Or instead of descending to outright misanthropy we could look at the political climate and situation in Rome at the time, where lots of citizens lived largely on state handouts and whose main entertainment was the Colosseum, bread and circuses. Bored and indolent, they needed continually escalating spectacles - they actually flooded the Colosseum and lifted ships in to do battle, naumachiae - so is this period in Roman history a warning about meaningless lives lived without industry, Roman culture, or human nature?
I don't care what you say. Read even further down would be my advice, or just read the bit I quoted again: "Broad regions of the Earth experienced almost synchronous changes over periods of 0 to 30 years (Severinghaus et al., 1998), and changes were very abrupt in at least some regions (Bard et al., 1987), e.g. requiring as little as 10 years off Venezuela (Hughen et al., 1996)." It's well known that sudden temperature increases and decreases have happened with some regularity in recent history, geologically speaking. Well known by those who care to actually learn the science, of course.
That moment when you realise you're as ideologically hidebound as any denier.
The central Greenland ice core record (GRIP and GISP2) has a near annual resolution across the entire glacial to Holocene transition, and reveals episodes of very rapid change. The return to the cold conditions of the Younger Dryas from the incipient inter-glacial warming 13,000 years ago took place within a few decades or less (Alley et al., 1993). The warming phase, that took place about 11,500 years ago, at the end of the Younger Dryas was also very abrupt and central Greenland temperatures increased by 7C or more in a few decades (Johnsen et al., 1992; Grootes et al., 1993; Severinghaus et al., 1998). Most of the changes in wind-blown materials and some other climate indicators were accomplished in a few years (Alley et al., 1993; Taylor et al., 1993; Hammer et al., 1997). Broad regions of the Earth experienced almost synchronous changes over periods of 0 to 30 years (Severinghaus et al., 1998), and changes were very abrupt in at least some regions (Bard et al., 1987), e.g. requiring as little as 10 years off Venezuela (Hughen et al., 1996). Fluctuations in ice conductivity indicate that atmospheric circulation was reorganised extremely rapidly (Taylor et al., 1993). A similar, correlated sequence of abrupt deglacial events also occurred in the tropical and temperate North Atlantic (Bard et al., 1987; Hughen et al., 1996) and in Western Europe (von Grafenstein et al., 1999).
Hold up there. Climate has been changing since we first had some. The big question is "how fast?", and the current changes are very rapid. A few kilometers of ice go away over tens of thousands of years, that's natural. A variation of 2C over a few million years, that's natural. A variation of 2C in a century or two is remarkable, on a geological basis.
The central Greenland ice core record (GRIP and GISP2) has a near annual resolution across the entire glacial to Holocene transition, and reveals episodes of very rapid change. The return to the cold conditions of the Younger Dryas from the incipient inter-glacial warming 13,000 years ago took place within a few decades or less (Alley et al., 1993). The warming phase, that took place about 11,500 years ago, at the end of the Younger Dryas was also very abrupt and central Greenland temperatures increased by 7C or more in a few decades (Johnsen et al., 1992; Grootes et al., 1993; Severinghaus et al., 1998). Most of the changes in wind-blown materials and some other climate indicators were accomplished in a few years (Alley et al., 1993; Taylor et al., 1993; Hammer et al., 1997). Broad regions of the Earth experienced almost synchronous changes over periods of 0 to 30 years (Severinghaus et al., 1998), and changes were very abrupt in at least some regions (Bard et al., 1987), e.g. requiring as little as 10 years off Venezuela (Hughen et al., 1996). Fluctuations in ice conductivity indicate that atmospheric circulation was reorganised extremely rapidly (Taylor et al., 1993). A similar, correlated sequence of abrupt deglacial events also occurred in the tropical and temperate North Atlantic (Bard et al., 1987; Hughen et al., 1996) and in Western Europe (von Grafenstein et al., 1999).
Moreover, if we could reverse AGW, and prevent human impacts on climate, we wouldn't be keeping the climate static. We'd be keeping it pretty stable over millennia.
You realise you just said, "we wouldn't be keeping the climate static, we'd be keeping it pretty static over millennia".
