Denmark plans to deprive jihadists' children of their citizenship

[Dubious]

Just because someone has psychological problems, does not make them a 'looney'.
It also does not mean that they need to be locked up in some institution.

Well white terrorists are locked up with treatment rights ....after pleading mentally ill

Yes. He interviewes all types of jihadis: Western and non-Western.

But somehow doesnt shed much light on the Western ones even though they are the ones growing!

I would say lack of proper guidance.
And that does not necessarily need to be religion.

Kind of responsibility of the state? To educate is, so is to nurture, protect the child...hence child service...But somehow, it only serves in snatching away children instead of actually being useful in helping with the integration maybe?

He means someone who was born to and grew up with parents who are Muslim, but who did not grew up in a household were they practised Islam.
And later on, they started to practice Islam and they 'converted'.

That def isnt the "definition" of converted!

Why should it matter that the only just recently became Muslim?
From what I know that, as long as they performed the Shahada then from that point on they are Muslim and recognized as such.

Why shouldnt it matter? BECAUSE the words of people living as Muslims is thrown out the window and these people are quoted as textbook Muslims...So at least be a textbook definition of one in order to be quoting on behalf of 1.6 billion!

As for "preforming the shahadah" - even you dont know what you are talking about!

Shahadah is just a line, you just say it in secret or in open...many do it in open to be accepted. So there can be "secret" Muslims among us but they arent interviewed! There are peaceful Muslims, but they dont interest the media...yet these "sudden converts" paint it all for 1.6 billion -majority of which are peaceful but not getting any attention?! It is like ignoring the good cells -which may have some cure/ immunity and chasing after the bad ones and wondering why they became cancerous?!

Without a reference of what to compare with (good cells) such an experiment is really not scientifically sound!

They allowed it themselves.
They chose not to integrate and participate in Danish society.
They did not want to be a part of Danish society.

How did they choose to? Who was there with open arms? Who was there to guide them? Who was there to receive them?

They have studied marginalize people.
And they are trying to help them.
But like I said, these people do not want to integrate and participate.

Actually there are articles stating the state failed...When you allow ghettos to grow and not integrate, you literally are allowing it!

Well, that is something that the reporter, who interviewed the jihadis, is trying to explain.
That it is not about protecting Islam but protecting the state.
So, it is the 'state' which is taking a beating.

Not at all It is Islamic terrorism not state terrorism!

His voice isnt loud enough nor his research even taken seriously enough!

Do not be so condescending of new converts.
From what I have seen, is that new converts are more practising Muslims than those that have grown up as Muslims.

Depends...Like human come in all variety so do converts...After all they are human!

2ndly, Would you go to a say butcher [ just coz he "converted" to start practicing on human] for a surgery? If no, why go to the most extreme negative instead of the majority?

After all the bell shaped curve in every statistic analysis always shows you where the majority lies...If 1.6 billion were aggressive, I assure you, no life would be safe!

Did they now? Again, unlike india, world needs something called proofs before making statements like that

Plenty of articles...Google is your friend like it was yours for such an interview!

Denmark is one of the safest countries in the world.
It is certainly safer than all the countries where all these Muslims came from.
Like I said before: Denmark has NOT done enough to help them integrate and participate.
But many of them do not want to.

1) Your saying means nothing
2) There are studies about marginalized people -plenty of studies where names dont land jobs coz it is "ISLAMIC"/ "NON EUROPEAN" sounding - so who exactly isnt integrating?
There are studies where the council wasnt active enough - Studies from UK
There are studies where taking in refugees was forced upon many countries for being a part of EU [study on Sweden is the most important one]
There are studies that marginalized people dont get to rent - people dont want to accept them....and new comers - they cant speak your language, instead of helping, you push them to ghettos then wonder why they stuck in such a life? - Studies of Blacks in USA

Help yourself and welcome to the real world of hidden truth!

 

[Kailash Kumar]

Well white terrorists are locked up with treatment rights ....after pleading mentally ill

If a terrorist (regardless of their background) would plead mental illness, then a psychologist or psychiatrist will evaluate this person and will check if it is true or not.
If it is, then they will be treated as someone with a mental illness.
If not, then not.

