Angela Merkel admits there are NO-GO Zones in Germany | Immigrant gangs

[Hilhen7]

So in your view an institution decides who is what. How do institutions gain this power? Why do they gain this power? And what exactly is the origin of this power?

- - - Updated - - -



This, however, won't solve much of anything since in America we have hyphenated people and people often define themselves by their ethnicity anyway. The problem is that an identity which is truly inclusive of all has zero meaning to anyone.

Well then what makes a person German, what are the qualifications? I mean you need to have a definition...

[Noradin]

I have no idea what you're talking about.

We know, it must be because your blindness reduces your ability to read significantly.

- - - Updated - - -

The interview with Merkel sounds more like she was referring to areas where police and people are "afraid to go" rather an area where authorities or the public are being incapable of going, which is what the term "no-go" would mean.

More specifically she said that such areas should not exist.
She didn't claim there were any (no-go areas).

- - - Updated - - -

Well then what makes a person German, what are the qualifications? I mean you need to have a definition...

According to Germans?
Either citizenship of Germany or having German as (a) main language, depends on context.

[Dextroden]

We know, it must be because your blindness reduces your ability to read significantly.

- - - Updated - - -


More specifically she said that such areas should not exist.
She didn't claim there were any (no-go areas).

- - - Updated - - -



According to Germans?
Either citizenship of Germany or having German as (a) main language, depends on context.

Why would you say should not if they do not?

Legit question. If this is an imaginary thing, why would she draw attention to it and "play into right wing hands", to paraphrase a silly post?

[Post]

What point?
Did you try to make one?

Maybe read my posts.

[Noradin]

Maybe read my posts.

I did, there was no point to be had.
It was much to vague to count for anything.
Maybe you meant to make some edgy racist post but didn't have the guts?
Maybe you meant something else entirely?

Who knows? Maybe you should be more explicit next time.

[Post]

I did, there was no point to be had.

I can't really help you if you can't comprehend something as clear as:

So let's not create more then...

[Noradin]

Why would you say should not if they do not?

Legit question. If this is an imaginary thing, why would she draw attention to it and "play into right wing hands", to paraphrase a silly post?

Just for you I looked the interview up again and rewatched it.
She answered a very specific question regarding the AfD (the "right wing"). Namely if her comments on "Freedom and Security" were designed to draw voters from that party. She was then asked to give explicit examples for how her parole of "no tolerance" related to this topic were to be understood. She illustrated her point by calling no-go areas unacceptable, and by further mentioning that areas where normal citizens are afraid to visit must be addressed. (German is more precise/different with pronouns and what subordinate clauses reference to than English, thus the translation is ambiguous.)
She didn't mention any areas where the police wouldn't go. In fact she mentioned the "Staatliches Gewaltmonopol"(~monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force by the state).
Also not that she mentioned "being afraid/wary" in a way that explicitly did not say that those feelings were neccessarily warranted.
Just that the fear regarding them exists.

- - - Updated - - -

I can't really help you if you can't comprehend something as clear as:
"So let's not create more then..."

It is a platitude with no content... if you wanted to imply something racist, then you should have had the guts to say so.
If you wanted to say something else then you should have been more careful with your wording.
As it is that post is useless.

[Post]

It is a platitude with no content... if you wanted to imply something racist, then you should have had the guts to say so.
If you wanted to say something else then you should have been more careful with your wording.
As it is that post is useless.

You're desperately looking for something to object to, but it's as simple as seeing something causing an issue and wanting to not do that thing. Just because we already have pollution doesn't mean we should be fine with introducing more for example, there are a million different analogies you could use here.

[Noradin]

You're desperately looking for something to object to, but it's as simple as seeing something causing an issue and wanting to not do that thing. Just because we already have pollution doesn't mean we should be fine with introducing more for example, there are a million different analogies you could use here.

In that case you should be fine with giving a bit more context for your post.

What is it we should avoid to to as to "not to create more then..."?
Letting in "brown people"? Selling guns? Shitposting?
Please be specific.

Maybe then there will be a point to your post, right now nobody can tell.

[Post]

In that case you should be fine with giving a bit more context for your post.

What is it we should avoid to to as to "not to create more then..."?
Letting in "brown people"? Selling guns? Shitposting?
Please be specific.

Maybe then there will be a point to your post, right now nobody can tell.

Don't let in just any immigrant who shows up at the border because we can see that doing that is creating problems. I'm amazed at how much trouble you're having grasping what I'm saying.