The current rise in sea level is a little under 3mm per year, which puts us up close to a foot by the rest of the century. That's going to be significant in some respects. Storm surges will be almost a foot higher, and stuff that's on the beach close to the highest high tide mark is going to start getting wet. However, the increase seems to be accelerating, and there's no reason to think it won't be two feet or more by the end of the century. I wouldn't count on centuries before significant rise.
Wiki says 21cm to 34cm by 2100. It's really not an incipient threat, which is why we'd best start making longer term plans for adjusting to it, for ourselves and the other inhabitants of this blue marble. And once again we don't really know how everything fits together so the acceleration might not be constant. It might get worse of course but it's all speculation at this point.
No. it isn't. As a scientist I can firmly conclude Global warming is happening, its caused by human activities, and we need to stop it as it contributes to an array of very devastating consequences.
Hold up there a minute mister scientist, where I'm sitting at the moment was buried under a few kilometers of glacier a hundred thousand years ago, and humans didn't contribute a thing to the sequence of events that caused it to melt. We are in a perfectly natural interglacial, something that's happened before. That's not to say human civilisation isn't contributing to climate change but what's up for debate is just how much of a contribution we're making.
Secondly I find the notion that we can just stop the earth's climate from changing quite suspect - it's not stable or in equilibrium and never has been, with a few possible exceptions. A nudge in the wrong direction and we might find ourselvs back in an ice age, and if you think global warming is bad believe me it doesn't hold a candle to global cooling. Maybe we want to warm things up.
Either way the situation is going to change, so it seems as though the best policy would be to preserve as much biodiversity as possible and ready ourselves for flooding and so on. Not anytime soon mind you, even the worst realistic predictions of sea level rise give us centuries before we start to see significant changes. As things stand I can see all fossil fuel energy sources being phased out by the end of this century, and I fully expect to see widespread adoption of electric vehicles within my lifetime, so it's not so bad. Devastation is going to happen and has happened many, many times in the earth's history, long before humanity made an appearance, but we can minimise it this time round.
And even if we stopped all emissions right now, as far as I'm aware the earth will continue to warm anyway, so perhaps the minor effects of a century of declining emissions versus causing economic chaos right now are a pretty good tradeoff.
No no you've got it all wrong, evil capitalist companies have no interest in ethics, they should all become good marxists and get busy with the mass murdering.
That's like saying someone can go out and write books, get them published and sell enough copies to make a decent living doing it.
Who said anything about making a living doing it? How about making what you can doing it, a pursuit aided not in any way by piracy.
I have a family member who is preparing to release a book at this very moment. Her literary agent's first action was to put together a marketing team to promote the book in order to grease the wheels in selling the book to a publisher.
Great, my maiden aunt is a kung fu ninja. Even if some very unusual literary agents organise marketing teams you can bet your ass they aren't doing it out of their own pocket.
Are you really one of those mindless idiots who jumps on the cock of the media conglomerates and believes that every connection to a torrent swarm is a lost sale?
Who really cares, stealing from authors in one way or another is as low as it gets.
One of the first books I got for free was a the first piece of Twilight fan fiction from an unknown author on Smashwords who was certainly not a well known, filthy rich author at the time. The book wasn't my cup of tea, but it seems to have worked out fairly well for the author.
Right, so now book piracy is actually helpful. Are there any further moral pretzels you'd like to wheel out, inquiring minds want to know.
This debacle was almost (almost) worth it just to watch the komrades losing their shit on slashdot trying to blame the fat cat CEO though. Worker protections are important but France is in a league of its own.
The problem is that everyone works from the assumption that capitalism is mandatory.
Just so I've got this straight, you're using a story about how a middling hard leftist legal system and business environment wiped out an open source company to take a poke at capitalism? Good job, and modded up to 5 no less.
As far as secondary revenue streams go, authors can license their IP to TV, Movie and Video Game makers or they can sellmerchandise themselves.
That's a bit like saying coders can just make a game then license the IP to TV stations, moviemakers, writers and merchandisers as a secondary revenue stream. It happens but it's rare enough that it may as well not exist for most. Musicians on the other hand almost all play gigs (as well as being able to sell their music to videogame makers, TV shows and movies), and the movie industry practically invented merchandising as well as other avenues of income.