But somehow doesnt shed much light on the Western ones even though they are the ones growing!

The article was about jihadis from Denmark traveling to Syria and what motivated them to do so.
It was not about the difference between Western and non-Western jihadis.

Kind of responsibility of the state? To educate is, so is to nurture, protect the child...hence child service...But somehow, it only serves in snatching away children instead of actually being useful in helping with the integration maybe?

The reponsibility for guiding a child lies first and foremost with the parents.
Do save some judgement for them.

That def isnt the "definition" of converted!

It might not be the definition of converted, but I tried to explain what he meant.

Why shouldnt it matter? BECAUSE the words of people living as Muslims is thrown out the window and these people are quoted as textbook Muslims...So at least be a textbook definition of one in order to be quoting on behalf of 1.6 billion!

The newly converted Muslims might not speak for all Muslims.
Yet I do not believe that the majority of Muslism are what you call 'textbook' Muslims.
If you want the 'textbook' Muslim to be the Muslims that represents the majority of Muslims, first you need to make the majority of Muslims, 'textbook' Muslims.

As for "preforming the shahadah" - even you dont know what you are talking about!

Shahadah is just a line, you just say it in secret or in open...many do it in open to be accepted. So there can be "secret" Muslims among us but they arent interviewed!

Well even so, converts can still be Muslims who know a lot about Islam.

There are peaceful Muslims, but they dont interest the media...yet these "sudden converts" paint it all for 1.6 billion -majority of which are peaceful but not getting any attention?! It is like ignoring the good cells -which may have some cure/ immunity and chasing after the bad ones and wondering why they became cancerous?!

Without a reference of what to compare with (good cells) such an experiment is really not scientifically sound!

There are Muslims who describe themselves as peaceful.
Correct.
But the media IS interested in them.

The problem is that when they are asked what they think, many researchers have found out that the peaceful Muslims think in almost the same way as the (newly converted) extremist Muslims.
Even when they condemn these same extremist Muslims.

I will give you an example.
According to the graphic below, most Muslims are for Sharia.
With the Muslims of Southern-Eastern Europe and Central Asia, there is no majority who wants Sharia, but since there are many more Muslims in other countries who do want Sharia, I can safely say that a majority of all Muslims worldwide do want Sharia.

Let us continue.
See the graphic below.

This graphic is from the same research as the graphic where it states what percentages of Muslims are in favour of Sharia.
They asked the Muslims who are in a favour of Sharia whether a Muslim should get the death penalty for leaving Islam.

Let us take Pakistan for example.
In Pakistan there are more than 200 million people.
98 % of those are Muslim.
84 % of the Muslims want Sharia.
76 % of the Muslims who want Sharia, favour the death penalty for those Muslims who leave Islam.

If you would calculate how many people that are:
200.000.000 * 0.98 * 0.84 *0.76 = 125126400.

More than 125 million Pakistanis would want the death penalty for Muslims who leave Islam.
Among those, there will probably also be a lot who will describe themselves as 'peaceful', don't you think?

So, the peaceful Muslims want the same as the extremist Muslims.
They just might want to achieve it in a different way.

How did they choose to?

By using or not using their brains.

Who was there with open arms? Who was there to guide them? Who was there to receive them?

No one.
But no one was also there with open arms for other immigrants who did not become jihadis.
And like I said before, PARENTS and not the state are the ones who are responsible for the upbringing and guidance of their children.

Actually there are articles stating the state failed...When you allow ghettos to grow and not integrate, you literally are allowing it!

The ghettos grew because Denmark let too many immigrants in the country who do not contribute to their country, do not want to work and are a burden on the social system and services of Denmark.

So yes, the state failed... to control immigration.

Not at all It is Islamic terrorism not state terrorism!

His voice isnt loud enough nor his research even taken seriously enough!

So you agree?

Depends...Like human come in all variety so do converts...After all they are human!

Exactly. They come in all varieties.
But you are the one who writes as if you think they are all the same.

2ndly, Would you go to a say butcher [ just coz he "converted" to start practicing on human] for a surgery? If no, why go to the most extreme negative instead of the majority?

After all the bell shaped curve in every statistic analysis always shows you where the majority lies...If 1.6 billion were aggressive, I assure you, no life would be safe!

