Syria Refugee minirant

[MakaiOokami]

I don't want this to devolve into name calling, flaring emotions etc...

I basically just want to say that the vetting process is 18+ months for refugees, tons of oversights, and the opposition keeps talking about shit happening in Europe.

Why does this infuriate me? We are not in walking distance. You can not just swim across the ocean. You have to take a plane, and when you have millions in walking distance, it's not fair to compare it to X number of pre-selected pre-screened, has-enough-money-to-fucking-fly, candidates a year and a half later.

I'm not trying to start a fight, I just feel like we're comparing Apples to Ipads and I'm hoping that maybe this might calm SOME people who might be possibly overly scared of a Syrian Refugee
Guerrilla Attack that just isn't comparable.

 

[Stephen Bitto]

I can see it both ways.

The threat isn't nearly as large as it is in Europe where refugees are flooding in on foot. Regulation is a much greater challenge for the EU.

That said, it isn't completely negligible in the US either. Additional safeguards are probably a good idea. The louder conservative candidates are playing to their bases and causing more harm to the discussion than good. Disappointing really.

The solutions, as they almost always do, lie somewhere in the middle. Commonsense regulation on all immigration would do this country and those entering it so much good. Sad US is more divided than ever making changes like that almost impossible.

As a conservative libertarian, I'm really hoping for a moderate conservative President that people can rally around. Someone who can solve problems with out ruffling too many feathers. Basically, the opposite of all the candidates getting all the press on both sides.

 

[MakaiOokami]

The Syrian Refugees don't have some easy time getting in though. The background checks we do for them are the most stringent from what I've heard. We're talking like a year and a half of interviews and fine tooth combs.

Where as a work visa was more or less like a mail order bride's level of scrutiny.

Why isn't 18 months, of scrutiny enough to say "Ok we don't need to freak out so much" when most of our terrorism is coming from the way we treat muslims, causing a flare up of home grown terrorists.

I don't know if you looked at the statistics but something like 60% of Muslims voted for George Bush, and then afterwards it was 20% who voted for George Bush, and the number 1 reason all the studies come to is that the Republican party just treats Muslims like they are all terrorists, treat them like crap, with suspicion, and yell in their faces.

I mean we even have non Muslims, getting confused for Muslims, because the hate is so blindingly artificial, that they can't tell 1 non christian religion from another.

 

[Stephen Bitto]

The Syrian Refugees don't have some easy time getting in though. The background checks we do for them are the most stringent from what I've heard. We're talking like a year and a half of interviews and fine tooth combs.

Where as a work visa was more or less like a mail order bride's level of scrutiny.

Why isn't 18 months, of scrutiny enough to say "Ok we don't need to freak out so much" when most of our terrorism is coming from the way we treat muslims, causing a flare up of home grown terrorists.

I don't know if you looked at the statistics but something like 60% of Muslims voted for George Bush, and then afterwards it was 20% who voted for George Bush, and the number 1 reason all the studies come to is that the Republican party just treats Muslims like they are all terrorists, treat them like crap, with suspicion, and yell in their faces.

I mean we even have non Muslims, getting confused for Muslims, because the hate is so blindingly artificial, that they can't tell 1 non christian religion from another.

I would agree that the hubbub has been largely inaccurate and manufactured. I would completely disagree with the generalization that Republicans treat Muslims the way you describe. Those things happen but only because individuals choose to act inappropriately.

 

[MakaiOokami]

I would agree that the hubbub has been largely inaccurate and manufactured. I would completely disagree with the generalization that Republicans treat Muslims the way you describe. Those things happen but only because individuals choose to act inappropriately.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ad33...-new-hampshire-gop-voters-feel-betrayed-party

New Hampshire exit polls from the Associated Press.

"Two-thirds of GOP voters say they support a temporary ban on non-citizen Muslims entering the United States."

"About three-quarters of GOP voters say they're very worried about the economy, while 6 in 10 say they're very worried about terrorism."

Then there's the whole Trump thing and his support. I mean when you get more popular for saying that you're going to register and "manage" all the Muslims in the country going to Mosques and places where they are, and then Jewish groups come out and defend Muslims, and his support only further goes up...

I would be interested in why you think the perception of the GOP being anti-islamic is somehow over represented or as you put it, manufactured.

Should I show you the studies where Muslims themselves say that they voted for John Kerry after having voted for Bush, because of the change in Republicans towards Islam? I mean what kind of evidence would pique your interest?

