REFUGEES'S AND THE IMPACT UPON OUR SOCIETY, Good/Bad/Ugly of it all.

sassy wrote:I know why, after all, you say so yourself when you talk about not caring because 'they aren't your tribe'.   And you can't legislate for people's fear and loathing of something different to themselves.   And you can't teach them empathy or understanding, or putting themselves in other shoes.  And no, I'm not talking about the likes of ISIS, who are hated by everyone, Muslims the most because they are the huge percentage who get killed, tortured and beheaded by them.   I talking about the people who have had to cope with ISIS and Assad and all the horrible things that are happening to people.  But then, their 'not your tribe' are they, even though 'your tribe' and mine caused so much of their suffering, and sells the people the arms and ammunitions and makes billions of £'s out of doing so.  But that doesn't matter does is.  You are superior because you are born in this country, and this country is superior because you were born into it.
And that's the reason.

 LordFoul replied> and this is why you fail 100% every time....
firstly you fail to EVER show any reason why I should care about those "not my tribe"...
what possible "meaning" do they have to me.....
what is the cost/benefit equation?
etc
the answer is NOT "becasue its the right thing to do" since THAT is a relative standpoint dependant upon a set POV.
secondly you REFUSE to accept that whilst I have ...repeatedly..... over a long time pointed out that I have no particular objection to people from other nations comming here, there are preconditions attached to that.
you repeatedly condone and promote the erosion of our way of life in favour of the incommer....
you promote their rudeness and ignorance
you condone their refusal to integrate.. (and as it turns out it is THEIR refusal to integrate ...NOT some sort of vague we dont want you message from us natives)
you condone and indeed encourage them to not only celebrate but push their difference
you expect me to pay for it all
you expect me to find their less pleasant habits acceptable (the whole hand wash thing for a start)
you expect me to find their contempt for western women aceptable ...and are prepared to blame our women for that...rather than recognising that their primitive religion is to blame
and even when presented with reasonable evidence (as I did in the handshake thread, over the "dont greet non Muslims first" post I made) ignore it since it doesnt coincide with your agenda.
I have., in te past asked this question ...and every time it has been avoided....I requote from the handshake thread here...rather than re write it all
you surrender on this issue (the handshake thing)
you have surendered on sharia laws
you have virtually surrendered on the issue of hiding their faces
you surrendered (and not just to Muslims) years ago on ritual slaughter
you surrendered years ago to the sikhs on the issue of crash helmets
In every case AFAIK where asian grooming gangs were allowed to run amok it was on the watch of lefty councils (and the reason given in these cases was "community cohesion and fear of accusations of racism...which is the ACTUAL point......It wasnt a case of money buying immunity (as was the case with others of similar ilk) it was a case of leftys rolling over to have their tums tickled....to sell your soul for cash is despicable.......... to sell your soul for a warped political principle cant even be measured on the scale of turpitude.....)
you run from/deny even matters of fact take fasting for instance...where strong evidence exists of increased accident rates for Muslims during ramadan, yet you wouldnt hear of a driving ban during that period for those participating...once again the REST of us are the ones thereby at risk and have to "suck it up"
when will YOU say ...enough....now settle down and fit in???????????????????????????
or will you ONLY be happy when you are face down arse up 5 times a day???
IF....they came here...settled down, and got on with things (which I agree a FEW have done.... but it really IS "only a few") and actually integrated , instead of trying to force US to change to their ways (which constitutes a much greater "few") there would be less of a problem.....

Irn's stated > Vic, where is their refusal to integrate? The poll from the Phillips dude suggest to vast majprity of Muslims do integrate and have no problem living here and condemn extremism. Just because they wear their own form of clothing or stick wiith their form of faith doesn't mean they haven't integrated surely?

The attack on the immigrant comunity and particulary Muslims happens on here elsewhere day in day out with most of it is based on what comes out of the mouths of the radical Mullahs as if they represented all the Muslims.

sassy wrote:Agree, great thread.  I'll have to have a think about it as last night it left me so depressed.