I answered this above. See the part with the graphics.

Plenty of articles...Google is your friend like it was yours for such an interview!

You do realize I literally copied your comment which is #5 in this topic.
You can at least provide me with ONE link.
I just want to check if you are not making things up.

1) Your saying means nothing

It means everything to me.

2) There are studies about marginalized people -plenty of studies where names dont land jobs coz it is "ISLAMIC"/ "NON EUROPEAN" sounding - so who exactly isnt integrating?

There are also studies which prove the opposite of what you say..
But I do not want this to become a match where we throw studies at eachother.

There are studies where the council wasnt active enough - Studies from UK

Again, one cannot depend on the state for everything.
A citizen does have some personal responsibility, don't you think?

There are studies where taking in refugees was forced upon many countries for being a part of EU [study on Sweden is the most important one]

Exactly. Since it was forced upon them, would that not explain why they do not want them?

There are studies that marginalized people dont get to rent - people dont want to accept them....and new comers - they cant speak your language, instead of helping, you push them to ghettos then wonder why they stuck in such a life? - Studies of Blacks in USA

The 'Blacks' in the United States are hardly newcomers.

But yes, ghetto's are a problem for those who live in them.
That those ghetto's exist was the result of policies of the state.
That is correct.

But that does not mean that, for example, that these young immigrants need to cause problems in these ghetto's.
You do not need to, for example, harass people.
That is not the result of the policy of the state.
That is the result of lack of social control, right upbringing and common sense.
This is the fault of the parents but it is mainly the fault of the individual.

Help yourself and welcome to the real world of hidden truth!

You do not need to welcome me.
Nor I do not need any help.
To me, the truth was never hidden.
It was always right in front of me.
If you, Dubious, need to find that 'hidden' truth then you are looking in the wrong place.
For those whose eyes and mind are open, no truth can be hidden, no truth needs to found.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Denmark plans to deprive jihadists' children of their citizenship

Sandrine Amiel

28/03/2019

Children born abroad to Danish jihadists will no longer receive Danish citizenship, the immigration ministry said in a statement on Thursday.

"As their parents have turned their back on Denmark, there is no reason for the children to become Danish citizens," Immigration Minister Inger Stojberg was quoted as saying in a statement.

The proposal was laid out by the minority government after striking a deal with its populist ally, the Danish People's Party.

While the bill must still go through parliament, the government expects it to pass easily. "It's hard for me to believe that some parties in parliament are not willing to protect Denmark," the minister told press agency Ritzau.

No date has been set for the vote.

'Forty jihadists with links to Denmark in Syria'
Since 2016, it has been a criminal offence under Danish law to have fought in conflict zones for a terrorist group.

The courts have already convicted 13 people for having joined or tried to join a terrorist organisation.

Nine of those were stripped of their Danish nationality and expelled from the country. The others could not be stripped of their citizenship as they did not hold dual nationality.

Under the new rules, holders of dual nationality can lose their Danish citizenship by simple administrative order.

There are around 40 jihadists with links to Denmark in what used to be territory held by the so-called Islamic State group in Syria, 10 of whom have been captured, according to the government.

The exact number of Danish children born there remains unknown.

How to deal with jihadists' children: a major headache for Europe
The fate of foreign fighters with the so-called Islamic State group and their families has become a major headache for European countries since the fall of its caliphate in Syria.

Even when it came to jihadists' children, European countries have varied greatly in their approaches.

The UK government recently faced criticism after the baby of an exiled IS bride died while the pair were in a Syrian refugee camp.

Shamima Begum, 19, left London with her two school friends in 2015 to join the jihadist group. She returned to the spotlight last month when she took part in media interviews saying she wanted to come home.

But despite her public pleas, the UK government stripped the teenager of her British citizenship. Her son Jarrah was born in February but died in a Syrian hospital a few weeks later.

In France, the government has repatriated several orphan French children from Syrian camps in recent weeks.

However, the 'case-by-case' policy implemented by the government has also drawn criticism by human rights advocates, who say all French children should be entitled to protection rather than just orphans.

https://www.euronews.com/2019/03/28/denmark-plans-to-deprive-jihadists-children-of-their-citizenship?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+euronews/en/news+(euronews+-+news+-+en)

The REAL Danish people are good people. The retarded low IQ immigrant scum are the ones who want to become isis terrorists. They need to be erradicatrd.

