• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

General says terrorists in 'daily' refugee flow to Europe

truthatallcost said:
You're still minimizing sexual violence against children, don't you see how absurd that makes you look?
Click to expand...

You're completely misunderstanding what I'm saying.

Sexual violence against children, of course, is awful.

But this isn't a discussion of sexual violence against children where some folks are arguing that it's awful and I'm arguing that it isn't.

This is yet another tired discussion of the potential infiltration by ISIS and consequent threat to Europe of violent Islamic jihad as a result of the influx of refugees.

The argument here is that allowing Islamic/Middle Eastern refugees in to Europe poses some existential threat to the future of Europe and the truth is that we see no actual indication that such is the case.

Te fallback position of those who oppose the refugees is that admitting the refugees is creating an epidemic of sexual violence against women and children and, again, we see no actual evidence of that being the case.

What we see are isolated incidents of drunken boobie grabbing and fewer incidents of rape than I can count on one hand.

The sexual violence being perpetrated by refugees isn't any worse than the sexual violence committed by any other cross section of any given population.

Islamic and Middle Eastern refugees don't pose any greater threat of sexual violence than college fraternity members, U.S. servicemen, or Republican Congressmen.

Roadvirus only mentioned 1 incident, there was another case in Norway,where a 3 year old boy was raped by a refugee.
We don't know the full scope of sex crimes refugees have and will commit in their new home countries.
I've seen several stories of Pakistani men gang raping British girls as young as 12 years old.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

You see an isolated incident here, and an isolated incident there, and in total you see less than a handful of individual incidents.

Is any incident of sexual violence awful?

I believe we can agree that it is.

Does the amount of sexual violence being committed by refugees rise to the level of an epidemic?

Absolutely not.
 
Continued...

You're really not concerned by what's going on here?
Click to expand...

No more or less concerned than I am of sexual violence occurring anywhere.

Maybe its because you're comparing a relatively new situation with the Catholic church scandal. The abuse in the Catholic church went on for 50 years before it became public knowledge, which is why we heard of story after story; because the abuse stemmed from several decades. Muslim refugees have been in the European union only 6 months and I've already heard dozens of cases of sexual violence.
Click to expand...

I wasn't actually comparing this situation to what went on in the RC Church.

The comparison was made and I addressed it but I didn't make the comparison myself.

You minimizing this is similar to those crooked bishops in the church who minimized what priests did.
Click to expand...

Again, I see no such similarity.

The problem with the RC Church wasn't that they were minimizing what priests did, it was that they knew damn well what priests were doing, and they knew which priests were doing it, and instead of calling the police and having offending priests arrested and charged with crimes of sexual violence they cajoled and paid off the victims, used the Church's position of authority to silence people, shuffled the priests around from parish to parish, exposing many parishes and many children to priests they knew were sexual predators, and hid the entire thing from the world for decades if not centuries.

I'm not suggesting that we do anything even remotely similar with Islamic or Middle Eastern sex offenders in Europe.

When one of them is accused of committing such a crime it should be investigated, if warranted the offender should be charged with the the crime, and if convicted he should receive the appropriate punishment.

And in the handful of incidents that e know of where sexual violence has been perpetrated by refugees I believe that's whats happening.

If you only care about the welfare of children when the perpetrators are people who you dislike, then why should I take anything you say seriously?
Click to expand...

You're all mixed up over who I may or may not like or dislike.

First of all, I don't dislike Catholic priests. I grew up Catholic, attended Catholic school, and to the best of my knowledge was never exposed to a priest who was involved in any of this bull****. All the priests I knew were great guys. I'm raising my kids as Roman Catholics and they attend Church and Church-related functions regularly both with me present and in the care of other adults, priests among them, and it doesn't keep me up at night.

On the other hand, I don't know any recent Islamic or Middle Eastern refugees living in Europe but I doubt very much I would like many of them. I've lived in Middle Eastern/Islamic enclaves here in the U.S. (I was living in Jersey City on 9/11/2001 and saw these folks celebrating in the streets, albeit in small groups rather than large crowds as Donald Trump claims) and for the most part I found the people to be dirty, ignorant, disrespectful, dishonest, and generally pretty repugnant.

So I'm not defending "people I like" and attacking "people I dislike".

I'm saying that there is no evidence that the threat as you see it actually exists.
 
soot said:
Let's not confuse ridiculing the victims with ridiculing all the Chicken Little conservatives who are hiding under the bed and wetting themselves in fear of some imagined threat.
Click to expand...

Go ask people in Paris how much of an "imagined threat" there was in January and November of last year.. Go ask the people who worked in that building in San Bernadino as well.