But that requires they build a fanbase. And in that endeavor, a literary agent is far more beneficial than an industry trade group
Literary agents liaise between writers and publishers/producers etc. They have nothing to do with building up a fanbase, most authors do all of their marketbuilding themselves, in their own time, on their own dime.
And it's been pretty well established that there's few (if any) people who pirate media that would run to Amazon or iTunes and buy something if they couldn't obtain it via piracy.
Certainly established to the satisfaction of people who pirate books anyway.
And most of the books I buy from new authors these days most often comes from authors who do things like release the first book in a trilogy for free or via word of mouth suggestions from people who are where I was in my teens and twenties and read stolen or borrowed versions of their books.
Freely released books are a very different matter to piracy, especially from creators who can least afford it.
I agree - the post wasn't in support of traditional publishing - but in this case they helped authors who weren't in their stable as well; I doubt the criminals only ripped off writers from large publishing houses.
Amazon's Kindle format is DRM-optional, and when the bookseller is telling people how to strip out the DRM it may as well not exist. Not that it matters in the slightest, that a book has DRM applied to it doesn't give criminals the right to profit from the hard work of others, which was the point being made.
Yeah by the standards of this article sound waves travel faster than light, at least if you're talking about their speed when passing through a sheet of tin.
Most ebooks don't come with DRM attached. The hysteria on display in the comments here is hilarious - scumbags are stealing the hard work of authors - many of whom are completely independent these days - for their own financial gain, and people are clutching their pearls that said scumbags got blocked. As much as I'm in favour of freedom of information I don't see why take-a-punt Pavel in Assbacketonia should be seeing a red cent for the hard work put in by hundreds of thousands of writers. There's no part of this ruling that will result in, or could be used to support, political or any form of suppression besides criminal.
Oh please, it's not the 1970s anymore. The majority (vast majority perhaps) of ebook authors are self published individuals who worked for months or years to produce their creations, only to have some yahoo in Eastern Europe swipe it for their own benefit. The "greedy media moguls" you imagine are less a part of the picture than ever before. And authors are the most vulnerable to online piracy - musicians can do live gigs, movies make it at the box office or through syndication - what other means does a writer have to earn money beyond direct sales? Live readings?
So, by that token, it doesn't even matter that we have "no-go zones" then, as the people in them don't get up to much anyway... Police presence or not...
Except it's not just one link, there are many more, to quote from the linked article:
National newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, explicitly using the term “no-go zones”:
An article about the police incident deserting their own and ceding control to criminals in Landskrona. They literally use the term in the headline, adding that the police are now pulling out of the area:
As for the police report, it clearly states that there are indeed informal courts and parallel justice systems (page 12, third paragraph (3.4.3)). Anyone who has read about Södertäljenätverket knows how broad the extent of this clan-based influence can be.
The vehicle checkpoints are mentioned on page 15, fourth paragraph (3.5.3).
On page 13, second paragraph (3.4.4) you find the frequent attacks on police. Here is just one of many news stories on how police have to install shatterproof glass on their vehicles because they get rocks hurled at them whenever entering these areas:
There are numerous newspaper articles, police reports and even Youtube videos by the gangs themselves bragging about how they’re chasing off the cops from “their” area, but I think this list should be enough.
I've nothing against Muslims in general myself, the same as I've nothing against Hindus, Christians or Buddhists. I do have a big problem with people obscuring the truth, and thus far you've presented no compelling evidence to suggest the above information is untrue. A rambling collection of anecdotes and opinions, sure, but no evidence.
This is mostly a big deal for retarded foreigners who imagined Ireland to be a heavily conservative place to begin with. You know nothing about this country, nothing about the people, and pretty much nothing about this amendment to the constitution. The choir: you were preaching to it.
Jacob Ekström is a police officer working in these areas. He has this to say in the latest issue of Forsking & Framsteg, the premier scientific journal in Sweden:
“The situation is slipping from our grasp,” he says about infamous enclaves Tensta and Rinkeby. “If we’re in pursuit of a vehicle, it can evade us by driving to certain neighborhoods where a lone patrol car simply cannot follow, because we’ll get pelted by rocks and even face riots. These are No-Go Zones. We simply can’t go there.” [My bold]
The article goes on to chronicle the rapid rise in gun-related violence in a country that was essentially unarmed up until just 15 years ago, the evolution of criminal gangs and clans from the middle east as an alternative societal structure, and how the “exclusion areas” (i.e. ghettos) have grown from 3 in 1990 to 156 in 2006.
The reporter brought the status report by Ekström to Lars Korsell, researcher and head of the organized crime unit att the national crime prevention bureau.
“Yes, it is pretty sensational that there are enclaves where Swedish law no longer applies,” Korsell replied slowly and ponderously.
I mean I sympathise with your need to defend what I presume is your home country, we had something similar here in Ireland during the troubles, tourists were afraid they'd get shot in the streets - no, folks, that's Northern Ireland, part of the UK - but from those reports it does seem as though a real problem exists. It doesn't appear to be widespread, yet, but there it is.
Slashdot Mirror
Or instead of descending to outright misanthropy we could look at the political climate and situation in Rome at the time, where lots of citizens lived largely on state handouts and whose main entertainment was the Colosseum, bread and circuses. Bored and indolent, they needed continually escalating spectacles - they actually flooded the Colosseum and lifted ships in to do battle, naumachiae - so is this period in Roman history a warning about meaningless lives lived without industry, Roman culture, or human nature?
I don't care what you say. Read even further down would be my advice, or just read the bit I quoted again: "Broad regions of the Earth experienced almost synchronous changes over periods of 0 to 30 years (Severinghaus et al., 1998), and changes were very abrupt in at least some regions (Bard et al., 1987), e.g. requiring as little as 10 years off Venezuela (Hughen et al., 1996)." It's well known that sudden temperature increases and decreases have happened with some regularity in recent history, geologically speaking. Well known by those who care to actually learn the science, of course.
That moment when you realise you're as ideologically hidebound as any denier.
the largest single temperature spike in the past 45 million years.
You mean larger than this: http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports...
The central Greenland ice core record (GRIP and GISP2) has a near annual resolution across the entire glacial to Holocene transition, and reveals episodes of very rapid change. The return to the cold conditions of the Younger Dryas from the incipient inter-glacial warming 13,000 years ago took place within a few decades or less (Alley et al., 1993). The warming phase, that took place about 11,500 years ago, at the end of the Younger Dryas was also very abrupt and central Greenland temperatures increased by 7C or more in a few decades (Johnsen et al., 1992; Grootes et al., 1993; Severinghaus et al., 1998). Most of the changes in wind-blown materials and some other climate indicators were accomplished in a few years (Alley et al., 1993; Taylor et al., 1993; Hammer et al., 1997). Broad regions of the Earth experienced almost synchronous changes over periods of 0 to 30 years (Severinghaus et al., 1998), and changes were very abrupt in at least some regions (Bard et al., 1987), e.g. requiring as little as 10 years off Venezuela (Hughen et al., 1996). Fluctuations in ice conductivity indicate that atmospheric circulation was reorganised extremely rapidly (Taylor et al., 1993). A similar, correlated sequence of abrupt deglacial events also occurred in the tropical and temperate North Atlantic (Bard et al., 1987; Hughen et al., 1996) and in Western Europe (von Grafenstein et al., 1999).
Hold up there. Climate has been changing since we first had some. The big question is "how fast?", and the current changes are very rapid. A few kilometers of ice go away over tens of thousands of years, that's natural. A variation of 2C over a few million years, that's natural. A variation of 2C in a century or two is remarkable, on a geological basis.
Not really, no. http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports...
The central Greenland ice core record (GRIP and GISP2) has a near annual resolution across the entire glacial to Holocene transition, and reveals episodes of very rapid change. The return to the cold conditions of the Younger Dryas from the incipient inter-glacial warming 13,000 years ago took place within a few decades or less (Alley et al., 1993). The warming phase, that took place about 11,500 years ago, at the end of the Younger Dryas was also very abrupt and central Greenland temperatures increased by 7C or more in a few decades (Johnsen et al., 1992; Grootes et al., 1993; Severinghaus et al., 1998). Most of the changes in wind-blown materials and some other climate indicators were accomplished in a few years (Alley et al., 1993; Taylor et al., 1993; Hammer et al., 1997). Broad regions of the Earth experienced almost synchronous changes over periods of 0 to 30 years (Severinghaus et al., 1998), and changes were very abrupt in at least some regions (Bard et al., 1987), e.g. requiring as little as 10 years off Venezuela (Hughen et al., 1996). Fluctuations in ice conductivity indicate that atmospheric circulation was reorganised extremely rapidly (Taylor et al., 1993). A similar, correlated sequence of abrupt deglacial events also occurred in the tropical and temperate North Atlantic (Bard et al., 1987; Hughen et al., 1996) and in Western Europe (von Grafenstein et al., 1999).
Moreover, if we could reverse AGW, and prevent human impacts on climate, we wouldn't be keeping the climate static. We'd be keeping it pretty stable over millennia.
You realise you just said, "we wouldn't be keeping the climate static, we'd be keeping it pretty static over millennia".
The current rise in sea level is a little under 3mm per year, which puts us up close to a foot by the rest of the century. That's going to be significant in some respects. Storm surges will be almost a foot higher, and stuff that's on the beach close to the highest high tide mark is going to start getting wet. However, the increase seems to be accelerating, and there's no reason to think it won't be two feet or more by the end of the century. I wouldn't count on centuries before significant rise.
Wiki says 21cm to 34cm by 2100. It's really not an incipient threat, which is why we'd best start making longer term plans for adjusting to it, for ourselves and the other inhabitants of this blue marble. And once again we don't really know how everything fits together so the acceleration might not be constant. It might get worse of course but it's all speculation at this point.
No. it isn't. As a scientist I can firmly conclude Global warming is happening, its caused by human activities, and we need to stop it as it contributes to an array of very devastating consequences.
Hold up there a minute mister scientist, where I'm sitting at the moment was buried under a few kilometers of glacier a hundred thousand years ago, and humans didn't contribute a thing to the sequence of events that caused it to melt. We are in a perfectly natural interglacial, something that's happened before. That's not to say human civilisation isn't contributing to climate change but what's up for debate is just how much of a contribution we're making.
Secondly I find the notion that we can just stop the earth's climate from changing quite suspect - it's not stable or in equilibrium and never has been, with a few possible exceptions. A nudge in the wrong direction and we might find ourselvs back in an ice age, and if you think global warming is bad believe me it doesn't hold a candle to global cooling. Maybe we want to warm things up.
Either way the situation is going to change, so it seems as though the best policy would be to preserve as much biodiversity as possible and ready ourselves for flooding and so on. Not anytime soon mind you, even the worst realistic predictions of sea level rise give us centuries before we start to see significant changes. As things stand I can see all fossil fuel energy sources being phased out by the end of this century, and I fully expect to see widespread adoption of electric vehicles within my lifetime, so it's not so bad. Devastation is going to happen and has happened many, many times in the earth's history, long before humanity made an appearance, but we can minimise it this time round.
And even if we stopped all emissions right now, as far as I'm aware the earth will continue to warm anyway, so perhaps the minor effects of a century of declining emissions versus causing economic chaos right now are a pretty good tradeoff.
I tell clients they can pay for the mobile upgrade or suffer a loss of Google ranking. It's working out well so far.
Another stride forward for Womens Rights!1
*starts playing feminist anthem*
No no you've got it all wrong, evil capitalist companies have no interest in ethics, they should all become good marxists and get busy with the mass murdering.
They hate him because of the petroleum dependencies in their retirement investments.
That's like saying someone can go out and write books, get them published and sell enough copies to make a decent living doing it.
Who said anything about making a living doing it? How about making what you can doing it, a pursuit aided not in any way by piracy.
I have a family member who is preparing to release a book at this very moment. Her literary agent's first action was to put together a marketing team to promote the book in order to grease the wheels in selling the book to a publisher.
Great, my maiden aunt is a kung fu ninja. Even if some very unusual literary agents organise marketing teams you can bet your ass they aren't doing it out of their own pocket.
Are you really one of those mindless idiots who jumps on the cock of the media conglomerates and believes that every connection to a torrent swarm is a lost sale?
Who really cares, stealing from authors in one way or another is as low as it gets.
One of the first books I got for free was a the first piece of Twilight fan fiction from an unknown author on Smashwords who was certainly not a well known, filthy rich author at the time. The book wasn't my cup of tea, but it seems to have worked out fairly well for the author.
Right, so now book piracy is actually helpful. Are there any further moral pretzels you'd like to wheel out, inquiring minds want to know.
This debacle was almost (almost) worth it just to watch the komrades losing their shit on slashdot trying to blame the fat cat CEO though. Worker protections are important but France is in a league of its own.
The problem is that everyone works from the assumption that capitalism is mandatory.
Just so I've got this straight, you're using a story about how a middling hard leftist legal system and business environment wiped out an open source company to take a poke at capitalism? Good job, and modded up to 5 no less.
As far as secondary revenue streams go, authors can license their IP to TV, Movie and Video Game makers or they can sell merchandise themselves.
That's a bit like saying coders can just make a game then license the IP to TV stations, moviemakers, writers and merchandisers as a secondary revenue stream. It happens but it's rare enough that it may as well not exist for most. Musicians on the other hand almost all play gigs (as well as being able to sell their music to videogame makers, TV shows and movies), and the movie industry practically invented merchandising as well as other avenues of income.
But that requires they build a fanbase. And in that endeavor, a literary agent is far more beneficial than an industry trade group
Literary agents liaise between writers and publishers/producers etc. They have nothing to do with building up a fanbase, most authors do all of their marketbuilding themselves, in their own time, on their own dime.
And it's been pretty well established that there's few (if any) people who pirate media that would run to Amazon or iTunes and buy something if they couldn't obtain it via piracy.
Certainly established to the satisfaction of people who pirate books anyway.
And most of the books I buy from new authors these days most often comes from authors who do things like release the first book in a trilogy for free or via word of mouth suggestions from people who are where I was in my teens and twenties and read stolen or borrowed versions of their books.
Freely released books are a very different matter to piracy, especially from creators who can least afford it.
I agree - the post wasn't in support of traditional publishing - but in this case they helped authors who weren't in their stable as well; I doubt the criminals only ripped off writers from large publishing houses.
Amazon's Kindle format is DRM-optional, and when the bookseller is telling people how to strip out the DRM it may as well not exist. Not that it matters in the slightest, that a book has DRM applied to it doesn't give criminals the right to profit from the hard work of others, which was the point being made.
Yeah by the standards of this article sound waves travel faster than light, at least if you're talking about their speed when passing through a sheet of tin.
Most ebooks don't come with DRM attached. The hysteria on display in the comments here is hilarious - scumbags are stealing the hard work of authors - many of whom are completely independent these days - for their own financial gain, and people are clutching their pearls that said scumbags got blocked. As much as I'm in favour of freedom of information I don't see why take-a-punt Pavel in Assbacketonia should be seeing a red cent for the hard work put in by hundreds of thousands of writers. There's no part of this ruling that will result in, or could be used to support, political or any form of suppression besides criminal.
Oh please, it's not the 1970s anymore. The majority (vast majority perhaps) of ebook authors are self published individuals who worked for months or years to produce their creations, only to have some yahoo in Eastern Europe swipe it for their own benefit. The "greedy media moguls" you imagine are less a part of the picture than ever before. And authors are the most vulnerable to online piracy - musicians can do live gigs, movies make it at the box office or through syndication - what other means does a writer have to earn money beyond direct sales? Live readings?
Can't that be said for everything?
No it can't, you illiterate dickhead relativist. Mosquitoes are genuinely useless.
Mosquitoes don't fill any ecological niche that couldn't be filled by a host of other species.
Some bugs just need to die.
No that pretty much means you lose that game. Although you can cheat of course, there are numerous cases of men working in fertility clinics that fathered hundreds of children, how's that for a life hack.
So, by that token, it doesn't even matter that we have "no-go zones" then, as the people in them don't get up to much anyway... Police presence or not...
Aha, so you admit you have no-go zones then.
Except it's not just one link, there are many more, to quote from the linked article:
National newspaper Svenska Dagbladet, explicitly using the term “no-go zones”:
http://www.svd.se/opinion/leda...
National newspaper Aftonbladet on the rampant ISIS recruitment taking place in these areas:
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyhe...
Dr Magnus Ranstorp on the rapid growth of radicalized Islamists (in English):
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/...
An article about the police incident deserting their own and ceding control to criminals in Landskrona. They literally use the term in the headline, adding that the police are now pulling out of the area:
http://hd.se/landskrona/2014/0...
The local police chief explaining why the officers are not to exit their vehicles and make arrests:
http://www.hd.se/lokalt/landsk...
More from the police chief on how they now deal with the area:
http://hd.se/landskrona/2014/0...
Also, if these areas do not exist, why is the ambulance union demanding military-grade protection gear to enter them?
http://mobil.svd.se/nyheter/am...
Another article interviewing the ambulance union chief on why they need bulletproof vests, helmets and similar gear:
http://magasinetneo.se/artikla...
As for the police report, it clearly states that there are indeed informal courts and parallel justice systems (page 12, third paragraph (3.4.3)). Anyone who has read about Södertäljenätverket knows how broad the extent of this clan-based influence can be.
http://polisen.se/Aktuellt/Rap...—Nationellt/Ovriga-rapporterutredningar/Kriminella-natverk-med-stor-paverkan-i-lokalsamhallet/
The vehicle checkpoints are mentioned on page 15, fourth paragraph (3.5.3).
On page 13, second paragraph (3.4.4) you find the frequent attacks on police. Here is just one of many news stories on how police have to install shatterproof glass on their vehicles because they get rocks hurled at them whenever entering these areas:
http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regi...
There are numerous newspaper articles, police reports and even Youtube videos by the gangs themselves bragging about how they’re chasing off the cops from “their” area, but I think this list should be enough.
I've nothing against Muslims in general myself, the same as I've nothing against Hindus, Christians or Buddhists. I do have a big problem with people obscuring the truth, and thus far you've presented no compelling evidence to suggest the above information is untrue. A rambling collection of anecdotes and opinions, sure, but no evidence.
Comments
This is mostly a big deal for retarded foreigners who imagined Ireland to be a heavily conservative place to begin with. You know nothing about this country, nothing about the people, and pretty much nothing about this amendment to the constitution. The choir: you were preaching to it.
Okay, so how about this one from only a few days ago: http://swedenreport.org/2015/0...
Jacob Ekström is a police officer working in these areas. He has this to say in the latest issue of Forsking & Framsteg, the premier scientific journal in Sweden:
“The situation is slipping from our grasp,” he says about infamous enclaves Tensta and Rinkeby. “If we’re in pursuit of a vehicle, it can evade us by driving to certain neighborhoods where a lone patrol car simply cannot follow, because we’ll get pelted by rocks and even face riots. These are No-Go Zones. We simply can’t go there.” [My bold]
The article goes on to chronicle the rapid rise in gun-related violence in a country that was essentially unarmed up until just 15 years ago, the evolution of criminal gangs and clans from the middle east as an alternative societal structure, and how the “exclusion areas” (i.e. ghettos) have grown from 3 in 1990 to 156 in 2006.
The reporter brought the status report by Ekström to Lars Korsell, researcher and head of the organized crime unit att the national crime prevention bureau.
“Yes, it is pretty sensational that there are enclaves where Swedish law no longer applies,” Korsell replied slowly and ponderously.
I mean I sympathise with your need to defend what I presume is your home country, we had something similar here in Ireland during the troubles, tourists were afraid they'd get shot in the streets - no, folks, that's Northern Ireland, part of the UK - but from those reports it does seem as though a real problem exists. It doesn't appear to be widespread, yet, but there it is.