 

[Vortex]

Denial of citizenship to Muslims seems to be the future in which the West is heading in.

Very dangerous precedent.

Maybe true but who’s fault is it if not the one of Muslims themselves ?

And when I use « Muslims » word I mean all Muslims from the world.

 

[KhalaiMakhlooq]

I've quoted the questionnaire and i'm replacing the word Jihad with Enemy and then i'm going to simplify and translate what the article is saying to make its easier to understand.

Q. In your research, have you noticed any common traits in the backgrounds of Denmark’s foreign fighters (age, gender, profession, geographical location) and their pathways into joining the enemy?

...most foreign fighters are young men and the vast majority have family roots outside the European continent.

enemy is non-white

...the main part had struggled with social challenges of some sort—their parents’ divorce, a mental diagnosis, deaths in the near family, etc.

enemy has a social challenge, family issue or a mental issue.

...a great number of Danish foreign fighters were average middle class kids...

enemy would be considered normal middle class of that society

...a significant number of Danish foreign fighters with non-Western backgrounds came from families that were remarkably secular and liberal.

enemy is from background that is secular and liberal

...most foreign fighters are in fact converts—some may just have Muslim family roots.

enemy's family has muslim roots

...these converts from Muslim families share their pathway into the enemy milieu with that of “regular” ethnic Danish converts; they do not feel strongly about religion, something happens along the way, they are socially marginalized, perhaps they enter a criminal environment, and at a certain point in time they are intrigued by Islam as a way out of their problems. Often, the radicalisation process that follows completely changes their approach to Islam—just as with the Danish converts who have no previous experience with Islam whatsoever.

enemy has no religious feelings, during a point of transformation their approach to religion changes, how is unknown

Common socioeconomic traits simply doesn’t do the job when it comes to explaining why foreign fighters decide to wage enemy war.

social and economic reasons cannot provide rationale for enemy

Q. ...one of the things that stands out in your interviews with foreign fighters is this idea of “the state” as a cause. What does this concept of “the state” mean to the foreign fighters you spoke to and why is it such a powerful idea that it is worth travelling many miles across the world to fight and die for?

The very idea of a state was a recurrent narrative among enemy fighters. In fact, several fighters consider this notion a direct motivation for joining the battlefield.

...they are not just joining an insurgency; they are joining a state.

the enemy aspires for a state

...they see themselves as immigrants who want to settle down and build a future.

the enemy sees the state as the way forward

A Danish born Salafi with Pakistani roots named Shiraz Tariq, who is perhaps the most prominent enemy figure in Denmark, often spoke of the state as a goal in itself.

“My goal is to fight the infidels until the state is implemented,” he told me in an interview from Syria.

the enemy will fight enemies of the state

To at least some parts of Danish foreign fighters, institutional aspects such as economic systems, schools, and legal systems are key in their justification of violent jihad. They talk about “protecting the state” rather than protecting Islam, or protecting the group.

to the enemy the state is vital, Islam or religion is not worth it

Q. How did the fighters you interviewed describe life inside the state and what sort of roles did they undertake?

I’ve met with returnees who’ve returned further radicalized in terms of both ideology and fighting skills.

In the mind of a enemy, it is not necessarily contradictive to live in a real world of fighting and a virtual world that enables you to dream about how a perfect caliphate should look like or how a new Islamic golden age should look like.

once the enemy returns, their mind is not contradicting reality and their visions

Q. There has been a lot of discussion about the role of religion as a driver of the foreign fighters, including the role played by mosques. How influential have Danish mosques been in the radicalisation of foreign fighters?

...very few militants mention that they get their religious inspiration from the mosques.

the enemy doesn't care about mosques

This is due to widespread conspiracies that the mosques are in fact right-hand men for the Danish government or the intelligence service.

...many Danish foreign fighters rely almost exclusively on their close friends

the enemy doesn't rely on friendship

That said, I think it would be a huge mistake to underestimate the role of religion when it comes to foreign fighter mobilization. While you can argue that the social and political dimension were more prevalent driving factors during the first years of the Syria civil war, I find religion—or at least arguments rooted in Islamic texts—to play a quite decisive role today and even since early 2015. The fundamental ideology of enemy is deeply Islamic.

Now please explain to me how you can make this statement "it would be a huge mistake to underestimate the role of religion when it comes to foreign fighter mobilization" when the interview clearly describes them as not-religious: here is the profile:

• enemy is non-white
• enemy has a social challenge, family issue or a mental issue.
• enemy would be considered normal middle class of that society
• enemy is from background that is secular and liberal
• enemy's family has muslim roots
• enemy has no religious feelings, during a point of transformation their approach to religion changes, how is unknown
• social and economic reasons cannot provide rationale for enemy
• the enemy aspires for a state
• the enemy sees the state as the way forward
• the enemy will fight enemies of the state
• to the enemy the state is vital, Islam or religion is not worth it
• once the enemy returns, their mind is not contradicting reality and their visions
• the enemy doesn't care about mosques
• the enemy doesn't rely on friendship

As you can see, IS fighters are not fighting for Islam, they have no religious feelings, they dont even care about mosques, they come from liberal and secular upbringings with only vague muslim roots. they dont fight for Islam, they fight for their own state

Now what you are feeding into is the unfounded connection and identification if foreign fighters with Islam and Muslims. From the profile of these enemies, you can see they don't concern themselves with religion.

Then you have quoted an unknown survey about Muslim perceptions:

None of the data from that chart is valid, because you don't know the nature of foreign fighters and you are linking them together, when they shouldn't be linked.

You have failed to realise that the two issues should not be linked because they cannot be linked on ideological, social or world-view grounds.

In fact if you presented a IS fighter who is a liberal secular non-religious own-state fighter, to a normal everyday Muslim and you didn't tell him what he was they would say he's not a Muslim in way shape or form from his views.

The bottom line is you have no knowledge of what IS actually is, and nor do Muslims:

For example if you told a muslim a fact about IS like "IS do not accept the traditional creed of Islam, they accept the creed of Zillat-Ul-Ibrahim" and "IS do not accept the validity of Mecca and Kabah and openly call it idol-worship and have publically stated that IS wish to destroy the Kabah in Mecca" they would have a heart attack.

Then how is foreign IS-State fighters a Muslim issue? it is clearly not.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

This is just Islamophobia. All ISIS men and women cannot be generalized as criminals. From outside they did not have a full picture either.

 

[fitpOsitive]

Maybe the real question they should start asking is why 1 of the "happiest" countries exports terrorists?

And the answer is : it has been like that since past 5 centuries. That's why third world remains third world. No matter how much they fight with each other, they are one against us. They train, they launch, they sell they nurture... And then comes Bombing, invasions and embargos. Its the pattern after Crusades.

 

[Dubious]

If a terrorist (regardless of their background) would plead mental illness, then a psychologist or psychiatrist will evaluate this person and will check if it is true or not.
If it is, then they will be treated as someone with a mental illness.
If not, then not.

We are talking about people who have a marginalized background...That term comes with a "set of rules"...People are marginalized coz they are considered that "they dont belong" nor are they "heard".These are less privillaged people who prob dont even know their rights or are to mentally ill to understand what mentally ill means like the stigma that surrounds mental illness in the East!

2ndly, How is it so far not a single man who is brown and goes around shooting random people found to be psycho? But almost EVERY white who goes around shooting somehow has sometimes pleaded mentally challenged? Or worse case scenario ...
the system didnt love him enough
broken family [more or less the same as these groups]
Did drugs [similar to these groups]
Bad influence [similar to these groups]
Had a bad past [similar to these groups]
Radically influenced by hate speech [similar to these groups]

The article was about jihadis from Denmark traveling to Syria and what motivated them to do so.
It was not about the difference between Western and non-Western jihadis.

And how many articles are there about the differences?

The reponsibility for guiding a child lies first and foremost with the parents.
Do save some judgement for them.

