patrick.net

MMR says

I also own such a t-shirt

That's because you are a real American! (wink)

MMR says

No refugees and limit immigration to professionals.

We already have strict quotas on unskilled labor entering the US. Respectfully, extreme vetting has no substance behind it. It's a talking point. There is no additional definition provided. IT insinuates that we are NOT doing enough vetting, which is crap. The amount of vetting to get into the US is already very extreme.

Bullet points version of current refugee vetting. Published in 2015.

As to "no refugees" ... are you really saying anyone who is of refugee status the US will not take? No exceptions? I'd hate to think what would happen if one of our closest Western allies had a crisis and needed shelter for some of its population. Extreme policy indeed.

thunderlips11 says

The core problem is we importing a group of people with an incredibly different value system, but dealing with them as if they are insiders who agree to the core system of values.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing

When my family first immigrated, there was another political party that felt just as you did. Since then though, my family did immigrate, and now they've put my last name on a class of US warship, for an actual blood relation, not to mention all the actual ways my family has contributed to the US. You could not pick me out of a lineup as an immigrant but the nation drinks itself silly in my honor each year St. Patrick's day.

You really saying you would keep me out in 1850? You're only option here is to argue how Latinos or Muslims are just 'too different' in some manner. I encourage you to read about the Know Nothing party, and their arguments, and see if you find any still hold water against Catholics, Germans, or Irish today. If you take a racial angle as your argument and I want you to know that the US writes laws to protect its citizens from people like you. It would be very much you who were outside the native tribe there, not them, if that would be your belief.

Any argument that states the US experiences a net weakening, as opposed to strengthening, at the current levels of legal and illegal immigration we have today I find to be utter nativist nonsense. Yes, the economy isn't working for middle and lower class. Yes, money is ruling politics and not representative of the people. That isn't because 1% of our population is Muslim and we have mosques. That isn't because 17% are latino.

Trump is a bad and incorrect answer to a real problem. He has sold you a false answer: one that easily stirs the blood and manipulates.

I think your ideology would keep people like this from seeking America and the American dream. I think that is the death of the nation. (Many more good ones here, than bad.)

To the mask laws: http://www.anapsid.org/cnd/mcs/maskcodes.html
There is no widespread ban, and never will be, unless the US is overrun by criminals hiding their identity. Odds are extremely low. Party on mask wearers.

This isn't happening either.

Dallas-Fort Worth is considered a desirable area for Muslim Americans to go to. Yes. That's right. Texas and Muslim friendly together in the same sentence. The anti-immigration movement is fighting something they cannot possibly win. You have maybe some hopes like the Anti-Chinese immigration legislation the US has passed long ago, but that is overturned relatively quickly. A battle or two is all you can hope to win. This new culture war was won before it began.

Rew says

If you are talking about banning masks and all face coverings, in public, in the US, good luck!

Are you trying to ruin Halloween? Think of the children, man! What's going to happen to our shopping mall Santas...? Are we going to make the real Santa shave his face? (In case any kids are looking over your shoulder.) Seriously though... What's our position on facial hair? It does obscure one's face... Could be mask-like....

I don't get the pro-ban position on what amounts to a clothing choice. The idea of clothing police is supposed to be a joke. As an actual conservative, I find the very idea that we'd divert resources to a Department of Clothing Conformity... Remember... smaller government... Using tax payer dollars to employ clothing inspectors and all the bureaucracy that would have to go with that, seems a little wasteful to me. And where does it stop? What about ugly-ass clothes like plaid golf pants, white patent leather shoes, and culottes?

Vet... Deny at the slightest concern of anything. Even suspending the refugee program... I'm good with that. I don't feel a personal obligation to bring them all here and show them the "right way to live." They strike me as more trouble than anything else. I don't think that the plan of insidious, subtle change as we infect their culture with our western ways over the next 100 years is the best plan to solving our current terrorism problem. They need to rise up against their own crazies and deal with them. They hate us more when we get involved. The largest number of victims in ALL this are the Muslim people themselves. They need a revolution and that will never happen when the west takes in the only intelligencia left in the region... all the while increasing our personal risk of terrorists using the system to break through and spread more terror to the west.

HOWEVER, I just don't care what anyone wears. If it makes a person feel better to wear a burka then wear one. Don't come here and force me to wear one.... and we're all good. What they do in their own country is what they do in their own country. It's up to them to change that... And since I don't have to go there, we're good on that one, too.

And yes, this is all about me.

Rew says

There is no additional definition provided. IT insinuates that we are NOT doing enough vetting, which is crap. The amount of vetting to get into the US is already very extreme.

How do you tell if somebody isn't a Muslim Extremist? Did the San Ber Shooter's Wife fill out a form where she pledged she wasn't a violent Muslim Extremist?

Within hours of the shooting, authorities had identified that she went to one of the most radical Mosques in Pakistan. Why didn't Homeland do this prior to her arrival as an immigrant?

Rew says

You really saying you would keep me out in 1850? You're only option here is to argue how Latinos or Muslims are just 'too different' in some manner. I encourage you to read about the Know Nothing party, and their arguments, and see if you find any still hold water against Catholics, Germans, or Irish today. If you take a racial angle as your argument and I want you to know that the US writes laws to protect its citizens from people like you. It would be very much you who were outside the native tribe there, not them, if that would be your belief.

I encourage you to read about the Vikings in Normandy and Northern England/Ireland/Scotland. Or about the American Indians. Or Ottoman and Tartar Muslim imperialism on the Steppes and in the Balkans. Or the Moghul conquest of India. Or, for that matter Northern Ireland. Did the Scots-Irish Protestants and Irish Catholics sing kumbaya? No, they still have serious issues there centuries after the mass immigration by Scots-Irish, and they're far, far closer than MENA Muslims are to Secular Modern Westerners in the value department.

For every example of a mass immigration wave that ended well, there are plenty that didn't. And while one side may not have been extirpated or totally converted, that was actually worse in the long run because the violence comes in fits and starts, usually in bad economic times.

A large reason why Europe has been peaceful is the forced ethnic cleansing that went on after WW2 by the Allies and Soviets. All the Polish minorities in Belorussia and Ukraine and Northwestern Poland were booted ito Poland, all the Germans in Holland and Czechoslovakia and Danzig/East Prussia removed into East and West Germany.

The participants at the Potsdam Conference asserted that expulsions were the only way to prevent ethnic violence. As Winston Churchill expounded in the House of Commons in 1944, "Expulsion is the method which, insofar as we have been able to see, will be the most satisfactory and lasting. There will be no mixture of populations to cause endless trouble... A clean sweep will be made. I am not alarmed by the prospect of disentanglement of populations, not even of these large transferences, which are more possible in modern conditions than they have ever been before".[48]

The one exception to this was Yugoslavia, but as soon as the wall collapsed... Rat-ta-tat-tat like this and like that, Orthodox, Catholic, Muslim violent spat.

Yet elsewhere in Europe the result has been a total end to intra-state wars in 60 years. And no, it's not the democratic peace dividend: The Germans had universal male suffrage in the 19th Century; the UK not until after World War I. Was the UK prior to 1920 an authoritarian state or a constitutional monarchy, like Germany was (but became a tyrannical absolute monarchy after 1913, for war propaganda purposes)

Liberal Western Values were made with shared broad cultural values in mind. The idea of freedom of religion resulting in Polygamy was a non-issue, since almost everybody in Western Countries practiced Monogamy by custom, and only a few minor heretical sects ever tried to pursue it.

Also: What ethnicity was involved in some of the worst racial rioting in American Cities?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_draft_riots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_race_riot_of_1919

And the reason? Economic Competition and, to a lesser extent, draft unfairness.

It's as if we have Black-White relations totally set straight, so we're ready to take on new challenges.

Rew says

Dallas-Fort Worth is considered a desirable area for Muslim Americans to go to. Yes. That's right. Texa

Of course it is, Dallas is a democratic city through and through, as is Houston, Austin and San Antonio. It's the areas surrounding that vote overwhelmingly republican, making Texas a red state. Thought you would know that Dallas, Houston, Austin and SA are not representative of Texas as a whole

thunderlips11 says

I encourage you to read about the Vikings in Normandy and Northern England/Ireland/Scotland. Or about the American Indians. Or Ottoman and Tartar Muslim imperialism on the Steppes and in the Balkans. Or the Moghul conquest of India. Or, for that matter Northern Ireland. Did the Scots-Irish Protestants and Irish Catholics sing kumbaya? No, they still have serious issues there centuries after the mass immigration by Scots-Irish, and they're far, far closer than MENA Muslims are to Secular Modern Westerners in the value department.

He'll read that when hell freezes over because it would shoot holes in his theories and mess up his narrative, which is MSM driven.

Rew says

are you really saying anyone who is of refugee status

No just muslims....other refugees don't seem to have as much of a problem with assimilation. Case in point Europe. Europe open borders policy is mostly a mistake.

Rew says

We already have strict quotas on unskilled labor entering the US

limit the refugees to that quota then. Rest get shipped to wealthy arab countries who aren't doing their fair share.

Obviously, it is antithetical to the mission of spreading Islam, which you seem to have difficulty grasping.

Rew says

The amount of vetting to get into the US is already very extreme.

Correct. For those coming LEGALLY, such as those 'criminal h1-B's' from India.

Muslims can just sneak through Mexico, haven't you heard?

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2016/apr/04/ron-desantis/terrorists-groups-besides-isis-crossing-us-mexico-/

MMR says

No just muslims....other refugees don't seem to have as much of a problem with assimilation. Case in point Europe. Europe open borders policy is mostly a mistake.

Police said on Thursday that two teenagers they have arrested in connection with a bomb attack on a Sikh temple in the western German city of Essen are linked to the Islamic fundamentalist scene there.

Officers received large numbers of tip-offs during their investigation that allowed them to identify the two 16-year-olds believed to behind the attack, the Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung (WAZ) reported.

"The accused have clear links to the terrorist scene," Essen police chief Frank Richter told journalists at a press conference, saying that both teenagers had made partial confessions.

Richter added that there was no evidence so far of a link to the Isis terrorist group, but said police expect to make further arrests in the coming days.

ARD public television reported that the two youths arrested were well-known to the police for their links to the Salafist scene in the densely populated Rhine-Ruhr region of North Rhine-Westphalia, something Richter refused to confirm at the press conference.

Three hurt in bomb explosion

The bomb exploded at a temple belonging to the Sikh Gurdwara Nanaksar congregation on Saturday at around 7 pm, wounding three people – one of them, a Sikh priest, seriously.

Hundreds of worshippers regularly visit the temple at weekends to pray and meet other members of the community, and a wedding with dozens of guests had taken place earlier that same day.

One of the kids was already in "extremism" education courses.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/world/is-linked-teenagers-accept-hand-in-german-gurdwara-bombing-report/story-36fvk7sU5VijiPEya8ggQK.html
One was a repeat offender; and was known to the police to have threatened other kids with murder and tried to obtain firearms.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/world/german-cops-say-nanaksar-satsangh-sabha-gurdwara-terror-suspect-a-repeated-offender/story-PmRyPUBlVmKodtQmxGJixN.html

B-b-but, isn't education the panacea? If somebody would only reach out to these lost children! It's really funny when they try to apply "The Outsider" 1950s A/V era outcast kid narratives to these kids from big extended Muslim Families, as if they were just neglected and left to their own devices. . This isn't stealing a guinea big from the school science lab out of boredom, but accidentally burning the school down when goofing around with the bunsen burner.

"Where did you get this bomb from, son?"
"I learned Salafi extremism, by watching you dad, ALRIGHT!?!"

Chinese resident of a town on the outskirts of Paris are demanding protection from what they believe are racist attacks, following the death of a man killed by muggers.

Members of the Chinese community in Aubervilliers, north-east of Paris, held a memorial Sunday for Zhang Chaolin, a 49-year-old textile designer who died on Friday after five days in a coma.

At least 500 people gathered outside the council offices to pay tribute to Zhang and protest at a recent wave of violence they say is being directed at them.

Originally from Wenzhou city, Zhejiang province, the father of two had been attacked by three men while walking with a friend, according to police.

Zhang was reportedly attacked by three young people who kicked him in the sternum, causing him to fall and strike his head on the pavement. He lost consciousness and his bag was stolen.

Another Chinese man, whose surname is Zheng, was also injured.

Aubervilliers mayor Meriem Derkaoui, condemned the killing as a murder "with a racist targeting".

Anybody know who makes up a huge portion of Aubervilliers population? Hint: Not Jean-Claude de Plisson avec Fromage

The mayor is a Communist, to boot.

MMR says

Obviously, it is antithetical to the mission of spreading Islam, which you seem to have difficulty grasping.

Exactly. The Saudis didn't offer much for the Refugees other than they'd foot the bill to build and staff mosques with Wahabi-Salafi Radical Clerics.

They only allow a few Syrians to migrate as guest worker-slaves. Reason?

But amid a history of competition between the Gulf states and Iranian-allied nations, there is a deep fear that allowing an influx of Syrian refugees could also let in Syrians loyal to Bashar al-Assad.

There also exists a more general concern about demographic change, leaving the states opposed to the idea of welcoming refugees. In the UAE, foreign nationals already outnumber citizens by more than five to one.

Indiana Jones says

Air France stewardesses were last week told to wear headscarves upon arrival in Tehran when the airline resumes services there later this month. The order sparked outrage among female cabin crew members, some of whom say they will refuse to fly to the Iranian capital.

Thank you. Why should we respect their dress code in their country, when they dont respect our dress code in our country?

thunderlips11 says

Exactly. The Saudis didn't offer much for the Refugees other than they'd foot the bill to build and staff mosques with Wahabi-Salafi Radical Clerics.

They only allow a few Syrians to migrate as guest worker-slaves. Reason?

The Saudis dont care for human lives, Muslim or infidels. They only care about spreading their fucking religion.

thunderlips11 says

The Gulf States don't want to be swamped under a wave of Vile Heretics, and have no way to vet them.

Err, the locals are already vastly outnumbered by foreigners and a great many of them are not Sunni - Shias, Christians, Hindhus, Sikhs, Buddhists..., so...

Rashomon says

Err, the locals are already vastly outnumbered by foreigners and a great many of them are not Sunni - Shias, Christians, Hindhus, Sikhs, Buddhists..., so...

That could be the reason why the Gulf States are the most liberal and civilized, as compared to other Islamic states.

Allah the devil says

That could be the reason why the Gulf States are the most liberal and civilized, as compared to other Islamic states.

I think you need to think that through again. Gulf States are not particularly liberal for starters. What about countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey, Morocco, Tangiers, Jordan, Maldives....?

Rashomon says

Allah the devil says

That could be the reason why the Gulf States are the most liberal and civilized, as compared to other Islamic states.

I think you need to think that through again. Gulf States are not particularly liberal for starters. What about countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey, Morocco, Tangiers, Jordan, Maldives....?

I dont know enough about the other countries. I should say most liberal as compared to the rest of the Mid East.

Allah the devil says

I dont know enough about the other countries. I should say most liberal as compared to the rest of the Mid East.

Well, there aren't that many other countries, but Lebanon, Egypt and Turkey are all considered more liberal.

Rashomon says

Allah the devil says

I dont know enough about the other countries. I should say most liberal as compared to the rest of the Mid East.

Well, there aren't that many other countries, but Lebanon, Egypt and Turkey are all considered more liberal.

Egypt? I would love to visit the pyramids, but terrorism against foreigners turns me off.
I visited Dubai in January, and loved the place. I felt safe, welcomed and got to drink beer.

Allah the devil says

Egypt? I would love to visit the pyramids, but terrorism against foreigners turns me off.

I visited Dubai in January, and loved the place. I felt safe, welcomed and got to drink beer.

Egypt is definitely more liberal than the Gulf states. Dubai is actually not liberal, it just has a certain approach in order to develop tourism. Outside of that, it is conservative. Egypt has a very strong secular history. You can't say that for the Gulf states.

Oh, and the pyramids are not that interesting really, impressive but not interesting - some far better sights to see in that country.