Imagined threat...what a load of bull****.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Same kind of crap we heard during the Red Scare. And before that, against the Japanese living in America just after Pearl Harbor. And before that, against the Chinese (hence the "Chinese Exclusion Act"). And both before and after that, about all the Irish and Italians coming to live in America.
Click to expand...

Sure... because all those people were blowing themselves and innocent people up on a daily basis... great analogy! :roll:
 
Roadvirus said:
Go ask people in Paris how much of an "imagined threat" there was in January and November of last year.. Go ask the people who worked in that building in San Bernadino as well.

Imagined threat...what a load of bull****.
Click to expand...

Yes, "imagined threat".

As in, you're imagining that recent refugees pose some sort of threat.

You cited two recent terror attacks involving a grand total of zero recent refugees.

All of those involved in the Paris and San Bernardino attacks were citizens of either the United States or European Union countries.

What are called, in common parlance, "homegrown terrorists".

If your argument is that the refugees are a threat it would behoove you to present some examples of recent immigrants actually doing something threatening.

And look, I'm not suggesting that Islamic terrorism isn't a threat, I'm just saying that there's no evidence that any of the refugees are terrorists.

Now, of course absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence and I'm sure that some of the refugees are at least to some degree radicalized.

But lets not act out like a pack of hysterical women, trembling in fear.
 
RetiredUSN said:
You know what......your right! You didn't say" your side"......big sorry!

The overreaction argument on your part, I don't agree with. But mostly everything else.....I do.
Click to expand...

Well, consider... if we include 9/11, we're still looking at 5,000 Americans killed by terrorism (more if overseas numbers are greater, including the wars) in about 15 years.



But, in 2013 alone, for example:

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

Heart disease: 611,105
Cancer: 584,881
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 149,205
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 130,557
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,978
Alzheimer's disease: 84,767
Diabetes: 75,578
Influenza and Pneumonia: 56,979
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 47,112
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 41,149

FastStats - Deaths and Mortality


We tell people to eat better and exercise. We tell them not to smoke. We ban smoking in various public places. But that's it.

We don't make bad food illegal; we don't make tobacco illegal.

In one year, heart disease and cancer have killed over 200 times the amount of Americans, then terrorists have in 15 years. But the Trump-style reaction to Syrian immigrants is to completely bar them, even though it's the most rigorous way to immigrate. That's what I mean by overreaction to a marginal risk.

If we care that much about American lives, why aren't we going absolutely ballistic on all the other and much bigger killers?
 
Last edited:
Bodhisattva said:
Meaning comparing them to the Irish or the Chinese is ridiculous. Both were working class hard workers that helped build the trans-Continental Railroads, for instance.



So your solution is to let in more terrorists... gotchya.
Click to expand...

Ah...so in your own little world, the Muslims aren't hard workers, hm? That's why there's so many homeless Muslims on our streets, then? Oh, wait...there's very, very few homeless Muslims, you say? Gee, but I thought you were implying that they aren't hard workers!

FYI, you'll find that Muslims tend to be overrepresented in the professional sector, particularly in the medical field.

In other words, you're looking at the very real evil committed by a fairly small percentage of Muslims...and you're applying it to Islam as a whole, never realizing that homicide and violent crime rates in stable and developed Muslim countries are significantly lower than ours is here in America. BUT you don't have to listen to me - you can figure it out on your own. All you have to do is add up all the Muslims who have committed terrorist attacks here in America...and then compare that against the total number of Muslims who live here in America.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Ah...so in your own little world, the Muslims aren't hard workers, hm? That's why there's so many homeless Muslims on our streets, then? Oh, wait...there's very, very few homeless Muslims, you say? Gee, but I thought you were implying that they aren't hard workers!

FYI, you'll find that Muslims tend to be overrepresented in the professional sector, particularly in the medical field.

In other words, you're looking at the very real evil committed by a fairly small percentage of Muslims...and you're applying it to Islam as a whole, never realizing that homicide and violent crime rates in stable and developed Muslim countries are significantly lower than ours is here in America. BUT you don't have to listen to me - you can figure it out on your own. All you have to do is add up all the Muslims who have committed terrorist attacks here in America...and then compare that against the total number of Muslims who live here in America.
Click to expand...

How many Muslims in the U.S. survive on welfare/food stamps /social security?

Why is crime low in Muslim countries?
Rape isn't really considered a crime. And petty thieves often have their hands cut off. Think that might deter crime?
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Ah...so in your own little world, the Muslims aren't hard workers, hm? That's why there's so many homeless Muslims on our streets, then? Oh, wait...there's very, very few homeless Muslims, you say? Gee, but I thought you were implying that they aren't hard workers!

FYI, you'll find that Muslims tend to be overrepresented in the professional sector, particularly in the medical field.