Also keep in mind that 23% of the country identifies as Republican. 33% as Democrat, everyone else is independent, so the amount of conservatives in the country is not the same thing as the amount of Republicans and the Republican Party is still in a downward trajectory.

If you identify as a Republican, maybe the problem is that the party has moved on without you.

 

[PlatformPlight]

The advent of ISIS and its impact on our perception of Islam as a whole is undeniably related to the manner the U.S. handled the Japanese in World War II. I can agree with the necessity of thorough screening processes and making sure we have done everything within the bounds of a person's "natural liberties" to secure the safety and well-being of the domestic front. This issue is one of ideology, similar to that of Naziism and certain strains of Communism, in which, America has a fundamental moral opposition to the perpetuation and advocacy of such endeavors.

The outright ceasing of immigrants is similar to anti-Semitism in the 1930s and 1940s in America, in the sense that we would make blanket generalizations over a very superficial and fallacious line of reasoning.

However, the solution of suspending immigration is one of many that are viable, but the war is an ideological one. The risk is not exclusive to Arabic nationalities, there are Western citizens who are being influenced and indoctrinated through the medium of internet propaganda and other forms of communication. There is a statistic and that is enough to demonstrate the complexity of this issue.

Trump oversimplifies the issue with his unrefined, high-energy, opposition to Mexican illegal immigration and Syrian refugees. The GOP leaders often show a tendency to oversimplify the issue as well...particularly this election year.

Unfortunately, I am still contemplating a solution which doesn't violate the Constitutional tenants of America and the base fundamentals of natural rights.

War may be on the horizon, and perhaps a decisive victory would remedy the issue...something the U.S. has, arguably, not achieved in many decades.

 

[Stephen Bitto]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ad33...-new-hampshire-gop-voters-feel-betrayed-party

New Hampshire exit polls from the Associated Press.

"Two-thirds of GOP voters say they support a temporary ban on non-citizen Muslims entering the United States."

"About three-quarters of GOP voters say they're very worried about the economy, while 6 in 10 say they're very worried about terrorism."

GOP voters being more for counter-terrorism doesn't equate the kind of racism you were implying in your original post. Additionally, what were the numbers for Democratic voters? I know they weren't 0%.

The point about the issue being manufactured was that Republican candidates overstate the dire situation of refugee immigration making voters feel as though more drastic measures need to be taken. This is why numbers like these spike around election time.

Clearly have very strong opinions on this issue. I don't plan on changing your mind. I will leave the discussion on this post.

 

[MakaiOokami]

GOP voters being more for counter-terrorism doesn't equate the kind of racism you were implying in your original post. Additionally, what were the numbers for Democratic voters? I know they weren't 0%.

The point about the issue being manufactured was that Republican candidates overstate the dire situation of refugee immigration making voters feel as though more drastic measures need to be taken. This is why numbers like these spike around election time.

Clearly have very strong opinions on this issue. I don't plan on changing your mind. I will leave the discussion on this post.

Here's some 2014 polling.

Dem/Rep/Ind

Unfavorable ratings below. So + or - is how much more or less Republicans have unfavorable views towards a group compared with Dems.

Roman Catholics 20/21/21 +1
Presbyterians 14/13/14 -1
Born Again Christians 26/17/26 -9
Jews 10/13/14 +3
Arabs 30/54/34 +24
Hindus 18/35/17 +17
Chinese 19/36/21 +17
Buddhists 14/30/13 +16
Muslims 33/63/39 +30

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/aai/pages/9785/attachments/original/1431961128/American%20Attitudes%20Toward%20Arabs%20and%20Muslims%202014.pdf?1431961128

All the polling trends like this, and polls that ask about where they get most of their news sources, people that ONLY watch Fox News, want to deport all immigrants, around 60%. Where as conservatives who watch CNN or MSNBC are much more moderate.

These are consistent trends. Not just my "strong opinion" but trends that stay in place no matter what year it is, who is running. Studies and polls from Muslim groups all point to how Muslims were treated after 9/11 to explain why Bush went from 80% votes in the Muslim community, to around 20% in just 4 years. Not his policies, not his rhetoric, but because of anti-islam treatment from primarily right wingers, since 9/11. Including Hindus getting caught up in all of it.

