Say What?

Below is a brief subtitled clip of German Chancellor Angela Merkel discussing the “integration problem”. Near the end she insists that the country will have to accept a higher level of criminality among immigrant youths.

What the heck was she thinking of when she said that?

And how will it play with the party base of the Christian Democrats? Or with the rest of the German electorate, for that matter?

Many thanks to Kitman for subtitling and YouTubing this video:

16 thoughts on “Say What?

  1. I suppose the corollary to such an acceptance has not occurred to Frau Merkel. Namely that if Germans, and other Europeans, are to accept a higher crime rate among immigrant “youths” then it is foreseeable, and quite acceptable in my opinion, that a higher crime rate will develop in response among the indigenous “youth”.

  2. Her bank account is probably accepting a higher level of bribery in the form of Islamofascist payment plans (Deutschemarks?).

  3. Well that’s a great deal for German voters. “Accept a higher level of criminality among immigrant youths.”

    Basically, most of these pols are complete idiots unable to deal with the demographic reality. She’s just told every German voter that immigration = high crime. Likely sky-high crime. In a deeply troubled world economy. With taxes flowing to bail out Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and Italy.

    She could not try harder on purpose to kill the EU.

  4. I think Germany must provide shelter and food for all scumbags, criminals and hobos that walk the Earth. Also, they need to bail out every disfunctional economy in Europe and Africa. By the way, have they finished paying war reparations? I mean for WW1, naturally they still have some billions to pay for WW2. So Germans, please work harder. There are many more mouths to feed.

  5. Not jumping to conclusions here – but ‘akzeptieren’ in German can also mean “admit to the truth of it” as in “Es ist so – akzeptieren Sie es endlich!” and stop turning a blind-eye.

    Since we all want for the German government to finally ‘akzept the fact’ that muslim youths are supremacist and often violent, we should instead be shouting – we know – now what are you going to do about it?

  6. I have to agree that the translation is a bit faulty. What she says here is “Wir mussen akzeptieren, dass die Strafzahl bei jugendlichen Immigranten besonders hoch ist.” Translating that into English, I definitely would not say that she meant “will have to” accept, but merely states that “We must face (accept) the fact that the number of crimes committed by young immigrants *is* especially high.

  7. Near the end she insists that the country will have to accept a higher level of criminality among immigrant youths.

    Is it just me or does this sound like a blatant attempt to subvert the existing legal code? If a certain nation’s laws X, Y and Z prohibit such and such illicit conduct and someone, especially a political leader of influence, seeks to tell a country’s citizens that they must accept an increased level of noncompliance with laws X, Y and Z isn’t that subverting the rule of law? At the very least it is encouraging criminal activity with the promise of lax enforcement.

    Let me hazard a wee guess at one of the first laws to be selectively unenforced; BIGAMY. But only for members of a certain ideological group, of course.

    Kevin Stroup: What about the Muslims accepting more dead, wounded and incarcerated of their own people for criminal behavior?

    An eminently suitable proposition. Most certainly one that will gain an increased level of respect from Muslims, in particular.

    linnapaw: … “We must face (accept) the fact that the number of crimes committed by young immigrants *is* especially high.

    And exactly why should honest, hard-working German citizens “accept” high immigrant crime rates? Instead, why not tell the effing Muslims that they are in for a huge patch some damnably rough sledding if they continue to poach upon the health and wealth of decent German people?

    Merkel, like so many liberals, is blaming the victim and pampering the criminal. Curiously enough, that is also a specialty of Islam. It is no coincidence that Merkel is adopting one of Islam’s favorite strategies in order to cope with Muslim criminality.

    This makes her complicit in both the Islamification of Germany and whatever increase in crime that, thereafter, goes insufficiently prosecuted. Merkel has openly admitted that multiculturalism is a “total failure”, yet has the frigging temerity to suggest that Germans must simply learn to live with her own failed policies.

    This is yet one more prime example of how the Left has abandoned personal responsibility as a core element of morality.

  8. gsv are you out on damage control?
    leaving the same comment at all platforms is odd

    Read the blog post on Germanys biggest political blog PI-News

    Headline “Merkel: Wir müssen Migrantengewalt akzeptieren”
    transl. “We Must Accept Immigrant Crime”

    In the article author asks “Why do we have to accept that, Merkel?”

    Convince the Germans, that they got it wrong before complaining about the translation

    If she meant what you said, she could have used the much more common terms, such as “feststellen” “einsehen” etc.

  9. Well of COURSE her eyes are dead. Her soul is dead. That’s what colonialism does. The system she is forcing on Germany works just like Apartheid: You can have some of the benefits of “civilisation”, but at the price of your dignity and freedom. Germans must kill a little bit of themselves everyday.

  10. I think The comment about german translation is correct. From the rest of her statment it sounds as if she means “we have to admit” that there is a high amount of criminality amongst immagrant youth, not that “we have to let them be criminals”.

    Even in english that sentance can mean both things.

  11. The pity is that it would be so easy to get rid of that criminal element.  It self-identifies as Muslim first and above all else, and has a cavalier attitude toward violence against the host population.  If it doesn’t out itself by word, deeds will do; if it shows up as endemic to a family or mosque, deport the entire group.

    It wouldn’t be long before the problem people are elsewhere, and anyone bent on making trouble in the future works hard to be unnoticed in the present.

  12. “A boxing gym where integration is attempted through sport”

    Leaving aside the notion of whether boxing actually constitutes a “sport”, why couldn’t it be a “football field”, or a “tennis court”, or a “bowling alley” – it has to be a “boxing gym”? Because, of course, teaching criminally inclined youths how to fight is the best path to peaceful integration, and won’t in any way lead to more vicious attacks on law-abiding citizens.

    Assuming it’s not just down to extreme ignorance or extreme stupidity, I’m left wondering what the payoff is for politicians like this (and it’s not unique to Germany – the same thing happens down here in Australia, right down to the “boxing gyms”). If it’s about securing votes and remaining in power long enough to earn a life-long benefits plan, then what is the point of having enough money to live out a comfortable existence in a country where your life is likely to be under threat if you step outside the front door?

    Personally I don’t plan on going peacefully, so bring it on.

  13. Infidelity: Assuming it’s not just down to extreme ignorance or extreme stupidity…

    You’ve dug down far enough already. Please stop shoveling about before all of the billboards start reading in Chinese.

Comments are closed.