{notice the superior way I phrased that }

didge wrote:The problem with this thread is its flawed from the off
Nobody has issues with those who respect the well being and equality of others, of which many Muslims do. The problems stems from a sleazeball amount of Muslims in Western countries that have nop intention of integrating which effects the lives of women, homosexuals and religious and non-religious minorities. Where we saw this in the past with prejudice against Irish, Afro-Caribbean, Indians and the first Pakistani's that came, they integrated in the main and did not keep from the rest of society.

We area talking about here a sizeaball amount of Muslims that place their faith over that of British law, which is very problematic, especially to where the views of Islam they keep clash with the well being and equality of others. They hold views that area based on absolute morals that deny equality. America still suffers this problem with Neoconservative Christians as well, as they refuse to respect the well being and equality of all within the law. This is why people on the left are clueless, they go off the good that we see off those that integrate massively missing the part that a substantial do not and have no intention of doing so. This concerns many people as it has a knock on effect on hate crimes all round, those to the ones that these hardliner Muslims commit against Jews, women, homosexuals ect, to then Muslims suffering due to the hate that rises from the hardliner Muslims.

Cause and effect.

What needs to be done is more Muslims have to distance themselves from these groups, but because of a belief around brotherhood and sisterhood, they fail badly and allow the two to be seen and grouped together. Thankfully there is progressive and secular Muslims out there who are willing to take up this cause and bring about a better world, because they recognise that some of the beliefs in islam are against the human rights of people
The left do nothing to help bring about change, but make it worse by failing to recognise the problems. They also add to the cause and effect of the spiraling hate.
Its their inability to denounce things that are bad are wrong because they fear they will also been seen as hateful.

Its wrong, you have to criticize bad things, or they do not change when those same lefties then end up supporting those who believe in bad beliefs, allowing those bad beliefs protecting which should never and does not have any protection under our laws.
Our laws are based on equality, not some nonsense claimed to have been written in book 1400 years ago. It denies freedom of thought and controls those to being abject slaves to the will and commands of a book

4EVER2 wrote:

sassy wrote:Agree, great thread.  I'll have to have a think about it as last night it left me so depressed.

I beg your forgiveness {as well as LordFouls & Irn's} for just dragging your posts over onto here but 'I' deemed them so worthy of reading {notice the superior way I phrased that } that all of your thoughts generated much of my deep thinking about my own countries brief 200+ years and our immigration/refugee issues...well, I hoped to continue the discussion SANS any name calling and immature derails! 
But that's just a HOPE & a prayer

4EVER2 wrote:

didge wrote:The problem with this thread is its flawed from the off
Nobody has issues with those who respect the well being and equality of others, of which many Muslims do. The problems stems from a sleazeball amount of Muslims in Western countries that have nop intention of integrating which effects the lives of women, homosexuals and religious and non-religious minorities. Where we saw this in the past with prejudice against Irish, Afro-Caribbean, Indians and the first Pakistani's that came, they integrated in the main and did not keep from the rest of society.

We area talking about here a sizeaball amount of Muslims that place their faith over that of British law, which is very problematic, especially to where the views of Islam they keep clash with the well being and equality of others. They hold views that area based on absolute morals that deny equality. America still suffers this problem with Neoconservative Christians as well, as they refuse to respect the well being and equality of all within the law. This is why people on the left are clueless, they go off the good that we see off those that integrate massively missing the part that a substantial do not and have no intention of doing so. This concerns many people as it has a knock on effect on hate crimes all round, those to the ones that these hardliner Muslims commit against Jews, women, homosexuals ect, to then Muslims suffering due to the hate that rises from the hardliner Muslims.

Cause and effect.

What needs to be done is more Muslims have to distance themselves from these groups, but because of a belief around brotherhood and sisterhood, they fail badly and allow the two to be seen and grouped together. Thankfully there is progressive and secular Muslims out there who are willing to take up this cause and bring about a better world, because they recognise that some of the beliefs in islam are against the human rights of people
The left do nothing to help bring about change, but make it worse by failing to recognise the problems. They also add to the cause and effect of the spiraling hate.
Its their inability to denounce things that are bad are wrong because they fear they will also been seen as hateful.