Sure, if the parents have a job or more than one and are running around trying to do something in a new found land where they dont even speak the language...I am sure they can find some time to raise a child where they are getting beaten and at a disadvantage based on their face, name, religion, nationality! And the status of a refugee...it is a terrible status where you dont have honor..Ask the Palestinians how they travel/ seek job/ get an education....

Since you are as ignorant as the white regarding their laws and system...Let me educate you a little:

On paper refugee children are allowed schooling but that doesnt happen in reality! Very little to do with the parents!

Below is a report of say 2018 [so imagine the situation prior to this because we are talking about adults who came back then and how the system was back then]

But as this report documents, unmet government promises and harsh policies mean that the right to education for most child asylum seekers on the Aegean Islands is not being fulfilled.

For many children, lack of education on the Greek islands compounds education already severely compromised before arrival due to conflict in, and flight from, their home countries. In 2017, a Greek ministerial expert committee found that “owing to wars and migration, a significant percentage of refugee children [in Greece] have been out of the school environment for at least two years, and many children have never attended school, although they are of school age.”

Human Rights Watch is not aware of any cases where children living in the government-run camps on the islands have been able to enroll in public primary or secondary schools, or where information about public school enrollment, transportation to the schools, or other support has been made available to them. The only formal education that has been made available to children in government-run camps is pre-school classes.

https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/07/...-future/denial-education-child-asylum-seekers

https://www.infomigrants.net/en/pos...ucation-by-host-countries-unesco-report-shows

If you want to know about the truth about Denmark:
http://refugees.dk/en/focus/2019/february/the-massive-danish-discrimination/

So, maybe seek out the problem and ADDRESS it before blaming others!

 

[Fenrir]

They know the risks of joining militant groups. If they want their families to enjoy the benefits of Danish citizenship maybe make better choices and don't join up with militants?

Norway has rules on depriving citizenship from criminals too, but only if it wouldn't make them stateless and their crimes are severe rights violations. Otherwise they're incarcerated and rehabilitated.

http://globalcit.eu/new-rules-on-deprivation-of-citizenship-in-norway/

The new §26a will enter into force on 1 January 2019. It stipulates that a person that has shown behavior seriously to the detriment of Norway’s vital interests may lose his or her Norwegian citizenship by court judgment, if he has been convicted of a crime in Chapters 16, 17 and 18 of the Norwegian Penal Code. Chapter 16 deals with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes; chapter 17 deals with violations of Norway’s autonomy and other fundamental national interests; and chapter 18 deals with terrorist and terrorist-related acts. Other conditions are that the person must be over the age of 18 when committing the acts, and also holds another citizenship. In other words, the person should not be at risk of becoming stateless.​

You know the risk and willingly put that burden on yourself and family when you accept it. I support Denmark in doing so.

 

[Dubious]

It might not be the definition of converted, but I tried to explain what he meant.

And he used the word wrongly...Do have the guts to point a wrong as a wrong!

The newly converted Muslims might not speak for all Muslims.
Yet I do not believe that the majority of Muslism are what you call 'textbook' Muslims.
If you want the 'textbook' Muslim to be the Muslims that represents the majority of Muslims, first you need to make the majority of Muslims, 'textbook' Muslims.

We dont really care much about what you believe. The problem is not in what "one believes" but what reality really is.

Well even so, converts can still be Muslims who know a lot about Islam.

The everyday Muslim doesnt need to know all about Islam to be a Muslim...MOST dont even know the Shariah law [no it doesnt just contain punishments] and only know what the media shows them....Many cant even read the Quran!
After all a Muslim is also a human being and works exactly like a human being does!

If you want to buy/ bring into your life a car/ house/ phone/ laptop...you seek the best...but when you want to interview a Muslim you seek the worst? That alone shows how much importance is given to the subject!

There are Muslims who describe themselves as peaceful.
Correct.
But the media IS interested in them.

That is why I am putting the blame on the media after alt-right groups going mental now a days is also the doings of the media! Right?

The problem is that when they are asked what they think, many researchers have found out that the peaceful Muslims think in almost the same way as the (newly converted) extremist Muslims.
Even when they condemn these same extremist Muslims.

Please quote your so called researches and we can examine them!