 

[MakaiOokami]

The advent of ISIS and its impact on our perception of Islam as a whole is undeniably related to the manner the U.S. handled the Japanese in World War II. I can agree with the necessity of thorough screening processes and making sure we have done everything within the bounds of a person's "natural liberties" to secure the safety and well-being of the domestic front. This issue is one of ideology, similar to that of Naziism and certain strains of Communism, in which, America has a fundamental moral opposition to the perpetuation and advocacy of such endeavors.

The outright ceasing of immigrants is similar to anti-Semitism in the 1930s and 1940s in America, in the sense that we would make blanket generalizations over a very superficial and fallacious line of reasoning.

However, the solution of suspending immigration is one of many that are viable, but the war is an ideological one. The risk is not exclusive to Arabic nationalities, there are Western citizens who are being influenced and indoctrinated through the medium of internet propaganda and other forms of communication. There is a statistic and that is enough to demonstrate the complexity of this issue.

Trump oversimplifies the issue with his unrefined, high-energy, opposition to Mexican illegal immigration and Syrian refugees. The GOP leaders often show a tendency to oversimplify the issue as well...particularly this election year.

Unfortunately, I am still contemplating a solution which doesn't violate the Constitutional tenants of America and the base fundamentals of natural rights.

War may be on the horizon, and perhaps a decisive victory would remedy the issue...something the U.S. has, arguably, not achieved in many decades.

See the real issue to me, has so little to do with the propaganda that they are doing over there.

When you have bearded man with a holy bible on Fox News saying how we need to convert or kill the other bearded men with a Quran...

How hard is it to create propaganda videos against the U.S. when people are already cowering when ever a drone goes by, no one is seeing any of the aid we promised decades ago, and on the major news networks you have the most despicable people talking about how Islam is this, Islam is that...

All Abrahamic Religions are dangerous bullshit. The difference is that we ignore groups like Lord's Resistance Army, we marginalize the Ku Klux Klan and pretend they don't exist anymore but they're still active and just as bad as Islamic groups, who has even heard about the National Liberation Front of Tripura as the Baptist Church sells them guns and they threaten to kill people celebrating Hindu Festival of Durga Puja with death and raping citizens.

Those aren't even the worst ones. The real issue isn't the propaganda that ISIS is creating. I think that our major news networks are making propaganda to scare Americans into buying guns or gold, and that ISIS just has to slightly tweak their context of the same exact message. ISIS isn't fabricating a war against Christianity/Jews, versus Islam. All they have to do is highlight it.

That's why we're seeing major attacks perpetuated partly by citizens. That's why San Bernadino happened there, and not somewhere else where it might have been stopped. My understanding is that had a racist piece of shit working at that facility kept his anti-islam rhetoric to himself, they wouldn't have left the party, changed their plans, and came back with guns. At least they were angry enough to leave the pipe bombs at home. Maybe we could have caught them if they were taking things slower.

 

[MakaiOokami]

Here's my solution to the problem.

Stop giving them reasons to hate us, stop attacking Islam verbally, start helping the communities, get rid of the for profit military contractors, get rid of the tanks that the pentagon isn't asking for, get rid of the planes from bygone eras that have no use now a days that the pentagon doesn't want, stop bombing based on cellphone meta data with drones and hoping that the person you wanted to his was in the vehicle based on computer algorithms saying "Well we think a high value target is here"

I'm pretty sure that's why a family came here and begged the Senate to stop after we blew up their grandma. We created Al Qaeda and in effect ISIS when we gave them weapons to fight against the "godless communists" and helped to further radicalize the Wahhabi Islam Sunni sects.

That term "Chickens have come home to roost" that was pre-9/11 talking about how we helped Osama Bin Laden rise and now he's going after our "false" religion.

So my method of fixing this stuff, is to give Muslims around the world reasons to NOT hate the U.S. and reasons to fight against these extremists, and then maybe us rising up and stopping all the Christian extremist groups committing terrorist acts at the same scale ISIS is doing.

THAT is my solution against the terrorists. You spend trillions making the world a better place, not a bigger crater. Maybe I'm wrong but how the fuck will we even know if spending 5 trillion helping these countries would have been better than spending 10 trillion destabilizing them.

I wouldn't be surprised if ending the war on drugs would pay for all of it too. We just spend so much money destroying people's lives for no tangible forseeable benefit, then we piss people off, and then we wonder why shit never gets better. Well what the fuck have we done to make it better?