Its wrong, you have to criticize bad things, or they do not change when those same lefties then end up supporting those who believe in bad beliefs, allowing those bad beliefs protecting which should never and does not have any protection under our laws.
Our laws are based on equality, not some nonsense claimed to have been written in book 1400 years ago. It denies freedom of thought and controls those to being abject slaves to the will and commands of a book

  Heavy Sigh~~~

"flawed from the off"...then way the usual long drawn out diatribe?

Assimilation; would you agree that this just doesn't happen over night '?' That settling into a foreign countries unique laws and formalities/social graces takes time and that the 'refugees' will cluster into their enclaves because it's what they FEEL more comfortable with.  That's basic human nature - we humans are very 'HERD' mentality driven - it's how we've survived.

Would you also agree that the number of problems that the most outspoken among the Muslims are few compared to the ratio that have fled their homelands?

My country being the 'BABY' among this membership has suffered greatly from the many diverse refugees that have descended upon us {rather from invitation/labor force or fleeing a destitute homeland issue}...but along with those 'GANG/CRIMINAL' elements we've acquired some hugely beneficial: medical advancements/research/ corporations/small business/work force/skilled labor/unique food groups/fine dining and a much broader view of the entire world. 

So has the few bad apples ruined the entire basket of good humans --- NOT HARDLY!

Fuzzy Zack wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1189577/Muslim-extremists-anti-war-protest-driven-members-community.html

The Muslim community turned on extremists in their midst yesterday, telling them they were 'sick and tired' of their behaviour.
The angry confrontation came in Luton, where anti-Islamist protesters brandished England flags last Sunday, before clashing with police.
The latest violence erupted as arguments raged between fellow Muslims shortly after Friday morning prayers in the Bury Park area of the town.

Heated: The two groups clash after members of the Luton Muslim community decided to move a group of extremists on, with officers struggling to hold them back
Passing traffic ground to a halt as the large group of moderates confronted about a dozen extremists.
As the radical Muslims began to set up their stall, they were surrounded by a crowd shouting 'we don't want you here' and 'move on, move on'.
Angry words were exchanged and scuffles broke out between members of both groups, with the extremists shouting 'Shame on you' and 'Get back to your synagogue'.
The moderates chanted 'Out, Out, Out', and after an uneasy stand-off, police officers were able to persuade the extremist group to leave the area.

Anger: A member of one of the groups gestures to the camera during the confrontation
One police officer and two community support officers struggled to hold them apart until more officers arrived.
Buses and cars were unable to move as the crowd spilled into the road.
Farasat Latif, of the Islamic Centre in Luton, which was firebombed after the protest against the soldiers, said moderate members of his community took action because police had failed to move the group on.
During the protest against the homecoming parade of the Royal Anglian regiment in March, the extremists had shouted 'baby killers' and 'butchers of Basra' as well as brandishing placards against the Iraq war.
He said the extremists, who follow the militant group led by Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammed, had fuelled feelings against the Muslim community which led to a march last Sunday in Luton which was disrupted by white, right-wing extremists.

Standstill: The clashes between the two groups caused traffic to stop through the Bury Park area of Luton
Mr Latif said: 'We have been fighting these Muslim extremists for you. They represent nobody but themselves.
'The community decided to move them on because the police won't. We have asked them, but they did nothing.
'I don't know if they will be back. We have been the victims twice over - from the stupidity of Muslim extremists who metaphorically pour petrol and fan the flames of the right-wing extremists.
'This was a peaceful demonstration and we hope they get the message that the law-abiding community is sick and tired of them.'
No one was arrested during the incident.
A spokeswoman for Bedfordshire Police said: 'We attended the incident, calmed people down and moved them on. No one was arrested and there were no injuries.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1189577/Muslim-extremists-anti-war-protest-driven-members-community.html#ixzz46vtcMuwX

didge wrote:Glad to see several hundred turn out against extremism.
Still not enough, as many are within their their communities and where we have the Muslim Council of Britain that represents many of them be at odds with the Prevent strategy. The strategy to prevent all extremism and yet we see Muslims work against this, when they should be working with this. Like I say , its the majority of Muslims that are suffering due to a sizable proportion that have no intent to integrate Many more Muslims need to get behind the progression and secular Muslims for a better future