I will give you an example.
According to the graphic below, most Muslims are for Sharia.
With the Muslims of Southern-Eastern Europe and Central Asia, there is no majority who wants Sharia, but since there are many more Muslims in other countries who do want Sharia, I can safely say that a majority of all Muslims worldwide do want Sharia.

*SIGH*
Let me start...with defining Shariah for you coz you are like the media and only know as much as the media feeds you, your own research is zilch!

The Arabic word sharīʿah (Arabic: شريعة‎) refers to the revealed law of God and originally meant "way" or "path".

So basically it is a way or a path to live as I stated earlier [as you can see I foresaw this coz you are a classic case of lack of knowledge in anything but full on wanting to discuss it as an expert!]
Shariah is not all about beheading or punishments only.

It is a law like any law of a country that has been edited [based on circumstances] and has more than 1 "way" or "path" to many scenarios. It also includes charity, pray, be nice to thy neighbour, smile to the stranger and many other stuff that people who dont do their research never find out about!

Please learn to give references so we can see how the research was conducted I can clearly tell you that 84% of Pakistanis is too high! We have a large number of liberals as you can see our laws have included alot over the years...

Let us continue.
See the graphic below.

This has no stance in Islam [according to the Quran] as I said Shariah changed over time...So maybe at a particular time death penalty was a thing, but it is not from the Quran and I am almost certain there has been some political + loss of translation that led to this being part of any country!

I can assure you Thailand doesn t have a higher % of people wanting DEATH PENALTY than Malaysia and it clearly says it only interviewed 5 provinces...SO a biased result isnt a result!
The questionnaire should also be attached to see what kind of "deceptive" questions were asked...Death penalty for for leaving Islam in Thailand is kind of laugh worthy coz who is going to issue it in a Buddhist country?

Blindly believing in a survey is what caused Isalmophobia where hate loving people told world that Terrorists are killing us even though FBI clearly showed fascist people are killing Americans more than any foreigner!

Let us take Pakistan for example.
In Pakistan there are more than 200 million people.
98 % of those are Muslim.
84 % of the Muslims want Sharia.
76 % of the Muslims who want Sharia, favour the death penalty for those Muslims who leave Islam.

If you would calculate how many people that are:
200.000.000 * 0.98 * 0.84 *0.76 = 125126400.

More than 125 million Pakistanis would want the death penalty for Muslims who leave Islam.
Among those, there will probably also be a lot who will describe themselves as 'peaceful', don't you think?

So, the peaceful Muslims want the same as the extremist Muslims.
They just might want to achieve it in a different way.

You must have failed in Statistics

1 always question how you got 84% is it a representative of the whole country? Can it be a representative? 2ndly how was the questionnaire conducted? I could take a questionaire here on PDF about how many indians believe in xyz, would that represent all of india?

Question should also be when was this survey taken? Was there a war going on in Pakistan? Were the questions direct or derived from a questionnaire like many do?

And what segments of society were interviewed? Was the interviewer informed that it will be part of a survey not just random talks - like how indians on PDF keep claiming we will do this, we will do that?

By using or not using their brains.

this is no answer to what I asked not even remotely close to what you wrote!

No one.
But no one was also there with open arms for other immigrants who did not become jihadis.
And like I said before, PARENTS and not the state are the ones who are responsible for the upbringing and guidance of their children.

You dont understand the life of an immigrant....esp in a foreign land.. No I am not talking about Bengalis ending up in india or vice versa! I am talking about say an Indonesian ending up in New Zealand or one from Kenya ending up in USA or an indian from a small town ending up in Finland! EXTREME differences!

Not every human has the same capacity!
2ndly as per 1 of the articles I posted earlier, SOME of the children of immigrants/ refugee manage to get a placing in the schools ...not all do so not all go through the same exposure! The article stated not enough schools not no schools...So some did get enrolled, some managed to be accepted, some managed to work things out.

 

[Dubious]

The ghettos grew because Denmark let too many immigrants in the country who do not contribute to their country, do not want to work and are a burden on the social system and services of Denmark.

So yes, the state failed... to control immigration.

Denmark didnt wake up one day and had immigrants, it was all a process of years...YEARS WHERE the govt let immigrants in without amending the law...THAT solely is the govt's fault!

Instead of welcoming the immigrants like Canada did ....the govt just ignored them..THAT too is on the govt! People with a history of invasion saw it as an invasion instead of part of the govt's initiative to help others!

Let me show you what the govt did:-
It forced people to go against their belief- something they were running away from

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/20/world/europe/denmark-muslims-handshake-law.html

This is the welcome and the govt causing divide- State sponsored neglect as compared to its neighbours:

The prosperous Nordic country of 5.8 million stands out among its neighbors for its reluctance to integrate even comparatively small numbers of foreigners. It granted protection to 2,365 people in 2017, compared with Sweden’s nearly 28,000.

http://time.com/5504331/denmark-migrants-lindholm-island/

Exactly. They come in all varieties.
But you are the one who writes as if you think they are all the same.

I dont, but you are the one who actually does think so:

Well even so, converts can still be Muslims who know a lot about Islam.

I have nothing against converts who go and seek knowledge, take courses and end up becoming great preachers through proper channels and education...I dont see majority of the media interviewing them?!

I answered this above. See the part with the graphics.

Lets say the breakdown you provided of Pakistanis...and the survey took say 200,000 people [I am assuming..]what percentage of the population is that? 0.001 - can you extrapolate based on such data? Simple stats will tell you NOPE! So no you didnt answer anything...

You do realize I literally copied your comment which is #5 in this topic.
You can at least provide me with ONE link.
I just want to check if you are not making things up.

https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/01443330910965804
The phenomena didnt start overnight but had started in 1990s...Children from that era are 25+ now and angry from all that they saw growing up!

You might also like this study material: http://www.puntosud.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/social_exclusion.pdf

There are also studies which prove the opposite of what you say..
But I do not want this to become a match where we throw studies at eachother.

Are there proper studies? I am talking about proper thesis written on these problems from the point of view of sociology / psychology and anthropology!

As well as some from from the POV of criminal studies...I know we in the class had to study the Blacks of USA coz it was the most documented case back then...Now we have cases in Europe as well...

Again, one cannot depend on the state for everything.
A citizen does have some personal responsibility, don't you think?

Well, why call yourself welfare? When you sign treaties, including accepting the responsibilities of people....People who are already fleeing a war, prosecution, displaced, harm...

Dont sign treaties if you dont know how to fulfill them or dont have the will to invest in the outcome! Just to show the world you are a free state/ accepting friendly state, you ruin people's lives...THAT is the responsibility of the state mind you!

You do know why xyz state is "forced" to "take on responsibilities?" because they directly or indirectly were involved in the situation...France in Africa, Sweden in selling to the Nazi, Austria for being racist ....UK for its colonial barbarism!

Exactly. Since it was forced upon them, would that not explain why they do not want them?

Same reason they didnt want Jews? White superiority complex not new problem! If you dont want to be forced, stop your activities which results in refugees...stop displacing people, stop war? Why dont we hear that stopping of these louder than the drum of war?

The 'Blacks' in the United States are hardly newcomers.

But yes, ghetto's are a problem for those who live in them.
That those ghetto's exist was the result of policies of the state.
That is correct.

Yes. Ghettos dont become overnight...It is a systematic process..

But that does not mean that, for example, that these young immigrants need to cause problems in these ghetto's.
You do not need to, for example, harass people.
That is not the result of the policy of the state.
That is the result of lack of social control, right upbringing and common sense.
This is the fault of the parents but it is mainly the fault of the individual.

From this I assume you dont even know the process of ghettos or the problems therein?

Harass people is not reserved to ghettos...You see that even in posh areas...So, yes parents in posh area also need to control their children...Problems in ghettos are far worse than this simplistic set you produce!

You do not need to welcome me.
Nor I do not need any help.
To me, the truth was never hidden.
It was always right in front of me.
If you, Dubious, need to find that 'hidden' truth then you are looking in the wrong place.
For those whose eyes and mind are open, no truth can be hidden, no truth needs to found.

Actually, from your posts, we all know you never actually looked for the truth, you went with the media flow! Never have you studied these subjects nor cases!

As for your last sentence, that may be true if you choose to see past what is shown to you!

I can give you study material for BA level sociology / Diploma in conflict studies / MBA in Conflict management and peace and conflict studies...