Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Transcendent MTG

Article on Muslim Ban

24 posts in this topic

It is custom in our forums to post a synopsis and or a discussion starter/observation/opinion and not just a link.

This is typical liberal over reaction.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama had similar bans for 6 months during his presidency.  While I don't agree with the ban completely, it's being characterized as a Muslim ban when it's a ban of people from certain countries.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The core issue is that you cannot gauge a persons intent from any known measure. So when they create a net, they (Who are they?) need to get as close an approximation as possible, and country of origin is about as close as we can get... which is not very close. The net that's cast traps all sorts of folk who are effectively innocent. It's that which generates all the interest. 

If the net was 100% effective we'd all be much happier.

Edited by Pasanda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To continue your net metaphore, Pasanda, it is naive at best to think there is no by-catch while whatever fish is caught that is in a McDonald's filet-o-fish sandwhich (is it even fish?) ... or that tuna was the only fish caught prior to being put in a can and sold on store shelves.

Nets are indiscriminate. Blanket orders are too. And stereotypes never indicate or define individual character.

YMMV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They totally fumbled the execution on this ban.  If he had come out and talked about it and explain what would happen, then inform the authorities how to handle people in different situations it would have been a big difference.  There would still be outrage, but it wouldn't have been as much.

MTGZuby likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama bombs Muslims with indiscriminate drone strikes? *crickets*

 

This bill is ham-handed and the antithesis of American values. It also ignores countries were ACTUAL Terrorists have come from (Saudi Arabia).

I can understand European countries wanting to limit Muslim immigration, since it's a whole different ballgame over there. The US? They, like Canada, already have stricter standards. 

Lasraik likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Elovia said:

To continue your net metaphore, Pasanda, it is naive at best to think there is no by-catch while whatever fish is caught that is in a McDonald's filet-o-fish sandwhich (is it even fish?) ... or that tuna was the only fish caught prior to being put in a can and sold on store shelves.

Nets are indiscriminate. Blanket orders are too. And stereotypes never indicate or define individual character.

YMMV

I understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JesGolbez said:

Obama bombs Muslims with indiscriminate drone strikes? *crickets*

 

This bill is ham-handed and the antithesis of American values. It also ignores countries were ACTUAL Terrorists have come from (Saudi Arabia).

I can understand European countries wanting to limit Muslim immigration, since it's a whole different ballgame over there. The US? They, like Canada, already have stricter standards. 

The drone strikes were war crimes, but for some reason Obama got a pass on a lot of bad things his administration did.

Saudi Arabia should absolutely be on this list.  Have to wonder if someones business ties had to do with them not being on the list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lasraik said:

The drone strikes were war crimes, but for some reason Obama got a pass on a lot of bad things his administration did.

Saudi Arabia should absolutely be on this list. Have to wonder if someones business ties had to do with them not being on the list.

Trump is an easy target. Obama is 'nice', so things slide off of his back. Hillary would be just as hawkish, if not more so. 

As much as I loathe trump, I loathe hypocrisy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It important to know that Trump did not create or write this law, his order only enforces the law Obama already wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lasraik said:

The drone strikes were war crimes, but for some reason Obama got a pass on a lot of bad things his administration did.

Saudi Arabia should absolutely be on this list.  Have to wonder if someones business ties had to do with them not being on the list.

I agree with Saudi Arabia.  Throw in Egypt, Pakistan, Libya and a few others.

Not sure why its those 7,  I'm thinking those are the worst of the worst.  Not sure why Libya isn't on there, its just as big of a shithole as the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Jag said:

It important to know that Trump did not create or write this law, his order only enforces the law Obama already wrote.

Yeah have to agree with @Wolphard on this one.  This isn't true.  Obama limited entry for Iraqi refugees for 6 months in 2011 and named the countries on Trumps list as countries that don't fully cooperate with who goes in and out of the country with our law enforcement agencies but he didn't write this law specifically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The law Obama (Obama administration) FINISHED writing.  It is certainly not a Muslim ban, it is forcing those 7 countries to stick to the rules we already had, but were not being enforced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jag said:

The law Obama (Obama administration) FINISHED writing.  It is certainly not a Muslim ban, it is forcing those 7 countries to stick to the rules we already had, but were not being enforced.