Rashomon says

Egypt has a very strong secular history

True, when secular dictators, backed by the US were running the show. Leave it up to Egyptians in a democratic setting to vote for the muslim brotherhood.

By that definition, Iraq also has a very strong secular history, as does Libya and Syria.

Rashomon says

Dubai is actually not liberal,

correct. Dubai is not liberal, unless you are related to the royal family.

MMR says

Rashomon says

Dubai is actually not liberal,

correct. Dubai is not liberal, unless you are related to the royal family.

I would disagree with this part. How can An Islamic country not be liberal when it does not practice the shariah laws? Or am I somehow wrong?

MMR says

limit the refugees to that quota then. Rest get shipped to wealthy arab countries who aren't doing their fair share.

Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey?

I love the simple policy: "we kick em out. We ship em over to somebody else. They pay for the wall." Imagine another sovereign country driving a ship into our waters, and offloading 10,000 people on shore. I know your attitude is "f them, it's all about us." ... but these hypothetical 10,000 lives, what do you think happens? What about the relations between the two nations?

What the nations able to take refugees are doing is saving very real human lives.

You going to tell the Bosnian muslims that immigrated in the 90s to go back as well?

MMR says

Obviously, it is antithetical to the mission of spreading Islam, which you seem to have difficulty grasping.

MMR says

Muslims can just sneak through Mexico, haven't you heard?

MMR says

No just muslims....other refugees don't seem to have as much of a problem with assimilation.

Ok, so you are just anti-Muslim, period.

MMR says

He'll read that when hell freezes over because it would shoot holes in his theories and mess up his narrative, which is MSM driven.

The Mongols above are an awesome example of how effective religious tolerance is in empire building.

Immigration and invasion are not equivocal but you seem to be suggesting they are. The Normans, Vikings, and Mongols didn't immigrate. They came to conquer. The fact that MMR and Thunderlips11 spin the narrative toward this is pretty telling. If you are starting from the premise that Muslim immigrants are coming to conquer America, well, no wonder you think Trump has an answer.

"San Bernardino! Boston Marathon! This just cannot continue! They ARE out to conquer us!" The same argument the gun lobby uses about mass shootings applies: these do not account for substantive danger to our population when compared with other problems we face, including native-born-American on native-born-American crime which is of course, of a degree higher as to render the Muslim terrorist threat almost nothing.

Border and immigration enforcement, sure. A magic solution to radical terror and the economy: so wrong it's sad! Illegal immigration is way way down on the list of serious problems for the nation. Trump's nativism has grossly inflated its importance because it is an easy manipulator.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

If the US nativism backlash against Germans had won out, Trump might not even be around in America today!

As firmly as I can say it, nationalism is what the weak and scared run toward in times of war and economic hardship. It doesn't solve anything and it never lasts.

thunderlips11 says

they'd foot the bill to build and staff mosques with Wahabi-Salafi Radical Clerics.

Source?

When in France, dress like the Arabs, obviously ...

The French should have the power to make and enforce their own laws, and expel anyone who doesn't comply with them.
There is NO human right to immigrate.
Fuck a bunch of that!

thunderlips11 says

It's also because many of the refugees are the non-Sunni plurality: Christians, but also Druze, Alawites, Shi'a, and other heretics to Sunnis. The Gulf States don't want to be swamped under a wave of Vile Heretics, and have no way to vet them.

So let's show them the right way to do it and ban all Muslims for the same reason : they don't fit some people's selective vision of what a native born American today should be. That's a great plan.

This is the same issue with pointing out the dress codes in the other Middle Eastern nations as a "see they do it to us!" point. The dress codes themselves are what is against our Western personal freedom beliefs. You don't counter that by banning dress that's out of the norm for your culture when you are concerned about preserving personal freedoms.

ISIS leadership must be licking its lips.

thunderlips11 says

I learned Salafi extremism, by watching you dad, ALRIGHT!?!"

Lol that commercial....I remember seeing it several times in the 80's. I was convinced that the dad was a coke addict. But it looked like a blunt box in retrospect.

I tried time and time again to get a good look at what was in the box and couldn't decide if it was weed or coke.

Quigley says

The French should have the power to make and enforce their own laws, and expel anyone who doesn't comply with them.

There is NO human right to immigrate.

France will enforce its laws. Don't worry. This is why the have overturned the ban as illegal.

There is no human right to immigration, that's true. Many nations depend on it for growth and prosperity though.

Allah the devil says

Islamic country not be liberal when it does not practice the shariah laws?

The countries you said that didn't practice the sharia laws were secular dictatorships (Egypt).

You're the one who said Dubai wasn't liberal. Again its a monarchy, so that might explain the difference between conservative vs liberal. Although I'd say dubai is more liberal than Abu Dhabi and more liberal than places like Jordan or Saudi

Rew says

Many nations depend on it for growth and prosperity though.

which is one reason why France and other european nations miscalculated by allowing muslim immigration willy-nilly and encouraging ghettoization.

Rew says

ISIS leadership must be licking its lips.

Rew says

some people's selective vision of what a native born American

No one said 'ban all muslims' just limit refugees to pre-defined quotas, such as the ones you pointed out, limit ghettoization (like Hamtramck MI and Dearborn) and whatever is going down in Idaho.

Limit immigration above and beyond that to professionals, similar to the standards that they apply to Indian nationals.

Even then, the country is less safe. Nidal Abu Malik at Fort Hood was a physician.

Rew says

You don't counter that by banning dress that's out of the norm for your culture

Yes, you just let somalians into Minneapolis who refuse fares when they see people coming out of airport with liquor from duty-free shops

Rew says

Many nations depend on it for growth and prosperity though.

It's really really hard to see how Freeloading Muslims who occasionally blow people up and contribute nothing in the way of labor, culture, or production to society will contribute to growth and prosperity. More like the opposite; as most people in Europe are beginning to realize.

Rew says

If you are starting from the premise that Muslim immigrants are coming to conquer America, well, no wonder you think Trump has an answer.

Didn't recall EVER saying Trump had an answer. LOL. I've said in the past that he doesn't have any clear policies.

But yeah, even after hundreds of years in India, muslims are often more empathetic to pakistan even when they don't have relatives there and furthermore, no matter what part of India they are in, they are muslims first and not Indians. This is the case since the days of the Mughal empire over 600 years ago.

Yes, the premise is that everywhere muslims go, they are looking to build critical mass. The US is no different. I do think the US has structural advantages that make ghettoization harder, but not impossible, when compared to Europe. Have you ever wondered why do you think so many of them have large families? Or maybe you didn't know that because the MSM talking points you regurgitate don't mention such cultural trends and you hardly even know any muslims.

Among Palestinians, very few have only one or two children. Most have a minimum of 3 but many had 5 or more and others are as high 9-10. Just one experience from my childhood in Gallup, NM. Today, they make up 4% of the population there.

Rew says

nationalism is what the weak and scared run toward in times of war and economic hardship

I don't suffer from any economic hardship and would easily qualify as upper middle class in any market in the US.

Rew says

Muslim immigrants are coming to conquer America

What do you think the muslim premise is in Europe? Again, why can't the refugees go to Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Oman, Yemen or Saudi Arabia or a combination of all. Outside of Yemen, most have the resources to accomodate refugees.

Given that the majority of gulf states can afford to accommodate the refugees, why do they insist on going to Europe, a foreign land with a foreign culture? Couldn't possibly be the welfare

Really need to cut down on the blind acceptance of MSM

Rew says

Border and immigration enforcement, sure. A magic solution to radical terror and the economy

I didn't recall saying I had a problem with mexicans from mexico; chicanos yes, mexicans from mexico, even if here illegally, not so much. I just pointed that muslims can use the same border to sneak into the US and have done so.

Didn't you read the liberal politifact article I linked? Forgot, it didn't fit the narrative so it just registered as white noise.

Rew says

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/

I agree that it's cool thing for Trump to exploit for Low information voters in red states.

But to reiterate, no one is building a wall and republicans and democrats both, particularly middle to upper middle class voters benefit from them being in the US.

My parents have some mexican employees, presumably legal, but impossible to know definitively. Better than the local yokels, also known as Bricktuckians (Brick, NJ residents) who are often useless as workers.