and say a behavior is bad for such a (theoretical for you) judgment. Hate the sin not the sinner.

              --
              Account abandoned.
              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 12 2018, @12:15PM

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @12:15PM (#665868) Journal

                You tell me, since that it happens all the time was predicted and it's a banal prediction to make.

                Ok, it's a waste of your time to do that. That's what I'm telling you.

                Nobody "deserves" to succumb

                I quite disagree. Here, we see a bunch of delusional fairy tales about the oppressive nature of Islam while ignoring that the reality is a bunch of innocent people getting hurt. One loses rights, when one deprives the rights of others.

                Hate the sin not the sinner.

                And yet you've been demanding we harm innocent people for a bunch of posts. That doesn't even reach the threshold of "sin".

    • (Score: 3, Touché) by Bot on Wednesday April 11 2018, @09:16AM (20 children)

      by Bot (3902) on Wednesday April 11 2018, @09:16AM (#665305) Journal

      > I grant that Islam is relatively violent and unaccepting of other belief systems, but I draw the line at harming innocents merely because they have Islamic cooties. It's far better to punish or reward based on behavior than on beliefs.

      ideally yes, but you know how it works.
      Islam stomps feet as a minority -> respect minorities, evil westerner!
      Islam becomes majority -> respect democracy, evil unbeliever!

      If there was a way to ensure muslims do not force their belief on others like they basically have to, I would agree.

      --
      Account abandoned.
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday April 11 2018, @02:14PM (19 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday April 11 2018, @02:14PM (#665367) Journal

        If there was a way to ensure muslims do not force their belief on others like they basically have to, I would agree.

        Rule of law.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11 2018, @08:10PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 11 2018, @08:10PM (#665516)

          Rule of law, as you know it, depends on the general population being educated and solidly westernized.

          Rule of law, as they know it, comes from the Koran. Constitutional law is beneath the Koran. The Koran is superior.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 12 2018, @04:10AM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @04:10AM (#665744) Journal

            Rule of law, as they know it, comes from the Koran.

            Words have meaning. "Comes from the Koran" isn't rule of law.

        • (Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday April 12 2018, @09:45AM (16 children)

          by Bot (3902) on Thursday April 12 2018, @09:45AM (#665827) Journal

          how are laws changed? something with demo inside? then demography enters the picture. then immigration can be an act of war. Some here are fairly convinced that this is the plan, some hope that what has happened every time everywhere else does not happen this time. Frankly, this time looks different indeed, but I am not betting on a positive outcome.

          --
          Account abandoned.
          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 12 2018, @12:04PM (15 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday April 12 2018, @12:04PM (#665864) Journal

            then immigration can be an act of war.

            No, words have meaning. Merely having a bunch of people move in whom you don't like is not an act of war.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @10:27AM (14 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 13 2018, @10:27AM (#666389)

              > Merely having a bunch of people move in whom you don't like is not an act of war.

              That is not what anyone except you is talking about. What is in question are the effects of having a bunch of people move in when their primary purpose is to displace the indigenous culture. That is is classic transmigration. It is not the first time Islamic transmigration has been used against Europe and Europe has not been the only target through history. Transmigration is a traditional operation in jihad, going back 1400 years. Thus it is an act of war.

              Immigration is a separate matter, especially when it is done on a small scale. However, a desire for the newcomers to integrate into the host society is a key part of the definition.

              If on the other hand, you just have a large scale movement of population from one territory to another you will have settlers or colonists not immigrants.

              Too many on the net are intentionally conflating colonists, immigrants, refugees, settlers, and transmigrants. These are all very different groups of people moving around for very different purposes and causing very different effects on the host countries. Even in the best of circumstances and the most earnest intentions, there is no such thing as magic dirt [urbandictionary.com].

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday April 13 2018, @12:53PM (13 children)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 13 2018, @12:53PM (#666437) Journal

                What is in question are the effects of having a bunch of people move in when their primary purpose is to displace the indigenous culture.

                No, it's not. This fairy tale is complete bullshit. For example, no one has even bothered to present evidence of intentional displacement of the "indigenous culture" by Muslims (ignoring that the Muslim culture in question was also indigenous to Burma/Myanmar - the label covers both recent immigrants and people whose families have lived in Burma for centuries) while we can read in the newspapers of real world displacement of Muslims by mobs with the connivance of the Myanmar government.

                If on the other hand, you just have a large scale movement of population from one territory to another you will have settlers or colonists not immigrants.

                No, that fits the very definition of immigrant. Settlers, colonists, refugees, etc are all immigrants. Their motives, incentives, means, etc are irrelevant to the definition.

                Too many on the net are intentionally conflating colonists, immigrants, refugees, settlers, and transmigrants.

                So you're going to fix this problem by intentionally conflating these categories for your purposes rather than their purposes?

                there is no such thing as magic dirt

                And yet, if you move the poorest, most illiterate African out of his hovel and into a US city working some menial job, you add at least $10k per year to his value - magic people theory is just as invalid. It's infrastructure. I grant that at least, you or some AC much like you has addressed this with a discussion of the threats of high levels of immigration to such infrastructure (for example, claiming that high levels of Muslims would lead to sharia laws which would be a destruction of Western legal infrastructure). But even then, you don't get that countries like the US can handle modest levels of immigration without a strain as long as one maintains the infrastructure. But that hasn't been happening in recent decades.

                • (Score: 2) by Bot on Saturday April 14 2018, @10:59AM (9 children)

                  by Bot (3902) on Saturday April 14 2018, @10:59AM (#666870) Journal

                  I don't get you.

                  No one has even bothered to present evidence of intentional displacement of the "indigenous culture" by Muslims.

                  A coup is not a displacement of culture?
                  The no go zones are not a displacement of culture?
                  The parallel islamic government with sharia courts is not a displacement of culture?
                  Are literal tons of paper all fabrications?

                  I got a lot of garbage collection to do if true.

                  --
                  Account abandoned.
                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:14PM (8 children)

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday April 14 2018, @12:14PM (#666890) Journal

                    No one has even bothered to present evidence of intentional displacement of the "indigenous culture" by Muslims.

                    Indeed.

                    A coup is not a displacement of culture?

                    No coup occurred.

                    The no go zones are not a displacement of culture?

                    They occur when society refuses to provide important law enforcement and other governance services. "No go" areas are thus, ghettos, isolating the immigrants. It's a displacement of culture, but here of immigrant culture to keep it away from the rest of society.

                    The parallel islamic government with sharia courts is not a displacement of culture?

                    Provide governance and that wouldn't stand. But when you refuse to provide basic services, of course, someone will fill that vacuum be it with their own government, organized crime, and other such stuff.

                    Are literal tons of paper all fabrications?

                    Link to these things and we can discuss whether they are or not. But don't be surprised if/when they fail to hold up under rational scrutiny.

                    I got a lot of garbage collection to do if true.

                    You probably do.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @08:50PM (1 child)

                      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @08:50PM (#667043)

                      Provide governance and that wouldn't stand.

                      Nope. They don't want non-sharia law. They reject it. To them, it is not legitimate.

                      Even here in the USA, where we definitely have governance, various islamic communities are setting up sharia courts. (also UK, France, etc.) Within those communities, you are expected to use the sharia court. You are expected to obey the rulings. If you ignore the rulings, bad shit happens to you, so obviously you obey. This gives the sharia courts the force of law.

                      You might claim we failed to provide governance because "bad shit happens to you", but that is unreasonable. There is simply no way to police a self-isolating community that will not talk to the normal criminal justice system.

                      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 15 2018, @06:34AM

                        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 15 2018, @06:34AM (#667178) Journal

                        They don't want non-sharia law. They reject it. To them, it is not legitimate.

                        And yet it's not "they" who are failing to enforce those laws.

                        various islamic communities are setting up sharia courts

                        And there is a legal basis for doing so (a lot of groups over the years have set up various sorts of arbitration) with clearly delineated limits to what those courts can do.

                        There is simply no way to police a self-isolating community that will not talk to the normal criminal justice system.