No, it's not a Muslim ban.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take away the fear mongering, and the tense soundtrack.  What do you guys think about what the growth rates say?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jag said:

Take away the fear mongering, and the tense soundtrack.  What do you guys think about what the growth rates say?

Its a simple math problem that is repeating itself throughout Western countries.  Europe, Japan and North America.

Usually within a single generation, immigrants often assimilate into the existing culture.  I have seen this first hand numerous times.  Growing up, I had friends whose parents were from the Philippians and others from India.  Yet their kids were as American as apple pie.  Same thing with my kids friends and their parents that were from Cambodia/China/Chile.

The kicker is, will that continue to happen?  I know total assimilation doesn't happen.  Many times, integrating subcultures will blend with main culture to produce a unique one (see pizza, Taco Bell, Christmas, etc, etc).  But what if the new dominate populations want to change the existing nation and begin to vote as a block?  For instance, I have seen articles where there is a sizable percentage that want to see Sharia law in Britain.  And in fact, there are some that exist to dispense justice outside of the current court system.

The US is on track for a Hispanic majority within our lifetimes.  Europe is on track for a Muslim majority within our lifetimes.  Our cultures have changed in the past generation.  We were predominately Christian, now things are more secular, but what if that changes away from secularism (Hispanics are generally more religious as are Muslims)?

I'm not saying these changes are good, bad, or anything.  Just posing the questions

 

Edited by Dunnar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fear comes from the idea that is Hispanics become the majority the we become Mexico, cartels and all.  If the majority becomes middle eastern, now we have a dominate religious component, and there is a much greater potential for war because of it.  it is not the middle eastern people that bother me, it is religious fanaticism.  Yes there are religious fanatics in every religion, but this one still actively fights wars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jag said:

Take away the fear mongering, and the tense soundtrack.  What do you guys think about what the growth rates say?

 

Just to give you some background information, the group behind that video, Britain First, are a neo-nazi rascist organisation that deliberately spreads lies and misinformation, and have been known to do so for decades so isn't a recent fake news claim.  They utilise dead servicemen to push their agenda against the wishes of their families (will try and get shares and likes by putting up the pictures of dead servicemen).  I would not trust anything they have to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That explains the tone of the video, but the stats are not wrong, the quotes are real.  Here is another video that speaks about the same thing, from an economic standpoint.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My fact check took me to the natural change rate.  So yeah ok, some of the stats were wrong. haha

I feel like a real tool for posting that up.  So sad.

Edited by Jag
Dunnar likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jag said:

My fact check took me to the natural change rate.  So yeah ok, some of the stats were wrong. haha

I feel like a real tool for posting that up.  So sad.

I wasn't taking what you posted as absolute facts.  I took it as a general trend, meaning that the diversity of the populations across the Western world are changing due to various factors.  I've seen where that is happening and one of the drivers behind immigration policies.  That immigrants take jobs that citizens would otherwise not take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like this guy.  He does a great job in this article explaining that Trump needs better PR to explain what he is doing, and curb the misinformed outrage.

http://victorhanson.com/wordpress/make-haste-deliberately/#more-9834

"

Take Trump’s immigration stay. In large part, it was an extension of prior temporary policies enacted by both Presidents Bush and Obama. It was also a proper correction of Trump’s own unwise and ill-fated campaign pledge to temporarily ban Muslims rather than take a pause to vet all immigrants from war-torn nations in the Middle East.
 
Who would oppose such a temporary halt? Obviously Democrats, on the principle that the issue might gain political traction so that they could tar Trump as an uncouth racist and xenophobe, and in general as reckless, incompetent, and confused.

Obviously, the Left in general sees almost any restriction on immigration as antithetical to its larger project of a borderless society run by elites such as themselves. Obviously Republican establishmentarians fear any media meme suggesting that they are complicit in an illiberal enterprise.

Perhaps the Trump plan was, first, to ensure that radical Islamist terrorists and their sympathizers do not enter the U.S., as they so often enter Europe; second, to send a message to the international community that entry into the country is a privilege not an entitlement; and, third, symbolically to reassert the powers of assimilation, integration, and intermarriage as we slow and refine legal immigration. (The U.S. currently has about 40 million foreign-born residents, or a near record 14 percent of the population; one in four Californians was not born in the United States.)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0