4EVER2 wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1189577/Muslim-extremists-anti-war-protest-driven-members-community.html

TY...this is an excellent example Fuzzy; now if main stream media will continue to pick up more such stories like this --- perhaps the jest of how the 'MODERATE REFUGEES' are feeling will become the way all humanity reacts to their thought process.  They too just want to live a healthy/safe/normal life style and let others just be left alone!

The Muslim community turned on extremists in their midst yesterday, telling them they were 'sick and tired' of their behaviour.
The angry confrontation came in Luton, where anti-Islamist protesters brandished England flags last Sunday, before clashing with police.
The latest violence erupted as arguments raged between fellow Muslims shortly after Friday morning prayers in the Bury Park area of the town.

Heated: The two groups clash after members of the Luton Muslim community decided to move a group of extremists on, with officers struggling to hold them back
Passing traffic ground to a halt as the large group of moderates confronted about a dozen extremists.
As the radical Muslims began to set up their stall, they were surrounded by a crowd shouting 'we don't want you here' and 'move on, move on'.
Angry words were exchanged and scuffles broke out between members of both groups, with the extremists shouting 'Shame on you' and 'Get back to your synagogue'.
The moderates chanted 'Out, Out, Out', and after an uneasy stand-off, police officers were able to persuade the extremist group to leave the area.

Anger: A member of one of the groups gestures to the camera during the confrontation
One police officer and two community support officers struggled to hold them apart until more officers arrived.
Buses and cars were unable to move as the crowd spilled into the road.
Farasat Latif, of the Islamic Centre in Luton, which was firebombed after the protest against the soldiers, said moderate members of his community took action because police had failed to move the group on.
During the protest against the homecoming parade of the Royal Anglian regiment in March, the extremists had shouted 'baby killers' and 'butchers of Basra' as well as brandishing placards against the Iraq war.
He said the extremists, who follow the militant group led by Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammed, had fuelled feelings against the Muslim community which led to a march last Sunday in Luton which was disrupted by white, right-wing extremists.

Standstill: The clashes between the two groups caused traffic to stop through the Bury Park area of Luton
Mr Latif said: 'We have been fighting these Muslim extremists for you. They represent nobody but themselves.
'The community decided to move them on because the police won't. We have asked them, but they did nothing.
'I don't know if they will be back. We have been the victims twice over - from the stupidity of Muslim extremists who metaphorically pour petrol and fan the flames of the right-wing extremists.
'This was a peaceful demonstration and we hope they get the message that the law-abiding community is sick and tired of them.'
No one was arrested during the incident.
A spokeswoman for Bedfordshire Police said: 'We attended the incident, calmed people down and moved them on. No one was arrested and there were no injuries.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1189577/Muslim-extremists-anti-war-protest-driven-members-community.html#ixzz46vtcMuwX

Didgy-dooers regurgitated reply>
So zero points answered to my points and then demand I asnswer questions
Quelle surprise
I am not concerned by whether you think the ratio is of importance on numbers that have fled
I am only concerned with the thousands that do not conform to society
They make the lives of others Muslims problematic, as well as women, homosexuals and religious and non-religious minorities
All of which you deflected out of talking about
I suggest you try and answer my points again

4EVER2 wrote:

Didgy-dooers regurgitated reply>
So zero points answered to my points and then demand I asnswer questions
Quelle surprise
I am not concerned by whether you think the ratio is of importance on numbers that have fled
I am only concerned with the thousands that do not conform to society
They make the lives of others Muslims problematic, as well as women, homosexuals and religious and non-religious minorities
All of which you deflected out of talking about
I suggest you try and answer my points again

A. I've not "demanded" anything from you --- nope, really DO NOT CARE; I asked if you "COULD AGREE"
B. you've yet again dumped more of your regurgitated bile that you consistently purge everywhere you post back out here
C. And now you expect the ADULTS to respond to your POINTS as if you have that control ~~~  Done, back on ignore --- you've still have many lessons to learn about proper debate behavior!