                        And what community is that again? You seem to imply that Islamic communities are of that sort. It would be helpful, once again, to have actual evidence to support your assertions.

                    • (Score: 2) by Bot on Monday April 16 2018, @02:52PM (5 children)

                      by Bot (3902) on Monday April 16 2018, @02:52PM (#667649) Journal

                      > They occur when society refuses to provide important law enforcement and other governance services.

                      You are telling me a country like Sweden does that? One of us is living in a bubble.

                      --
                      Account abandoned.
                      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 16 2018, @06:13PM (4 children)

                        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 16 2018, @06:13PM (#667738) Journal

                        They occur when society refuses to provide important law enforcement and other governance services.

                        You are telling me a country like Sweden does that?

                        Yes. They got to the point where idiots are using hand grenades [wikipedia.org] all over the place.

                        One of us is living in a bubble.

                        Indeed.

                        • (Score: 2) by Bot on Monday April 16 2018, @11:28PM (3 children)

                          by Bot (3902) on Monday April 16 2018, @11:28PM (#667849) Journal

                          In my bubble the words 'refuse to provide' cannot be applied if you 'face military class weapons'.

                          --
                          Account abandoned.
                          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday April 16 2018, @11:51PM (2 children)

                            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday April 16 2018, @11:51PM (#667855) Journal

                            In my bubble the words 'refuse to provide' cannot be applied if you 'face military class weapons'.

                            If they had taken them off the street in 2015 (when a "large cache" of such weapons was thought to have been imported), they wouldn't be facing "military class weapons" at all. Basically, it's a complacent police force meets a lucky smuggler.

                            • (Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday April 17 2018, @02:39PM (1 child)

                              by Bot (3902) on Tuesday April 17 2018, @02:39PM (#668103) Journal

                              So your argument is that the iron fist (well actually, the mere application of the law towards criminal behavior) should have been used earlier, but what about agreeing with the ACs advocating the iron fist now?

                              --
                              Account abandoned.
                              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday April 17 2018, @06:46PM

                                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday April 17 2018, @06:46PM (#668236) Journal

                                So your argument is that the iron fist (well actually, the mere application of the law towards criminal behavior) should have been used earlier, but what about agreeing with the ACs advocating the iron fist now?

                                Wouldn't have been much of an iron fist to seize illegally smuggled hand grenades. Enforcing just law is not an iron fist, then or now.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @08:43PM (2 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @08:43PM (#667040)

                  As you seem to have guessed, that's a different AC. All the rest are me. I fully agree with him.

                  The US can not "handle modest levels of immigration" on a long-term basis if those immigrants bring an immutable culture. We can handle a bunch of people from Bhutan or South Korea or Brazil; they don't want us dead and they won't kill family members who decide to be atheist or Christian. Islam is immutable; people within the grip of it are unable to escape, with the penalty being death. Parents will even kill their own kids.

                  I can see that you are determined to treat people as individuals, as in a court of law. You essentially ask what crime a specific individual has committed. I like that ideal, but sometimes it is unworkable. History shows us what always happens with islam. Denying this obvious truth, with centuries of evidence, is suicidal. If you don't want your culture and offspring to survive, why do you bother living? You might as well off yourself right now, because nothing you do will matter. If you do however wish your culture and offspring to have a future, then you have to fight for that. Step 1 is stopping invaders from arriving. Step 2 is to eliminate invaders who are already present. Alternately, you and your kind can go invade another land, but that takes a sort of energy and willpower that western civilization lost about 2 centuries ago.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @08:53PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 14 2018, @08:53PM (#667045)

                    Oh, also not the "1400 years of violent expansionism and genocide" AC. There could be 3 of us.

                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 15 2018, @06:45AM

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday April 15 2018, @06:45AM (#667182) Journal

                    The US can not "handle modest levels of immigration" on a long-term basis if those immigrants bring an immutable culture.

                    Where's this "immutable culture"? Evidence please.

                    I can see that you are determined to treat people as individuals, as in a court of law.

                    And you should be as well. Sorry, I don't see anything else of your post worth responding to, because you aren't grounding it in reality.