PRESIDENT TRUMP

Discuss world politics in relation to Islam and Muslims.
User avatar
Fernando
Posts: 4949
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 1:27 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by Fernando »

I believe that when Germany imported gastarbeitern from Turkey after WWII, they seriously expected that they'd go home again after they'd helped rebuild the country. What the Turks expected I've no idea, but there was clearly a mismatch somewhere.
That London needs to import teachers is hardly surprising, since they've imported such a large proportion of their population in general.
Agricultural work is seasonal and has long depended on seasonal workers, many from abroad but also many students. When I was a student I was in digs with a lad from Lincolnshire who worked on the pea harvest in the summer. I've seen it claimed that such work is unavailable to students these days but I don't know if that's true. If it is, could it be the "gangmaster" system that's at fault? AFAIK it has a poor reputation.
‘Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs and literary traditions. They neither intermarry nor eat together, and indeed they belong to two different civilisations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions.’ Muhammad Ali Jinnah

User avatar
Equestrian
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:44 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by Equestrian »

manfred wrote:We still seem to be talking about completely different things.

a) I have not said I oppose Trump's immigration policy. I did say that the so-called "ban" is not seen even by Trump himself as a solution to all issues around immigration. And the point I was trying to make was not about immigration at all.

b) This part saddens me:
We as citizens of a nation have no civic duty to aid those of another. The highest duty of a nations government is to defend, preserve and maintain the interests of its own citizens, specifically culture, tradition and heritage.
So, what exactly is this culture, tradition and heritage, if it is nothing to do with caring for others? Are sharp elbows, metal toe caps, callous self-interest even to the point of allowing other to die, are those the Christian values you seem to hint at? What will we preserve by giving up the thing that makes our culture?

Allowing ourselves to be over-run is not preserving our culture, but abandoning the values it is built on does not do it either. Also "the highest duty" does not mean there are no other duties. Also, we live in a world where we are all interconnected, and actions as well as omissions have a habit of "returning to sender".
It's easy to moralize on your armchair in the comfort of your home away from communities effected by foreign immigration,

I live in central London, hardly "away from communities affected by immigration". I am not "moralizing", you really know little about me.
The fact is that at this point there can be no perfect policy or measure to resolve the immigration crises. As Douglas Murray noted, the immigration crises should have been addressed decades ago. And with that, I leave you with another sober analysis from Murray.
That part I agree with. However, we cannot change the past, so we need to start with where we are. It cannot have a perfect solution. This also means it cannot have a simple solution. It needs much more than what Trump has done. As I keep saying I do not even oppose his "ban", but I expect him to use the time this gives him to come up with something much better than that.
In your previous post you characterized Trumps immigration policy as a detriment to asylum-seekers, describing it as knee-jerk and extreme. Clearly you were expressing disapproval, if not outright opposition.

But let's not parse words. It seems to me that we're not so much talking passed each other as you are skirting the relevant point. We are at a tipping point with regards to the immigration crises and its impact on the future of Europe and western civilization at large. As Douglas Murray lamented, Europe will cease to be Europe within a generation. The ramifications will be catastrophic, yet you idly fret about "the VICTIMS of Islam" in the Muslim world.
Where is your concern for the victims of "the VICTIMS of Islam"? Surely you understand that foreign asylum-seekers from the Muslim world and abroad bring with them a culture that is wholly incompatible with western values. Do not European gang-rape victims have a place in your heart?

The time for immigration policy focused on "genuine" asylum-seekers is long past, Europeans cannot even get their governments to acknowledge the immigration crises much less address it. The fervent political, corporate and ideological opposition to Trumps "simple" immigration policy is proof of this. This opposition will only grow as more and more 3rd world immigrants flood in until any support for immigration reform will evaporate. And then the mass-scale carnage begins in the streets of Europe.

But I'm the cold and callous jackboot, right manfred?

Right now there are fledgling youth movements across Europe attempting to stifle NGO sponsored illegal immigration and they are going up against the full force of corporate interests, globalist NGOs and violent Marxist youth organizations all masquerading as humanitarians. I would be interested to know whether you regard this patriotic youth movement as sharp elbowed, metal toe cap jackboots.