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Be definition, being moderate means you're busy living your life and don't have time to protest.

Extremists are normally subsidised by benefits or some organisation (like Britain First) and has all the time to protest.

4EVER2 wrote:

Didgy-dooers regurgitated reply>
So zero points answered to my points and then demand I asnswer questions
Quelle surprise
I am not concerned by whether you think the ratio is of importance on numbers that have fled
I am only concerned with the thousands that do not conform to society
They make the lives of others Muslims problematic, as well as women, homosexuals and religious and non-religious minorities
All of which you deflected out of talking about
I suggest you try and answer my points again

A. I've not "demanded" anything from you --- nope, really DO NOT CARE; I asked if you "COULD AGREE"
B. you've yet again dumped more of your regurgitated bile that you consistently purge everywhere you post back out here
C. And now you expect the ADULTS to respond to your POINTS as if you have that control ~~~  Done, back on ignore --- you've still have many lessons to learn about proper debate behavior!

didge wrote:The problem with this thread is its flawed from the off
Nobody has issues with those who respect the well being and equality of others, of which many Muslims do. The problems stems from a sleazeball amount of Muslims in Western countries that have nop intention of integrating which effects the lives of women, homosexuals and religious and non-religious minorities. Where we saw this in the past with prejudice against Irish, Afro-Caribbean, Indians and the first Pakistani's that came, they integrated in the main and did not keep from the rest of society.

We area talking about here a sizeaball amount of Muslims that place their faith over that of British law, which is very problematic, especially to where the views of Islam they keep clash with the well being and equality of others. They hold views that area based on absolute morals that deny equality. America still suffers this problem with Neoconservative Christians as well, as they refuse to respect the well being and equality of all within the law. This is why people on the left are clueless, they go off the good that we see off those that integrate massively missing the part that a substantial do not and have no intention of doing so. This concerns many people as it has a knock on effect on hate crimes all round, those to the ones that these hardliner Muslims commit against Jews, women, homosexuals ect, to then Muslims suffering due to the hate that rises from the hardliner Muslims.

Cause and effect.

What needs to be done is more Muslims have to distance themselves from these groups, but because of a belief around brotherhood and sisterhood, they fail badly and allow the two to be seen and grouped together. Thankfully there is progressive and secular Muslims out there who are willing to take up this cause and bring about a better world, because they recognise that some of the beliefs in islam are against the human rights of people
The left do nothing to help bring about change, but make it worse by failing to recognise the problems. They also add to the cause and effect of the spiraling hate.
Its their inability to denounce things that are bad are wrong because they fear they will also been seen as hateful.

Its wrong, you have to criticize bad things, or they do not change when those same lefties then end up supporting those who believe in bad beliefs, allowing those bad beliefs protecting which should never and does not have any protection under our laws.
Our laws are based on equality, not some nonsense claimed to have been written in book 1400 years ago. It denies freedom of thought and controls those to being abject slaves to the will and commands of a book

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Be definition, being moderate means you're busy living your life and don't have time to protest.

Extremists are normally subsidised by benefits or some organisation (like Britain First) and has all the time to protest.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

didge wrote:Glad to see several hundred turn out against extremism.
Still not enough, as many are within their their communities and where we have the Muslim Council of Britain that represents many of them be at odds with the Prevent strategy. The strategy to prevent all extremism and yet we see Muslims work against this, when they should be working with this. Like I say , its the majority of Muslims that are suffering due to a sizable proportion that have no intent to integrate Many more Muslims need to get behind the progression and secular Muslims for a better future

And just like Smelly, it will never be enough for you.

4EVER2 wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

And just like Smelly, it will never be enough for you.