 

[MakaiOokami]

TLR

This fear bullshit has to stop. We need to talk about solutions to individual problems, not banning all Muslims. We have 18 months of background checks? What's wrong with that. What do we need to do more of that we aren't already doing.

You are worried they might not integrate well? Worried about raping and Sharia Law? Well let's first start getting rid of Christian and Jewish arbitration (same exact thing as Sharia Law) so that the law is fair and Constitutional no hypocrisy.

What is the issue, that you have, we address that, that's how we fix the problems. Not sitting there screaming hyperbole at each other.

 

[PlatformPlight]

Christian extremist groups committing terrorist acts at the same scale ISIS is doing.

You need to prove this. As a Christian myself, I would certainly like to know who these Christian extremist groups are and what "terrorist acts" they are committing. Also, if the Islamic community doesn't have enough reason to fight ISIS by now, then regardless of what the US does, they will continue to support them through inaction. It is the classic cliche, "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem."

You espouse the same cookie-cutter argument that many do...America created Al-Qaeda and in turn ISIS...this has a sliver of truth to it and is a gross generalization. While America has made its mistakes and continues to make its mistakes, they are still on far superior moral ground than ISIS or the likes of any Al Qaeda splinter group. Apples to oranges mate.

The "law" that you speak of needing to be "fair and Constitutional" has its very heart entrenched in the moral codes of both Judaism and the Christian ethic. The so-called arbitration you critique, is necessary in any codified system of law. Sharia Law is incompatible with the US, not because it is non-Christian or non-Jewish, but because it is paradoxical with our notions of liberty and natural rights...even human rights as outlined in the UNs UDHR of 1948.

I am not necessarily defending our actions in the Middle East and I recognize and acknowledge the presence of political and economic corruption on this issue. However, the true battle lines ought to be drawn between principled morality and blatant immorality. This is the best lens to view the ISIS conflict. This group, despite their grounds, is killing, raping and plotting to further this agenda. I don't care how corrupt our motives are here in America, this group has to be snuffed out - I have Muslim friends, good friends, and I would never advocate the restriction of liberty on behalf of their beliefs, because that is some Marshal Law shit i.e. Abraham Lincoln.

I absolutely love your final statement:
"What is the issue, that you have, we address that, that's how we fix the problems. Not sitting there screaming hyperbole at each other."

You, my friend, are 100% correct on this and I agree that political sound bits and ridiculous pandering to irrational, unreasonable, hyper-conservative constituents is not helping in any sense.

I really appreciate the atmosphere of this thread. Thanks for keeping it civil everyone!

 

[MakaiOokami]

My wife had a nasty fall a couple of weeks ago. She has a compound fracture in her T12, I've been doing a lot of taking care of her, not much on forums.

So the question really is, what would you accept as a valid news source on Christian Terrorism?

http://aattp.org/here-are-8-christian-terrorist-organizations-that-equal-isis/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/babak...sources-of-christian-terrorism_b_9066868.html

I can find a lot of these. They aren't hard to find. I can find you passages that say to kill, one that tell you to kill heathens, ones that tell you all sorts of things that any person can take out of context and build a terrorist cult out of.

To me, as an atheist I see very little difference between "Christianity is a religion of love and faith it says to turn the other cheek when you get slapped, and then if they steal your coat to give them your shirt too" and "Islam is a religion of peace, after all Muhammed said that killing 1 innocent person is like killing all innocence in the world"

You can find and focus on the peaceful stuff for sure. Both groups do it.

 

[MakaiOokami]

Now on the arbitration thing. I'll make this short and sweet.

If Scientologists can do religious arbitration and ruin people's lives, what argument would you have that Islam can not do the same kind of arbitration?

Quote from a judge.

“As compelling as Plaintiffs’ argument might otherwise be, the First Amendment prohibits consideration of this contention, since it necessarily would require an analysis and interpretation of Scientology doctrine. That would constitute a prohibited intrusion into religious doctrine, discipline, faith, and ecclesiastical rule, custom, or law by the court.”

http://tonyortega.org/2015/03/13/ga...-judge-grants-scientology-arbitration-motion/

How can you defend Christian, Jewish, Scientology, arbitration but then say that Islamic Arbitration (like Sharia Law) is not allowable?

I don't understand that argument. This sounds like special pleading. What would stop Devil Worshipers from doing arbitration?