Seems to be Islamophobic. (Fun fact. The person who popularized the word is now regretting the current migrant crisis). Boy are you 100% sure behind that statement and this is also an ad hominem fallacy. You're more concerned about the background of the GateStone Institute than the credibility of the article. The same applies to your comment on Bild. It's also important to know that the German government has taken extensive lengths to censor 'negative' migrant news. No wonder why other German news organizations didn't say anything whereas Bild doesn't have much to lose because as you said, it has the lowest reputation in Germany...

Why should I correlate with a strawman fallacy? I love it when people like you are met with empirical evidence that make you uncomfortable, they default to the "Stop generalizing an entire group of people" argument. Anyways, to hammer in the point, cultures create tendencies and not all cultures are equal. Some have objectively worse customs and people who come from bad cultures will have higher tendencies to commit crimes. For instance, Saudi Arabia punishes rape victims. Egypt does not count a husband raping a wife as rape. Female genital mutilation is endemic to muslim majority nations. Exorbitant percentages of muslims in many muslim majority countries hold very illiberal/regressive views such as killing homosexuals, making women always obey their husbands, and wanting to impose Sharia law. It's a problem that is unique or widespread in muslim majority countries as I don't see the same problems from East Asia or Latin America. This is why people are wary of migrants. It's because of their cultures of origin. This isn't bigoted as you always love to describe. This is fact and to deny that ironically makes you the bigot because there is something called bigotry of low expectations.

That's fine. But if immigrants are causing these issue's, then it means that they're the problem! Governments shouldn't have started this if they don't know how to deal with it. I'm fine with small amounts of immigration when its ABSOLUTELY needed, but only of skilled professionals that the country needs. If they're a liability, deport them.

How do I take a source as credible? Doing backround checks of course. And you jump at me just for checking it? For verifying it? Oh boy. You just eat everything you are being feeded, right? No suprise you are so off and post videos with sources you didn't even looked at. Everything what fits your agenda, huh?

Just to sum it up:

*Calls me unconfomfortable, because I don't like people labeling a whole culture and religion as criminals.
*Asks for empirical evidence, figures and tables. Yet, fails to provide them himself.
*Posts links to random youtube guy and links in different languages or unaccessable sources. Tells I am ignoring those.

I'm certainly done with the delusion you call worldview.

Good Day, Sir.

I'll ask a mod to close this thread.

If immigrants are the cause, then I am not denying it. Like I said. Those who cause trouble, have to be dealt with very fast. And probably no country likes liabilities :)

But at the same time, I don't like people label all of them as criminals or whatever because some of them don't play by the rules.

Well people have different opinion's. I'm not a fan of immigration simply because it isn't needed. Countries unnessessarly allow 100000s of immigrants in, and they just end up getitng in trouble because they find a job or a place to live, ect. For example, here in Canada, we're receiving 300000 immigrants this year, when we only gained 150000 jobs! Many of these people are here for that reason, and they can't find it. 

Now I'm not generalizing all immigrants, but a larger fraction of them are getting in trouble. Europe should know from this especially with that's going on. If you can't deal with it, don't start it!

You call that background checks? All I saw were ad hominem fallacies such as your "Seem to be Islamophobic" statement, as if that added anything useful. You judged GateStone Institute and Bild by their backgrounds. I, on the other hand, judge by a point-by-point basis. Unlike the links you referenced, I post mine in the correct context and in addition, they actually have citations. You, on the other hand, used a study of immigrants from the United States to justify your position on migrants in Europe, attempting to force a square peg into a round hole. I love how you accuse me of posting videos that site studies as if that's a bad thing. It just comes to show how anti-empirical you are.

- Strawman fallacy. You seem to like to use this one a lot, do you? Since when does "Migrants are overrepresented in crime statistics" is equivalent to labelling a whole culture and religion as criminals? You are uncomfortable because you have been using that line ad nauseaum when most people have not over-generalized.

- I provided them, but you didn't. You decided to turn the blind eye just like how Germany decided to turn a blind eye to the Cologne sexual assaults. The figures and tables are there for you to see in Angry Foreigner's video and description. Why are you so reluctant to look the data up yourself? And while Statista's data is behind a paywall, why didn't you check on its reputation?

- Ah, there you go with the ad hominem once again. Criticize how the person is just a "random YouTube guy" and links sources in different languages rather than critiquing his actual arguments and data, so yes, you are ignoring Angry Foreigner. Not once, did I see comments like "I don't think the data is credible because so-and-so didn't use proper methodology" or anything else that is logically sound from you.

I'm getting the "I don't like what you're saying, so I'm asking a mod to close this thread so you can't say stuff anymore" vibe. So instead of correcting your fallacies and attempt to find other sources that support your point, you have taken the censorship route. Oh, and I didn't call whatever "delusion" you're talking about as worldview, so ease off on the phantom arguments.

I'll just show you why I am done with you.

You say: "All I saw were ad hominem fallacies such as your "Seem to be Islamophobic" statement, as if that added anything useful."
The point is. This is not my statement. I said: "So.. according to alternet.org, the recently created GateStone Institute seems to be islamophobic."

This is not my statement, but the statement of alternet.org. I additionally wrote: "How much truth there is won't be judged by me. But I saw it worth by posting it." And also to all the criticism of that source I wrote: "But OK.. let's assume that is true for Germany.. the crime rate increased in the recent months or years." Because you doesn't seem to understand english very well, let me explain to you what the last sentence means. It means, that despite ALL MY CRITICISM for that souce, I go with the whole truth of it to see where it is going next. And amazingly, you ignored that sentence aswell.

