Syrian refugees flooding Lexington?

[Ron Mehico]

And also, while I'm on the subject, this whole influx of refugees thing isn't really settling with me that well either.

There was a MASSIVE migration of arabs and persians to america in the 1980's during the whole muslim uprising, but you never hear about that or hear anyone say anything about it. Literally millions of arabs and iranians moved to america in the 80's. Now granted the majority of those that migrated were christian, but we did it legally and through the proper channels, and we did it very successfully. Many of us (me and my family included) became great productive members of society, many doctors, lawyers, professors, engineers, etc. Lots of successful business men, now celebrities like the Kardashians (unfortunately), but we are and always have been a smart and hard working culture. But ever since we've moved to america the middle east has gotten more and more backwards. Its gotten less stable, poorer, and less educated, and IMO a lot of that has to do with Islam becoming more and more a part of the governments. Jordan is still doing well because we are the most liberal country and have done a good job of being allies with Isreal and America, but it too has become less stable. And now this whole Syrian refugee thing (and ISIS saying they are going to infiltrate it) are making the whole damn arabic race look backwards and like losers. I don't like being lumped in with these people. They can feel free to do it the way we did it, and that's how I feel about it, I see no reason to let in a bunch of "refugees" as if we are some peasant culture. They are more than capable to become legal citizens in the proper way like we did.

 

[mdlUK.1]

Why are we taking Syrian Muslims and not the Christians that are being slaughtered? Why isn't Saudi taking in the refugees?

 

[Kaizer Sosay]

And also, while I'm on the subject, this whole influx of refugees thing isn't really settling with me that well either.

There was a MASSIVE migration of arabs and persians to america in the 1980's during the whole muslim uprising, but you never hear about that or hear anyone say anything about it. Literally millions of arabs and iranians moved to america in the 80's. Now granted the majority of those that migrated were christian, but we did it legally and through the proper channels, and we did it very successfully. Many of us (me and my family included) became great productive members of society, many doctors, lawyers, professors, engineers, etc. Lots of successful business men, now celebrities like the Kardashians (unfortunately), but we are and always have been a smart and hard working culture. But ever since we've moved to america the middle east has gotten more and more backwards. Its gotten less stable, poorer, and less educated, and IMO a lot of that has to do with Islam becoming more and more a part of the governments. Jordan is still doing well because we are the most liberal country and have done a good job of being allies with Isreal and America, but it too has become less stable. And now this whole Syrian refugee thing (and ISIS saying they are going to infiltrate it) are making the whole damn arabic race look backwards and like losers. I don't like being lumped in with these people. They can feel free to do it the way we did it, and that's how I feel about it, I see no reason to let in a bunch of "refugees" as if we are some peasant culture. They are more than capable to become legal citizens in the proper way like we did.

/thread

 

[Ron Mehico]

I mean look how beautiful Lebanon was in the 1970's. It used to be called "the paris of the middle east" when my parents honeymooned there.

Now look at what the damn muslim bombings have made it:

 

[Pope John Wall II]

You can even extend that to Iran. 1970's Iran was on it's way to becoming a relatively-democratic Arab state that was progressing and liberalising (in the classic sense) before the Arab Spring and Sunni Wahabbism extended into Shia circles as well.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

NY Times and CBS news. Bastions of impartial reporting. Gimme a break.
Have you heard any of the leaders of Saudi Rabia, Jordan, Egypt, etc come out and emphatically say "This is not what Islam is about. This is not what we believe. This is wrong and we will assist the US and all other countries to bring these folks to justice." ?
Oh, by the way, I can go off memory and remember many, many Christians going on TV and condemning the actions of the Westboro church. Trying to prevent them further action by blocking them out at funerals and such.

So you think the New York Times and CBS just made up quotes to put in those stories? Do I need to find articles from Fox News to prove to you that some Muslims have very vocally denounced these acts of violence in the name of their faith? Nevermind, I already did it for you.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/2005/07/17/british-muslims-condemn-terror-attacks.html

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

Look, let me see if I can help you guys out here. I'm arabic, I grew up in Jordan, and we immigrated to the US when I was 6 years old. We left because we weren't Muslim and things weren't going great for non-muslims. Islam is an awful, horrible religion, and I'll gladly admit that me and my family are pretty much racists (religionists?) towards muslims. Its a stupid religion, and its an extremely aggressive religion, and its absolutely awful to women. Like you can't imagine how bad it is towards women. And its not peaceful, AT ALL. And it forces pretty much everything on everyone - I would get beat up eating a sandwich at school during Ramadan by other classmates. It sucked.

When we moved to america we lived a bunch of places but settled in West Virginia (unfortunately). Rednecks (lots of them in WV) were complete ******** to us to. They would say mean crap to us, tell my older siblings to go back to where we came from because they had slight accents, etc. So really, pretty much all humans are ******** to people that are different from them. But we adore america. Absolutely love it, my mom worships this country. And its because of separation of church and state and the ultimate freedom we have here. Fundamental evangelical christians absolutely suck, but for whatever reason the majority of christians in this country are really moderate and open minded. Either way - the point I'm getting at, is its hard to find moderate muslims, because for whatever reason it permeates the government, because its an inherently aggressive and pushy religion. Those of you who are saying Islam is a religion of peace are completely FOS. Its an awful religion that is pretty much propped up on abuse and being oppressive to women and people that aren't muslim - and the further you are from it the better quite frankly.

This I respect because at least you are speaking of your personal experience with Muslims. By the way, it's a shame that happened to you.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

This is correct. You're allowed to lie if it advances Islam. Just like molesting of uncovered women is justified.



Rumors and gossip? You haven't had enough of a history lesson or seen enough modern day examples to know what Islam is? You choose to ignore the obvious. It's written very clearly of what they believe and we see tons of examples of what Sharia Law brings: stonings, honor killings and executions.

Read these verses.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx

Listen to a Muslim woman who was sold as a child bride and escaped the beatings and evil of Islam. She understands Islam more than white Democrats.

Check out her interview and start around 30 minutes

I think I will pass on the objectivity of a website that trumpets itself as follows:
"TheReligionofPeace
TROP is a non-partisan, fact-based site that examines the ideological threat that Islam poses to human dignity and freedom."

 

[RacerX.ksr]

Again, I have not researched this deeply at all, but I would be surprised if the principle is interpreted to extend this far.

Is that because you are predisposed to ignore any truth that sheds a negative light on Islam?

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

Is that because you are predisposed to ignore any truth that sheds a negative light on Islam?

No, because as someone who grew up an evangelical Christian in very rural Kentucky, I feel it is my obligation not to jump to conclusions about religions or cultures I don't know a lot about.

 

[qwesley]

I mean look how beautiful Lebanon was in the 1970's. It used to be called "the paris of the middle east" when my parents honeymooned there.

Now look at what the damn muslim bombings have made it:

If only their legislators would have drawn a line in the sand and dramatically performed a sit in until bombs were outlawed. Sad!

 

[Teachable Moe]

Well, it strikes me as odd that a President refuses to call a spade a spade, and then tries to tie it to another political agenda.

Who in the civilized world is it going to offend if he calls ISIS islamic radicalists? Do you think ISIS is going to rethink their position because of what he says?

I just find it hard to believe that in this day and age adults believe in magic words. Are there magic words that ISIS can use to defeat us? If you were going in to battle wouldn't you prefer rifles, bombs, rockets, satellites, airplanes, tanks, and stuff to magic words?

 

[RacerX.ksr]

No, because as someone who grew up an evangelical Christian in very rural Kentucky, I feel it is my obligation not to jump to conclusions about religions or cultures I don't know a lot about.

But you claim to know enough about Islam to tell everyone else that DOES know something that they are wrong. How does that work?

 

[qwesley]

I just find it hard to believe that in this day and age adults believe in magic words. Are there magic words that ISIS can use to defeat us? If you were going in to battle wouldn't you prefer rifles, bombs, rockets, satellites, airplanes, tanks, and stuff to magic words?

Clinton's former CIA director says it is silly and defeatist.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

But you claim to know enough about Islam to tell everyone else that DOES know something that they are wrong. How does that work?

I challenge you to find one instance where I have said that.

 

[Bill Derington]

I just find it hard to believe that in this day and age adults believe in magic words. Are there magic words that ISIS can use to defeat us? If you were going in to battle wouldn't you prefer rifles, bombs, rockets, satellites, airplanes, tanks, and stuff to magic words?

No, but if I were still in uniform I would expect the commander in chief to at least be able to identify the enemy.

It's not a magic word, I just can't understand why Obama and his administration go out of their way not to call it what it was. Workplace violence, home grown terrorist, extremist and what not, anything to keep from calling it islamic radicals.

 

[warrior-cat]

No, but if I were still in uniform I would expect the commander in chief to at least be able to identify the enemy.

It's not a magic word, I just can't understand why Obama and his administration go out of their way not to call it what it was. Workplace violence, home grown terrorist, extremist and what not, anything to keep from calling it islamic radicals.

If the left can identify the right as racist, women haters, warmongers, etc....why can they not call Islamic terrorist by what they are. Hint....sympathizers.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

Not surprised at your fake surprise or if genuine, you either are too young to know, lack experience and education or just plain ignorant.

I can tell you've spent a lot of time fine-tuning your debating skills.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

If the left can identify the right as racist, women haters, warmongers, etc....why can they not call Islamic terrorist by what they are. Hint....sympathizers.

Did you notice that in the other names you chose (racists, woman haters, warmongers, etc.), you did not identify those groups by their religion? Do you think that it is possible that calling these terrorists "radical Muslims" would be playing right into their hands -- that is, that they would want to be to mobilize the entire Muslim world against West? If you can admit that there is a least a plausible reason why your Commander in Chief did this, would you defer to him or continue questioning the decision as if you had all the same information that he did?

 

[Pope John Wall II]

Did you notice that in the other names you chose (racists, woman haters, warmongers, etc.), you did not identify those groups by their religion? Do you think that it is possible that calling these terrorists "radical Muslims" would be playing right into their hands -- that is, that they would want to be to mobilize the entire Muslim world against West? If you can admit that there is a least a plausible reason why your Commander in Chief did this, would you defer to him or continue questioning the decision as if you had all the same information that he did?

And if the ENTIRE MUSLIM WORLD is capable of being radicalized against the west by condemning Islamic extremism, the problem is with Islam, not the west.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

And if the ENTIRE MUSLIM WORLD is capable of being radicalized against the west by condemning Islamic extremism, the problem is with Islam, not the west.

Not one said that all Muslims could be radicalized against the West, just that it may be the goal of these terrorists to try to do that. If you knew that was the strategy, would you try to combat it or play right into it?

 

[Pope John Wall II]

Not one said that all Muslims could be radicalized against the West, just that it may be the goal of these terrorists to try to do that. If you knew that was the strategy, would you try to combat it or play right into it?

You don't get to have your bomb and detonate it too, Ahmed.

Are the majority of Muslims peaceful, tolerant, progressive friends of the west who are against the barbaric practices that Islam has been engaging in since it's conception, or is there an underlying fundamental issue with their culture, moral value systems, and religious doctrine which would lead them to terrorist groups, and if not participate, then condone the actions of the terrorists which are just following their religion in an orthodox setting?

 

[Teachable Moe]

No, but if I were still in uniform I would expect the commander in chief to at least be able to identify the enemy.

It's not a magic word, I just can't understand why Obama and his administration go out of their way not to call it what it was. Workplace violence, home grown terrorist, extremist and what not, anything to keep from calling it islamic radicals.

Which is, of course, ludicrous. Do you imagine that a single bullet or bomb has missed an intended target because Obama doesn't use the words you want him to? Because that's what your frenzy amounts to. Obama is attacking and killing Muslim targets. And your side faults him -- even denies that he's doing it -- because you want him to dance to the tune your piping. Because that's all it is. You want a measure of control on Obama. And all that shiat that's been thrown at him by you all is because he won't do it.

 

[TACcat7]

I don't believe Islam is peaceful. Just saying that if POTUS believes that, then why doesn't he say anything to separate the herd.

 

[Pope John Wall II]

I don't believe Islam is peaceful. Just saying that if POTUS believes that, then why doesn't he say anything to separate the herd.

Because according to liberal logic, if you condemn barbaric terrorism, it will only produce more terrorists out of a group of supposed peaceful people

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

You don't get to have your bomb and detonate it too, Ahmed.

Are the majority of Muslims peaceful, tolerant, progressive friends of the west who are against the barbaric practices that Islam has been engaging in since it's conception, or is there an underlying fundamental issue with their culture, moral value systems, and religious doctrine which would lead them to terrorist groups, and if not participate, then condone the actions of the terrorists which are just following their religion in an orthodox setting?

Love the name-calling. That helps make your point. And you still won't answer my question.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

Because according to liberal logic, if you condemn barbaric terrorism, it will only produce more terrorists out of a group of supposed peaceful people

But you still haven't said where your countering logic leads you. How does calling the enemy by a certain name make you more likely to beat them?

 

[Bill Derington]

Which is, of course, ludicrous. Do you imagine that a single bullet or bomb has missed an intended target because Obama doesn't use the words you want him to? Because that's what your frenzy amounts to. Obama is attacking and killing Muslim targets. And your side faults him -- even denies that he's doing it -- because you want him to dance to the tune your piping. Because that's all it is. You want a measure of control on Obama. And all that shiat that's been thrown at him by you all is because he won't do it.

You're misunderstanding my point, I'm not in a frenzy. I'm simply stating that it's ridiculous for the President to purposely tip toe around the root cause of the issue, because he might make them even more angry at us. Nevermind 49 people just were killed by a guy that called 911 and pledged loyalty to ISIS. Instead we get gun control jammed down our throats for political purposes. If so many people want it, then lets send it to the people to vote for a constitutional ammendment, you and I both know why that won't happen.

Speaking of bombing them, even on that Obama drug his feet, damn near let Iraq fall and countless thousands killed and raped. Took Russia getting involved to force his hand.

 

[Bill Derington]

But you still haven't said where your countering logic leads you. How does calling the enemy by a certain name make you more likely to beat them?

Who is the enemy, Vanilla? What drives their philosophy and end goal?