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" ~Carl Sagan

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11546
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by manfred »

In your previous post you characterized Trumps immigration policy as a detriment to asylum-seekers, describing it as knee-jerk and extreme. Clearly you were expressing disapproval, if not outright opposition.
No, if you care to look, I talked about the notion that a "ban" could be a complete "solution" to the immigration issue. I conceded that a temporary ban is entirely fine, as long as it is a means to a differentiated solution, and not an end in itself.

I oppose UNCONTROLLED immigration, and I also oppose PERMANENT blanket bans based on nationality.

I also oppose the idea of a blood-guilt, of the kind you seem to support... where an entire nation is punished for the behaviour of just a few of its members. I am sure you can find a murderer or rapist of German or Irish descent in the US... so should Trump ban all Germans and Irish to come to the US too?

Suppose, for argument's sake, a woman asks for asylum because she had an affair with another man while married, and she would face execution in her home country. Such a person should be able to get protection in any country calling itself civilised. Saying she should be left to die at the hands of rock-throwing thugs is a betrayal of our own values.

You mention the increase in rape and related crimes in some European countries. This is due to UNCONTROLLED immigration, allowing people into the country who came with the purpose to cause upheaval in the first place. "All Muslims are rapists" is just plain stupid. It should be a simple rule that an immigrant who commits a crime should be made to leave. You will never be able to have a 100% guarantee that a particular immigrant will not commit a crime, but if you will not even try to get relevant information as to past behaviour and police records, then you contribute to the risk, rather than reducing it. While no government can eliminate all risk from crime by an immigrant, just as they can't manage that on locals, they have a duty to minimise that risk.

In fact Trump made it clear that he proposes a TEMPORARY ban on some countries for this very reason: background information is not available, or in the case of Iran, not given. It also means once such information is available, things will be different, and it means the ban is also an instrument to get cooperation about immigration where it is lacking.

You also mention cultural differences and varying willingness to adapt. What would be the level of integration you would expect from a new immigrant?

I lived in Russia for 4 years, long ago. I can speak the language quite well, know general customs, but I would never drink like an average Russian, and the notion of eating a litre of mayonnaise on a piece of raw herring with bits of beetroot sprinkled on top does not appeal in the slightest. I also don't see it as exciting to jump into ice cold water in 30 below zero in the middle of winter... But I joined a choir... So... was I sufficiently integrated or not? To me integration is not about giving up who you are. It about having respect for your hosts, learn about them, and try to make a contribution, and not be a bother to anyone. (I did make a small contribution, I taught in Russia...) If you like I prefer the Jewish model on integration... be a respectful guest and make yourself useful in some way, but don't altogether forget who you are.

Europeans cannot even get their governments to acknowledge the immigration crises much less address it.
Yes, this is true for many, and it is dangerous on several levels. It will enable further uncontrolled immigration and it will fuel demands for simplistic "solutions" leading in the end to violence.

However, the picture is gradually changing, and Eastern Europe is leading the way.

Now, if, as you say, European governments are slow to even see a problem, why on earth do you think they will listen to radical answers?
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

User avatar
Fernando
Posts: 4949
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 1:27 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by Fernando »

manfred wrote:Now, if, as you say, European governments are slow to even see a problem, why on earth do you think they will listen to radical answers?
Thereby lies the rub, Manfred. The very fact that [most] European governments are slow refuse to see a problem results in more and more people calling for radical answers. These might be labelled an extreme fringe at the moment but I can hear an underground grumble too. Unfortunately governments seem more likely to crack down on dissent, citing "extremism", rather than respond to people's fears.
‘Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs and literary traditions. They neither intermarry nor eat together, and indeed they belong to two different civilisations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions.’ Muhammad Ali Jinnah

idesigner1
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 4:26 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by idesigner1 »

President Trump had lots of right idea and policies to improve economy s well as to fight Islam .

However our guy lacks discipline and concentration to implement them. He has ADS and mind of juvenile who gets hurt easily and act on it.

glitch
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:18 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by glitch »

idesigner1 wrote:President Trump had lots of right idea and policies to improve economy s well as to fight Islam .