In other words, you're looking at the very real evil committed by a fairly small percentage of Muslims...and you're applying it to Islam as a whole, never realizing that homicide and violent crime rates in stable and developed Muslim countries are significantly lower than ours is here in America. BUT you don't have to listen to me - you can figure it out on your own. All you have to do is add up all the Muslims who have committed terrorist attacks here in America...and then compare that against the total number of Muslims who live here in America.
Click to expand...

Hly ****... why even bother? We were talking about terrorists EMBEDDED within the immigrants. NO OTHER immigrants to the USA had this issue.

For ****s sake... just read the thread title and grab a clue.
 
truthatallcost said:
How many Muslims in the U.S. survive on welfare/food stamps /social security?

Why is crime low in Muslim countries?
Rape isn't really considered a crime. And petty thieves often have their hands cut off. Think that might deter crime?
Click to expand...

1 - How many Muslims are on welfare, etc.? Have no idea...and regardless of what you apparently so desperately want to assume, neither do you. But I do know that when I see quite a few Middle Eastern names when I look at the names of doctors in hospitals around here. That, and I also have yet to see someone of apparent ME descent homeless on the streets. Lots of whites and blacks, a few Hispanics, and next to zero Asians and Middle Easterners (who, btw, are by definition Asian).

2 - Murder is of course considered among the very worst of crimes. Why are the homicide rates of developed, stable Muslim nations so much lower than America's?

Also, how much time have you spent in Muslim nations? I've spent quite a bit over my Navy career. How many Christian female family members do you have living in Muslim nations? I have four - two in Riyadh, two in Dubai. And all of them are happy and safe.

But I get it - in the right-wing echo chamber, all you see about Muslims is terror, terror, terror, how bad, how bloodthirsty the Muslims all are. But you never, ever get the other side of the story, do you? That's probably why you personally can't possibly conceive that maybe, just maybe you're not getting the whole story. AGAIN, why is it that by the numbers, the developed and stable Muslim nations have LOWER homicide rates than America?
 
Bodhisattva said:
Hly ****... why even bother? We were talking about terrorists EMBEDDED within the immigrants. NO OTHER immigrants to the USA had this issue.

For ****s sake... just read the thread title and grab a clue.
Click to expand...

1. How many of you know what the current vetting process is for someone to come to America as a refugee, much less how long it takes? I'm guessing close to zero.

2. In EVERY group of immigrants coming to America, whether 200 years ago or today, there's going to be some who are truly bad people...and every once in a while there will be some who want to do harm to America. Besides, if a terrorist was truly determined to come to America, really, how hard would it be? C'mon, guy! There's our borders with Mexico AND Canada, thousands of miles long...and unless you want a "Festung Amerika" with walls too high to fly over and trenches too deep to tunnel under, he can make it across the border. And even if he can't, how hard is it for a terrorist to hop onto a tramp steamer or a cheap yacht - or even a freaking sailboat - and come to one of our ports or just one of our unguarded shores? Ain't hard at all.

In other words, if they are really determined to come to America, not even all the Trumpgasm security measures ever dreamt of will stop them. All your oh-no-there-might-be-a-terrorist-among-those-refugees fearmongering is doing, is alienating the tired, the poor, the wretched refuse that we have traditionally welcomed to our shores...the very people that have made our nation that shining city on a hill that Reagan spoke of.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Same kind of crap we heard during the Red Scare. And before that, against the Japanese living in America just after Pearl Harbor. And before that, against the Chinese (hence the "Chinese Exclusion Act"). And both before and after that, about all the Irish and Italians coming to live in America.
Click to expand...

Yep there's no such thing as Islamic terrorism or ISIS just like there weren't Japanese spies in Hawaii giving detailed intel to Tokyo on Pearl Harbor and just like the CPUSA didn't take it's marching orders directly from Moscow.
 
soot;1065618797 SNIP This is yet another tired discussion of the potential infiltration by ISIS and consequent threat to Europe of violent Islamic jihad as a result of the influx of refugees. The argument here is that allowing Islamic/Middle Eastern refugees in to Europe poses some existential threat to the future of Europe and the truth is that we see no actual indication that such is the case. Te fallback position of those who oppose the refugees is that admitting the refugees is creating an epidemic of sexual violence against women and children and said:
I guess you missed the discussion on Sweden's huge problems, (due to the large influx of "Migrants") and you've forgotten about the French Terr attacks Nov. last, (France is 10% Muslim)....not to mention Israel's troubles, (Israel is 1/3 Muslim) and Turkey's suicide bomber(s), and the many incidents caused by misbehaving 'Migrants' at Calias

Germany has taken in approx. one Million "Migrants" and planned to take in another one Mil. this yr, but now Merkel is 're-evaluating' the situation...not to mention the MANY sexual assault cases over the Holidays there.
Click to expand...
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom