Dutch town riots over asylum centre plan

Merry Christmas to all.

I wish I could wish you all Happy New Year but let's face it, 2016 is going to be horrible.

No matter which side of this discussion you are currently on.

Godspeed to all of us.

originally posted by: BalansI don't really get why you say "Not here" when that link provides you with clear guidelines (rules/limitations) for a demonstration.

It's simple: if a group of people decides to demonstrate this afternoon, they can simply do so. Note that our Police is NOT allowed to stop the demonstration, only the Major can do so and the only reason she can is that the public health or safety is in danger. Now, of course the Police can ask you for your registration form. Alas, you don't have it. And that's the end of it: again, our Police can NOT stop the demonstration, if they do they are in serious trouble.

Now, in practice, if it is necessary to demonstrate against something on a very short term, you actually call City Hall and the Police and inform them. I never have experienced being hampered in any way, in general they are cooperative and even friendly. They will often show up, see if all is done in an orderly manner (and we on our part take great pride in the fact that we KEEP it orderly) and that's it. Nobody is arrested here.

See, if you have gangs of riotting drunks, throwing bottles, stones and not following orders from the Police - well, yeah, they tend to get nasty. I wouldn't call that a demonstration, though...

a reply to: ForteanOrg

I'd appreciate it if you actually read my response because clearly you haven't. I also take it you don't want to answer to my other post, I've asked you multiple times now.

In the future, if you're not serious about answering then at least show me the courtesy of telling me beforehand, before I waste my time trying to have a decent conversation. Thank you.

The plans for the asylum centre for 1500 refugees in Geldermalsen have been canceled.

Good.

nos.nl...

The proposal by the city council of Geldermalsen to accommodate 1500 asylum seekers is off the table, mayor De Vries announced at a press conference.

a reply to: Balans

Please note that firstly, the fact that you ask me a question does not oblige me to answer it. You do not employ me, aren't paying me, I don't know you, you're not my friend, we have no hierarchical relation. As an anarchist I abhor but respect hierarchical relationships, as long as I have chosen them myself: I'm a pragmatist, not a fool.

Secondly note that I am usually a polite chap who does his utmost to actually answer any questions posed to him, given that I have half a clue myself. But I won't answer any questions that I deem to be overly personal or in conflict with the T&C here. Again: I abhor but respect hierarchical relations I chose to engage in.

Also, I tend to run into difficulties answering questions that aren't clear, not asked in a polite way or have been answered before. You score quite badly on at least one of these aspects. Finally, note that the only person that "wastes his time" - is you. The decision to spend (waste?) time here is entirely yours, not mine.

I'm having quite a good time in here, thank you.

a reply to: HardBoiled

Nice to see that you support a democratic decision of the counsil of Geldermalsen

Actually, the major said that she fully expects the people of Geldermalsen to come up with a perhaps more modest but still adequate plan to take in their share of the refugees. I hope they do. I am not particularly fond of the way the counsil parachuted their plans onto the population, nor with their "hidden agenda" of trying to make money out of plots of land that would otherwisely not be profitable. And 1500 - that was a bit much, indeed. So, back to the drawing board. What would be reasonable?

To give you an idea: in my municipality of 15.000 we have welcomed 400 refugees so far and we haven't had ANY trouble whatsoever. So, if I extrapolate this to your situation in Geldermalsen, I'd say that 700 should be doable. Let's see how this develops.

heartbreaking news....

Belgium: Muslims Torch 804 Cars, Blow Up Christmas Tree on New Year’s Eve

so sad.

"...so you not only want to see riots but you are willing to incite them as well......im pretty sure that makes you a terrorist on someones list somewhere......"

originally posted by: VoidHawk

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

so you not only want to see riots but you are willing to incite them as well......im pretty sure that makes you a terrorist on someones list somewhere......

Having an opinion should NEVER make one a terrorist!

The example you highlighted is a near perfect example of how one prepares the butthole to receive all who come in the name of totalitarianism. Learn from this superb specimen, free men everywhere. A dead weight not to support, feed, or quarter, because it surrenders even to fascist whims at great distances over the horizon, whilst we struggle and endanger our very futures, by simply recognizing their presence.

While quivering in the corner, bound by invisible fascist constraints, ie., having an opinion which one day some AI technofascist database certainly contains, and will react to, here is something to think about, because it gets even better:

"On topic....this refugee crisis in Europe is just getting started,boy am I glad to live far away from that mess......"

Note keywords: On topic....

Here's another keyword: I am glad that you feel SAFE, hopenotfear. Boy, gee whiz, thank God the good guys are on our side!

I bet you wish there were more that you could do....because 'dreamworks' just blew hell out of a few more countries, and now here it comes. But that's all FAR AWAY from you!, thank good-ness! Big Hint: We are supposed to hate the Moose-lims (media soundbyte not mine). All other hate is unauthorized, and will be noted.

Thanks, buddy.
Stay safe, won't you.

# 567

originally posted by: xuenchen
heartbreaking news....

Belgium: Muslims Torch 804 Cars, Blow Up Christmas Tree on New Year’s Eve

so sad.

Oh, almost correct..

Let's see: it weren't 804 cars, it was one car. It weren't muslims, it were drunk youths, which actually is (alas) quite normal on New Years Eve. And yes, Europeans burn Christmas trees on New Years Eve. Have done so for ages, it has nothing to do with migration whatsoever. And then your source .. "Creeping Sharia.." .. are you serious? Hardly a neutral site..

Hey, I'm not saying it's allright if drunk mobs wreck other peoples car. I don't approve of it. But if that's all you can come up with to "prove" that we are all being invaded here, well, Dolly Parton has a better chance of proving she's a guy

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
a reply to: Balans

Please note that firstly, the fact that you ask me a question does not oblige me to answer it. You do not employ me, aren't paying me, I don't know you, you're not my friend, we have no hierarchical relation. As an anarchist I abhor but respect hierarchical relationships, as long as I have chosen them myself: I'm a pragmatist, not a fool.

Secondly note that I am usually a polite chap who does his utmost to actually answer any questions posed to him, given that I have half a clue myself. But I won't answer any questions that I deem to be overly personal or in conflict with the T&C here. Again: I abhor but respect hierarchical relations I chose to engage in.

Also, I tend to run into difficulties answering questions that aren't clear, not asked in a polite way or have been answered before. You score quite badly on at least one of these aspects. Finally, note that the only person that "wastes his time" - is you. The decision to spend (waste?) time here is entirely yours, not mine.

I'm having quite a good time in here, thank you.

I wouldn't even bother answering you anymore with a kindergarten statement like that were it not for the fact that you're somehow implying I've been either:
- "obliging" you to answer me somehow
- unpolite
- asking things in conflict with T&C
- asking questions that you consider too "personal"
- unclear
- asking something that was answered before

That and I'm cranky so you'll have to excuse me for that... and I find you plain offensive in your statements about me.


Not at any point have I commanded you to answer my questions:

"Furthermore, could you adress my previous response to you please. I know you're in a bit of a wordfight but it will hopefully show you that I don't make these things up. "

"Also again, what's your take on my previous reply ?"

"I also take it you don't want to answer to my other post, I've asked you multiple times now."

I've been quite polite in all my dealings with you. Safe for the sneer at your perceived anarchism but even that wasn't thrown at you in a disrespective way.

"The joke is that you seem to be under the impression that you are some kind of anarchist. Please, educate yourself on this subject as it looks a bit silly after reading your comments. Anarchism and Globalism do not work well together... "

My question to you was regarding the links I have provided in my post on page 9 in this thread, at your own request of me, see the part after I quote you asking me.

I hardly think anything about that was breaking T&C rules, and if you consider that as too "personal" of a question then why ask me about examples in the first place? It does not appear to me as there is anything unclear about the question nor the presented links and accompanying narrative. It was also not answered previously.


So yes, I find you offensive in your offensiveness about me. Between your self-proclaimed capacity for losing, your self-proclaimed globalistic anarchistic views and your incapacity to grasp the concept of restrictions I don't know wether to pity you and offer you my other cheek or to compare you to a wonderfull cake full of fruits. Now the T&C might be broken, so be it.

I bid you goodday.