However our guy lacks discipline and concentration to implement them. He has ADS and mind of juvenile who gets hurt easily and act on it.
So quick question, is it fair how Trump is treated?

i mean i didn't like Barak Obama for reasons tht were'nt personal, i didn't attack his wife. I ddn't attack his daughters.

I didnt like him because he chastised the american people for their faith. He didn't believe america was anything special and he didn't uplift the united states.
He treated isreal with the utmost disrespect and he basically told every Arab nation, the United States was wrong for everything, thus when you look at the world, all you see is every Arab nation minimizing history and its all, all the US and Isreal's fault. All of history is US and Isreal's fault. HE basically let Iran have everything they wanted.

When Syrian Refugee Crisis started he told everyone they were wrong and ungenerous. This from a man who dictates morality on his own whim.
So, without further ado, here is what the media has done to trump.

Before his innauguration CNN discussed assasination of a president, going down how many people would have to be killed to get a democrat. Has that ever been done to any president before by the news media?

How many people have accused Trump of Incest? Would that have been appropriate with Barak Obama?

Before Trump's innauguration they have been talking about Impeachment? Before he was even innaugurated

Explain this hatred.

idesigner1
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 4:26 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by idesigner1 »

It was Trump who started politics of personal attacks against his republican opponents . It was of extreme nature and he won't let it go even after he won primaries! A mind of a 15 year school yard bully. My opinion changed once Trump won't let go defeatedTom Cruse Went on and on for a week. To me it's a mental disorder.Guy can't help it like a child who rants and rave even after he gets his share of cadies. Just he is disfunctional no matter what he achieves. Can't forget anything, can't become generous in victory!

I don't know about incest charges against Trump or Obama.In short even Obama's wife was called worst names by Trump's racist supporters. Same is true about Hillay .She was accused of killing one of Bill Clintons top adviser who shot himself. Nothing new!May be she did it!I don't care about gossips!

So far kissing circumcised black Arab asses! Trump and family went first visited Saudi Farabia and were very happy there, guy is childish and loves people who flatter him! loves all kind of dictators circumcised or not! To balance act he went to Israel. Now US is oil exporter, no need to kiss Arabs.

glitch
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:18 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by glitch »

idesigner1 wrote:It was Trump who started politics of personal attacks against his republican opponents . It was of extreme nature and he won't let it go even after he won primaries! A mind of a 15 year school yard bully. My opinion changed once Trump won't let go defeatedTom Cruse Went on and on for a week. To me it's a mental disorder.Guy can't help it like a child who rants and rave even after he gets his share of cadies. Just he is disfunctional no matter what he achieves. Can't forget anything, can't become generous in victory!

I don't know about incest charges against Trump or Obama.In short even Obama's wife was called worst names by Trump's racist supporters. Same is true about Hillay .She was accused of killing one of Bill Clintons top adviser who shot himself. Nothing new!May be she did it!I don't care about gossips!

So far kissing circumcised black Arab asses! Trump and family went first visited Saudi Farabia and were very happy there, guy is childish and loves people who flatter him! loves all kind of dictators circumcised or not! To balance act he went to Israel. Now US is oil exporter, no need to kiss Arabs.
How slick of you, thought you' slip a lie in there and i wouldnt notice?
You haveno evidence that things said about Michelle Obama were said by 'Trump" supporters. Racist people said stuff, was it broadcasted on live TV, as jokes.
I guess if you voted Trump you're racist? Dishonesty abounds in you? Doesn't it?

idesigner1
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 4:26 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by idesigner1 »

One white woman, a mayor , had very unkind thing to say about Mrs. Obama. Later she apologized. Her exact words were its was shame when black woman was in White House, now it's great Mrs. Trump will be First Lady.

Even on this forum Obama was accused of killing his white grandma in Hawaii lest she spill beans about Obama's real birth place. Find out in old forum of year 2008 . Trump himself admitted that Obama was born in Hawaii after lots of badgering and perhaps under duress or for practical reasons.

Foster's suicide was widely blamed as Clintons conspiracy to silence him. There are books about it.

User avatar
Hombre
Posts: 3682
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 3:18 am

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by Hombre »

glitch wrote:So quick question, is it fair how Trump is treated?

i mean i didn't like Barak Obama for reasons tht were'nt personal, i didn't attack his wife. I ddn't attack his daughters.
As far as we know, no one is attacking Trump trophy wife.
I didnt like him because he chastised the american people for their faith. He didn't believe america was anything special and he didn't uplift the united states.
Obama believed in using your head first then when needed use of military to project power. Killing of Osama Bin ladin as prime example.

He treated isreal with the utmost disrespect and he basically told every Arab nation, the United States was wrong for everything, thus when you look at the world, all you see is every Arab nation minimizing history and its all, all the US and Isreal's fault. All of history is US and Isreal's fault. HE basically let Iran have everything they wanted.
Ask Netanyahu for that. Otherwise, it was Obama who signed 10 year $38B aid to Israel.

Before his innauguration CNN discussed assasination of a president, going down how many people would have to be killed to get a democrat. Has that ever been done to president before by the news media?
As designer1 had pointed out. It was Trump who during the campaign spoke of "I wonder what 2nd Amendment (refering to gun owners) would say about Hillary (calling for gun control in US)
How many people have accused Trump of Incest?
Ha ha ha! Trump just "joking about fornicating his own doughter ivanka - had she not being his daughter".

Would that have been appropriate with Barak Obama?
Obama is not fuckedup as Trump - he would never say it - even as a joke

User avatar
Equestrian
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:44 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by Equestrian »

manfred wrote:
In your previous post you characterized Trumps immigration policy as a detriment to asylum-seekers, describing it as knee-jerk and extreme. Clearly you were expressing disapproval, if not outright opposition.
No, if you care to look, I talked about the notion that a "ban" could be a complete "solution" to the immigration issue. I conceded that a temporary ban is entirely fine, as long as it is a means to a differentiated solution, and not an end in itself.

I oppose UNCONTROLLED immigration, and I also oppose PERMANENT blanket bans based on nationality.

I also oppose the idea of a blood-guilt, of the kind you seem to support... where an entire nation is punished for the behaviour of just a few of its members. I am sure you can find a murderer or rapist of German or Irish descent in the US... so should Trump ban all Germans and Irish to come to the US too?

Suppose, for argument's sake, a woman asks for asylum because she had an affair with another man while married, and she would face execution in her home country. Such a person should be able to get protection in any country calling itself civilised. Saying she should be left to die at the hands of rock-throwing thugs is a betrayal of our own values.

You mention the increase in rape and related crimes in some European countries. This is due to UNCONTROLLED immigration, allowing people into the country who came with the purpose to cause upheaval in the first place. "All Muslims are rapists" is just plain stupid. It should be a simple rule that an immigrant who commits a crime should be made to leave. You will never be able to have a 100% guarantee that a particular immigrant will not commit a crime, but if you will not even try to get relevant information as to past behaviour and police records, then you contribute to the risk, rather than reducing it. While no government can eliminate all risk from crime by an immigrant, just as they can't manage that on locals, they have a duty to minimise that risk.

In fact Trump made it clear that he proposes a TEMPORARY ban on some countries for this very reason: background information is not available, or in the case of Iran, not given. It also means once such information is available, things will be different, and it means the ban is also an instrument to get cooperation about immigration where it is lacking.

You also mention cultural differences and varying willingness to adapt. What would be the level of integration you would expect from a new immigrant?

I lived in Russia for 4 years, long ago. I can speak the language quite well, know general customs, but I would never drink like an average Russian, and the notion of eating a litre of mayonnaise on a piece of raw herring with bits of beetroot sprinkled on top does not appeal in the slightest. I also don't see it as exciting to jump into ice cold water in 30 below zero in the middle of winter... But I joined a choir... So... was I sufficiently integrated or not? To me integration is not about giving up who you are. It about having respect for your hosts, learn about them, and try to make a contribution, and not be a bother to anyone. (I did make a small contribution, I taught in Russia...) If you like I prefer the Jewish model on integration... be a respectful guest and make yourself useful in some way, but don't altogether forget who you are.
Europeans cannot even get their governments to acknowledge the immigration crises much less address it.
Yes, this is true for many, and it is dangerous on several levels. It will enable further uncontrolled immigration and it will fuel demands for simplistic "solutions" leading in the end to violence.

However, the picture is gradually changing, and Eastern Europe is leading the way.

Now, if, as you say, European governments are slow to even see a problem, why on earth do you think they will listen to radical answers?
Below is the passage relevant to Trumps immigration policy.
manfred wrote:Sure, immigration is a problem, but does that mean we must abandon our own values to deal with that? Can we not try to deal with the immigration issue without also being callous to the suffering of others?

Why would it be acceptable to also "ban" the VICTIMS of Islam? The crazy part is we first allow people in quite indiscriminately, and then suddenly try to prevent people from coming based on merely their place of birth.

This is the trouble with knee-jerks.... one leads to another. and ever more forcefully. Extreme measures will always invite extreme counter-measures.He will not be president for ever, so the most important person to convince of his actions is his successor.

Sure, let Trump have his "ban". But, as far as I understand, he himself does not see that as the "answer" to all issues around immigration. He said is temporary, to "see what is going on" as he puts it.
The portion highlighted in yellow is the subject, highlighted in orange is the object. The subject denotes your objection to what you describe as a ban on asylum-seekers in relation to the object - Trumps immigration policy. This doesn't necessarily qualify as opposition to Trumps immigration policy, but it certainly expresses your disapproval.
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but this is how I understood your post. Nevertheless I have no desire to labor the point, so for the record I'll take it that you support Trumps immigration policy.

That being said, allow me to reiterate my argument for the third time. Given the current 3rd world immigration rates combined with native low birth rates, Europe will cease to exist as we know it. This is also true for North America.
On that basis, and on that basis alone, the optimal short term solution to prevent the destruction of western civilization is to enact an immediate and indefinite interdict on 3rd world immigration. The low birth rates must be addressed in the long term.

In no way can this be interpreted as punitive immigration policy or as you put it, punishing 3rd world nations for the actions of their criminal element. Moreover, it is entirely fallacious to equate any sort of immigration ban to collective punishment as immigration is not a human right, its a privilege.

In defense of your position on immigration, you argue that Europeans also commit the same kind of heinous crimes as foreign immigrants. My God manfred, this is just a venal exercise in sophistry. The salient difference is the degree at which these crimes are committed. Sweden didn't become the rape capital of Europe because Swedish men decided to go on a rape rampage, the rape rate skyrocketed due to 3rd world immigration.
My rebuke regarding the European gang-rape victims was in response to your intractable charity for foreign asylum-seekers, not to imply that all Muslims are rapists. The point I was making is that your empathy seems to be hierarchical, wherein European victims of immigrant violence occupy the lower rungs of the empathy ladder.

You go on to say that crimes committed by immigrants are all due to uncontrolled immigration. First, I would question the metric by which you qualify uncontrolled immigration. But assuming you mean all immigrants that do not qualify as asylum-seekers, that still leaves millions of 3rd world immigrants. Pew research shows that in 2015 alone 1.3 million immigrants applied for asylum. You cannot legitimately argue that little to no crimes are committed by asylum-seekers as there is no data to bare. Just a cursory observation reveals the tenuity of your argument, as even asylum-seekers bring with them a culture that is in many ways antithetic to western values. They largely self-segregate and many refuse to integrate much less assimilate. Those that do integrate, do so minimally. By which I mean that their identity is their ethnicity and their loyalty lies first and foremost with their nation of origin or community. Of course there are exceptions, again not all.

The bulk of your argument rests on the exceptions which demonstrates the point of my previous posts. You are devoted to aiding the exceptional asylum-seekers at the expense of preserving western civilization. This is suicidal egalitarianism.
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" ~Carl Sagan

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11546
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by manfred »

Equestrian, I have already addressed all the points you made, so all I would ask is that people first read what I actually said and not the twisted version of my words you present.

While is it true that immigration is not an automatic right, it also true that many countries have laws that state they have an obligation to help those who are politically oppressed and in danger of their lives by threatened actions of their governments of the people of their home country. This does not mean, please finally note, that they have any automatic right to live in any country of their choice. Help does not automatically mean immigration, and it should not be the first option. But to turn you back on the plight of others is not something compatible with the values you say you represent or defend.
In defense of your position on immigration, you argue that Europeans also commit the same kind of heinous crimes as foreign immigrants.
This is a plain lie. Please do not build strawmen or twist my words. I said that while it is not possible to get a 100% guarantee that a particular immigrant will not commit a crime, it is the duty of a government to minimise that risk. This means that background checks are needed, as past behaviour generally is a fairly good indicator for future conduct, while the place you happen to be born is a much worse indicator for criminal tendencies.

You are devoted to aiding the exceptional asylum-seekers at the expense of preserving western civilization. This is suicidal egalitarianism.

To give a battered woman or gay man threatened with stoning or hanging a refuge is not going to bring about the end of a civilisation. NOT to do such a thing, consistently, does.

I will not respond to any more of these posts, as this is getting very tedious.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

User avatar
Fernando
Posts: 4949
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 1:27 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by Fernando »

Equestrian: what's the matter with a low birth rate in Europe? Or rather, what would be the matter with a falling population in Europe? The native population's been growing too quickly for ages and nobody has given a damn. Now the birth rate's falling, politicians are squealing over the (potentially) diminishing size of their little empires.
If the indigenous people of Europe choose to slowly thin the crowds out a bit, that's their right. It's wrong of politicians to deliberately import third-wold populations en masse to make up the numbers, especially when millions of jobs are about to be lost to automation and artificial intelligence.
‘Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs and literary traditions. They neither intermarry nor eat together, and indeed they belong to two different civilisations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions.’ Muhammad Ali Jinnah

User avatar
Equestrian
Posts: 488
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:44 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by Equestrian »

manfred wrote:While is it true that immigration is not an automatic right, it also true that many countries have laws that state they have an obligation to help those who are politically oppressed and in danger of their lives by threatened actions of their governments of the people of their home country. This does not mean, please finally note, that they have any automatic right to live in any country of their choice. Help does not automatically mean immigration, and it should not be the first option. But to turn you back on the plight of others is not something compatible with the values you say you represent or defend.
We can ill-afford to take on anymore 3rd world immigrants and I've delineated the reasons over and again. If you disagree with the reasons I've provided, then let's do the math together. Maybe you think that a majority Muslim population in Germany won't be so bad, I would be open to debate even that as well. But you're beating a dead horse with the 'plight of the asylum-seeker' if western civilization collapses.

You are failing to recognize the dilemma. Do we allow asylum-seekers to continue to flood in to the point of civilizational collapse, or do we put a halt to it?

What is your solution to this dilemma? Do you continue to take on foreign asylum-seekers until western civilization collapses and then just throw up your hands and say "Oh well, at least we stuck to our egalitarian values, asylum shop is now closed for business".

Not only is this irrational, but completely selfish and what I have characterized as suicidal egalitarianism.

manfred wrote:This is a plain lie. Please do not build strawmen or twist my words. I said that while it is not possible to get a 100% guarantee that a particular immigrant will not commit a crime, it is the duty of a government to minimise that risk. This means that background checks are needed, as past behaviour generally is a fairly good indicator for future conduct, while the place you happen to be born is a much worse indicator for criminal tendencies.
In reference to my point about 3rd world immigrant violence you responded by saying that you oppose a blanket ban on 3rd world immigration based on collective punishment and then followed with this,
I am sure you can find a murderer or rapist of German or Irish descent in the US... so should Trump ban all Germans and Irish to come to the US too?
I did not lie, nor did I twist your words. I answered this argument precisely in context. To rephrase my response - No, Trump should not ban Germans and the Irish because 3rd world immigrants commit murder and rape at astronomically higher rates than both German and Irish. And to add to this, unlike 3rd world immigrants, both German and Irish espouse western values.

manfred wrote:To give a battered woman or gay man threatened with stoning or hanging a refuge is not going to bring about the end of a civilisation. NOT to do such a thing, consistently, does.

I will not respond to any more of these posts, as this is getting very tedious.
You're right, this is getting tedious as I seem to be repeating myself.