You say: "You judged GateStone Institute and Bild by their backgrounds. I, on the other hand, judge by a point-by-point basis". No you didn't. You are a liar. How can you verify the statement in those articles are true? By checking the sources of course. But these sources are not accessible. You are intellectual dishonest and you try to push your insults and false agenda towards me.

Meaning... the source you've provided leads to a biased position on this subject and not an objective one. You plainly ignored this and went on with your rampant towards me.  

I've posted several links and doing my research on the high rate of rapes done by immigrants in sweden. Posted statistics of different countries related to rape by capita. Like:

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-rate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Germany/Sweden/Crime

Because what you and Slimebeast did was taking this as a base for the whole of Europe. Which was also intellectual dishonest. The table and figures you've wanted. You plainly ignored them and again, pushed you agenda towards me, while also insulting me.

You say: "You, on the other hand, used a study of immigrants from the United States to justify your position on migrants in Europe, attempting to force a square peg into a round hole."

You still are running like a maniac around that circle while I said SEVERAL posts ago: "Oh right... must missed that bit of all the plain generalization going on here, my bad" MEANING: I take this one back. Yet, you keep hammering on that one all the time like it's worth something for your misguided argumentation. How desperate are you really?

You say: " I love how you accuse me of posting videos that site studies as if that's a bad thing. It just comes to show how anti-empirical you are."
What videos? You only posted one like it should do the talking for ya. That's your idea of providing empirical evidence? I suppose you should check the definition, because it seems you like beating dead horses, huh? And again.... provided the links and still calls me anti-empirical. That's what I call delusional.

And thank you very much for posting this: "Since when does "Migrants are overrepresented in crime statistics" is equivalent to labelling a whole culture and religion as criminals? " Because this, is the pure empirical evidence, that you have no fucking clue what my point is in this whole stupid discussion. Go back several pages and look at my original post which Slimebeast attacked me for. Maybe then, it would make *click* in your head.

The rest of your post is just repeating the same crap over again. You have an issue with reading and understanding what someone says.

You are intellectual dishonest.

The Islamophobic comment was wholly unneccessary, but you thought it was still worth pointing out. You also made that Fox News comparison with Bild.de which is again, another ad hominem. You were criticizing Bild.de for its background rather than the content that was referenced.

And I have to laugh at your false accusations of me being a liar. Stating facts is apparently the equivalent to lying and having an agenda. I like how you claim that I took Sweden's statistics as the base for all of Europe when I showed Angry Foreigner citing sources that show similar trends in Norway, Denmark, and Finland. In addition, I also showed that the influx of migrants have caused a dramatic rise in crime rates in Germany. So I'm not lying, you are and you're apparently desperate, too.

Oh, and I have several more videos to show you if you are curious. This is just the tip of the iceberg. And what do you know, another ad hominem! :D Criticizing the manner of how I present evidence rather than criticizing the actual evidence. I wonder who's the actual intellectual(ly) dishonest one here...

So, to top this off, I should put these final tidbits:

- Most of the immigrants aren't refugees. About 60% are actually economic migrants.
- Immigrants from the MENA region are overrepresented in crime statistics in countries like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland. In contrast, immigrants from other countries such as Signapore or Japan are not overrepresented.
- The influx of migrants has caused a significant rise in crime in Germany from 2014 to 2015.
- In England, the majority of muslims do not believe homosexuality should be legal, 2 in 5 muslims believe that the wife should always obey her husband, and 1 in 4 muslims want to impose sharia law.
- Bosnia is suffering from the significant presence of sharia villages.
- A lot of these migrants come from countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, etc. and according to Pew Research, overwhelming majorities advocate for illiberal views such as killing homosexuals and making women always subservient to men.

And I bet after reading those bullet points, you are tempted to use the "I can't stand bigots that over-generalize a culture and a religion" line again because surely the ad nauseaum fallacy certainly helps. Looking at these statistics I've stated above, it is rather clear that the migrants' attitudes are a major problem in Europe. And what is the source for their attitudes? The cultures of their countries of origin. What is the source for their cultures? Fundamental Islam or Islamism, for short. And when you read the Quran, it advocates for some of the most horrendous things like turning non-muslim women into sex slaves. Mohammed was also not the... best role model. See the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah and Taqiya as examples. Things like this need to be acknowledged, but instead, some countries like Germany and Sweden opted to cover up serious incidents, where the latter even went as far as to IP ban an article and any valid criticisms of Islam are silenced. This needs to stop as people are allowed to criticize Islam as much as they are allowed to criticize other religions.

What I hate is are massive cover ups for purely political reasons:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12085182/Cover-up-over-Cologne-sex-assaults-blamed-on-migration-sensitivities.html

How about you adress what I actually posted?

The rape laws in Sweden have changed, yes, and the statistics nowadays aren't directly comparable to the rest of the world. I know that. BUT, I posted numbers from the past when those laws weren't in place. But, even if we were to use current statistics, it still wouldn't affect the the ratio between foreigners and natives, the huge  overrepresentation of immigrants in sexual crime.

"We don't see an increase of crimes done by immigrants."

That's simply a lie. Something your just claim because you want it to be so.

Immigrants in Europe are highly overrepresented in crime and crime increases by the number of immigrants and it's certainly true for Germany as well.  It's simple fact.

What the hell has Germany being 8 times larger than Sweden to do with anything? Am I talking to a child? Don't you know even the basics of statistics?

And who are you? Are you an immigrant yourself or just a self-hating German?