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

You're misunderstanding my point, I'm not in a frenzy. I'm simply stating that it's ridiculous for the President to purposely tip toe around the root cause of the issue, because he might make them even more angry at us. Nevermind 49 people just were killed by a guy that called 911 and pledged loyalty to ISIS. Instead we get gun control jammed down our throats for political purposes. If so many people want it, then lets send it to the people to vote for a constitutional ammendment, you and I both know why that won't happen.

Speaking of bombing them, even on that Obama drug his feet, damn near let Iraq fall and countless thousands killed and raped. Took Russia getting involved to force his hand.

Boy, talking about tiptoeing and dancing around an issue. You respond to Teachable's question with a diatribe on gun control? And your question to me above? As my grandmother would say, "What does that have to do with the price of butter?"

 

[CatsFanGG24]

page 8 hasn't been too kind to vanillaslice...yikes.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

page 8 hasn't been too kind to vanillaslice...yikes.

You mean because the rabble is ganging up on me? That obviously does not concern me. I'm not seeking anyone's approval here.

 

[mdlUK.1]

But you still haven't said where your countering logic leads you. How does calling the enemy by a certain name make you more likely to beat them?

Then why does obama insist on calling ISIS, ISIL? Because it's a slap at Israel.

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

Then why does obama insist on calling ISIS, ISIL? Because it's a slap at Israel.

Where do you get this garbage? And why can't you stay on topic?

 

[Teachable Moe]

page 8 hasn't been too kind to vanillaslice...yikes.

He isn't in Page 8

 

[vanillaslice_rivals204083]

He isn't in Page 8

You're right; I'm not. Wish I could say I would even like that movie. It looks pretty awful.

 

[mdlUK.1]

Where do you get this garbage? And why can't you stay on topic?

Ok moron, it is on topic. You're whining about the people that want obama to call it radical Islam. I asked you if it names don't matter, why does Obama insist on calling it ISIL?

 

[Bill Derington]

Boy, talking about tiptoeing and dancing around an issue. You respond to Teachable's question with a diatribe on gun control? And your question to me above? As my grandmother would say, "What does that have to do with the price of butter?"

So you can't answer, got it. Keep carrying that pail!

 

[Pope John Wall II]

Then why does obama insist on calling ISIS, ISIL? Because it's a slap at Israel.

Of all the things to attack Obama for (believe me, there are MANY), not being sympathetic to f*cking Israel is not one of them. If anything, he has been too cozy with Israel, and that's more of an indictment on the presidents before him if he is considered antagonistic with Israel.

 

[fuzz77]

Then why does obama insist on calling ISIS, ISIL? Because it's a slap at Israel.

How is "ISIL" a slap at Israel?
I just read 5 different stories on ISIS vs ISIL and not a single one mentions Israel in any form or fashion.
ISIS = Islamic State Iraq Syria
ISIL = Islamic State Iraq and the Levant
Levant is a translation of "al-Sham" -- the word the group uses to refer to itself.

Al-Sham is a reference to a region that stretches from Turkey through Syria to Egypt and includes the Palestinian territories, Jordan and Lebanon, according to Rashid Khalidi, a Columbia University professor and expert on Syrian history.
Part of the confusion stems from the fact that al-Sham has many meanings in Arabic.
Khalidi said: "How you translate 'al-Sham' determines whether you have an 'L' or an 'S' in English. It's the same word in Arabic. How you translate the term into English determines if you're of the 'ISIL' camp or the 'ISIS' camp. The Levant, which can extend from northern Egypt to Greece, is not as precise."
On the United States government's use of ISIL, Khalidi surmised: "Maybe because you don't want to give the dignity of the name that they give themselves."
Nawaf Obaid, a visiting fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, said via email that ISIL is preferable in English "to make it clear to a Western audience."
Levant denotes Syria and Lebanon in Arabic, "so better to stick to ISIL and clarify that it's the same as ISIS, but a more accurate translation from the Arabic," he said.
ISIS
ISIS is an English translation of the acronym in Arabic for Al-Dawla Al-Islamiya fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham, or the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham.
The organization has said its goal is to form an Islamic state, or caliphate, over the entire region, stretching from Turkey through Syria to Egypt and including the Palestinian territories, Jordan and Lebanon.
Some think ISIS flows better as a word in English. It also happens to be the name of one of a goddess of ancient Egypt.
CNN has been referring to the organization as ISIS, shorthand for the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.
Arabic speakers say al-Sham can be translated to mean the Levant, Syria, greater Syria, and even Damascus.
Islamic State
The jihadists like to refer to themselves simply as the Islamic State, a term more accurately reflecting the organization's aspirations of creating a caliphate across national borders.
They prefer to be known either as the Islamic State -- al-Dawla al-Islamiya in Arabic -- or just the State, al-Dawla. That is what they call themselves in online videos.