I gave you the asylum-seeker figures in my previous post. In 2015 1.3 million immigrants applied for asylum. In just the past six years 10 million 3rd world immigrants entered Europe, an estimated 1 in 10 were asylum-seekers since 1985. In the first quarter of 2017, about 285,0000 immigrants had been asylum-seekers. The numbers are expected to increase exponetially. So yes, asylum-seekers alone will compromise the integrity of western civilization at this point.
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" ~Carl Sagan

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11546
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by manfred »

And to repeat this again, I was not talking about the streams of people that currently enter Europe. Very few of them really are genuine asylum seekers. And it should be obvious that because there are people abusing the system, it would be wrong to simply close everything down permanently and leave genuine asylum seekers to die. What needs to be done is to deter the false asylum seekers while still finding a way to help the genuine ones. This is difficult, but the the alternative is simply not morally acceptable. We might as well argue because there are people killed on roads every day, we should ban all road traffic.

Your definition of "western civilisation" is based on race, it seems, and not so much on shared values.
To you, immigration by people of the same race as you is little or no problem, but you cannot even bring yourself to say that someone with a different colour skin or a different religion who is in dire need should receive some degree of help, never mind even be allowed to live in your neighbourhood. A Polish economic migrant is OK in the house next door, perhaps, but an Iranian battered wife fleeing for dear life is not.


I argue that what makes a people civilised are its values and its determination to maintain them even in very difficult situations.
You can keep your version of a civilisation, it is not mine, nor, for that matter, even Trump's.

And BTW... you did not answer Fernando.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11546
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by manfred »

Fernando wrote:
manfred wrote:Now, if, as you say, European governments are slow to even see a problem, why on earth do you think they will listen to radical answers?
Thereby lies the rub, Manfred. The very fact that [most] European governments are slow refuse to see a problem results in more and more people calling for radical answers. These might be labelled an extreme fringe at the moment but I can hear an underground grumble too. Unfortunately governments seem more likely to crack down on dissent, citing "extremism", rather than respond to people's fears.
Yes, and to allow over a million people into the country without even knowing their names in many cases is a very good reason to be worried, specially when ISIS openly declare they want to use this as a way to get "operatives" into Western Europe. I am worried that one "quick fix" leads to another, as well.... One minute we get "welcome to all migrants", the next, "kill all the foreigners". One extreme measure often generates another, in the opposite direction.

If Trump wants some time to work out a sensible approach, a temporary ban is not a bad idea, and other presidents have done the same before him. But the idea that you should permanently blanket-ban people on skin colour or religion is not only unjust, it will invariably result in a counter-movement of grossly over-liberal immigration, once the next president is in office, and even worse than what we have already.

So it is case of stand back and think. A difficult problem very rarely has a workable simple solution.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

idesigner1
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 4:26 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by idesigner1 »

The time for " temporary Muslim ban " has already passed. It's already six months of Trump's presidency.

The Muslim ban he wants to implement he should have used a phrase like " Muslimims from lawless countries "where US can't check out would be tourists , immigrants refugees etc. The countries like Libiya, Tunisia Sudan, Somalia fits that category. Lawyer like Allen Dershowitz supported this kind of ban from day one.

Again he is allowing Iraqis, Afghas, Sodomy Arabian and Pakistan where terrorists roam freely. In that way it's an absurd policy.I don't advocate total ban as it's impractical but without any announcement he could have made whetting extreme.

peterpin

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by peterpin »

I agree with equestrian.
All the f^cking Muslims should be rounded up and killed, slowly and painfully, and in public. The garrotte would be good. And all the bleeding heart lefties like the mammoth straight after.

And don't spare the kids, they grow up and take revenge.

Then they learn to stay away from civilised countries.

User avatar
manfred
Posts: 11546
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:29 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by manfred »

Oh for goodness sake, he did not say that either. Please do not post comments like that, as they are against the rules. The next one gets dumped.
Jesus: "Ask and you will receive." Mohammed: "Take and give me 20%"

idesigner1
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu May 30, 2013 4:26 pm

Re: PRESIDENT TRUMP

Post by idesigner1 »

Manfred Petperin is a Muslim or agent provocateurs.

His aim is to discredit forum. No member will talk like "kill children"

He should have been censored ( perhaps was not possible )or now banned.

Post Reply