Fuzzy, please for the sake of keeping this topic flowing forward and avoiding the pitfalls of going off into the gutter; could you just skip over the Didgy-dooers posts or better yet put his avatar on IGNORE???  PLEASE???

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

didge wrote:Glad to see several hundred turn out against extremism.
Still not enough, as many are within their their communities and where we have the Muslim Council of Britain that represents many of them be at odds with the Prevent strategy. The strategy to prevent all extremism and yet we see Muslims work against this, when they should be working with this. Like I say , its the majority of Muslims that are suffering due to a sizable proportion that have no intent to integrate Many more Muslims need to get behind the progression and secular Muslims for a better future

And just like Smelly, it will never be enough for you.

4EVER2 wrote:*****SNIP*****
Got me to thinking about all of the 'HUDDLED-MASSES' that came to our American shores; whether from their own methods or as a 'WORK FORCE' {slave or indentured servant}, fleeing some destitute situation from their homeland - we've had the multitudes of nations drop into our country and some assimilate rapidly while others brought with them their unique method of GANG violence.
Italian Mafia - Chinese Gangs - Mexican Gangs - Fighting Iris, just wasn't a polite nickname etc., etc., etc.  
We've suffered and are still dealing with their own unique ways of 'tribal social skills' --- but aren't we a better country as a WHOLE with this melting pot of cultures then if we'd kept our borders closed and excluded 'those that we found UN-acceptable'?

Seriously...isn't any meshing of social groups going to take some adjustments and getting used to each other?  And if within those refugees there will be 'THOSE' exceptional few that are bent on doing wrong - behaving badly - breaking the laws - doesn't that come with the very nature of allowing humanity to cross into our country and become a citizen?

Aren't we - WE the better part of humanity - supposed to be giving a hand up instead of showing how intolerant we can be? 
Just asking...I think it's an important discussion.

Irn's stated > Vic, where is their refusal to integrate? The poll from the Phillips dude suggest to vast majprity of Muslims do integrate and have no problem living here and condemn extremism. Just because they wear their own form of clothing or stick wiith their form of faith doesn't mean they haven't integrated surely?

The attack on the immigrant comunity and particulary Muslims happens on here elsewhere day in day out with most of it is based on what comes out of the mouths of the radical Mullahs as if they represented all the Muslims.

****SNIP*****

Lord Foul wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:*****SNIP*****
Got me to thinking about all of the 'HUDDLED-MASSES' that came to our American shores; whether from their own methods or as a 'WORK FORCE' {slave or indentured servant}, fleeing some destitute situation from their homeland - we've had the multitudes of nations drop into our country and some assimilate rapidly while others brought with them their unique method of GANG violence.
Italian Mafia - Chinese Gangs - Mexican Gangs - Fighting Iris, just wasn't a polite nickname etc., etc., etc.  
We've suffered and are still dealing with their own unique ways of 'tribal social skills' --- but aren't we a better country as a WHOLE with this melting pot of cultures then if we'd kept our borders closed and excluded 'those that we found UN-acceptable'?

Seriously...isn't any meshing of social groups going to take some adjustments and getting used to each other?  And if within those refugees there will be 'THOSE' exceptional few that are bent on doing wrong - behaving badly - breaking the laws - doesn't that come with the very nature of allowing humanity to cross into our country and become a citizen?

Aren't we - WE the better part of humanity - supposed to be giving a hand up instead of showing how intolerant we can be? 
Just asking...I think it's an important discussion.



****SNIP*****

firstly 4ever when these "huddled masses " came to your shores...like veyas antipodean dirt pile.....you HAD no "culture" to speak of....there was really nothing to consider uniquely "your own"  Hell you barely even, had a "cohesive society"  and it may well be pointed out that those italian gangs very nearly won....had you had lefties in control they would have done...they were NOT beaten by the authorities "being nice"...at all. The police actions taken against them were more reminiscent of war rather than policing.
secondly, what makes you think that your present society is in any way shape or form "desirable" or particularly virtuous?
gang violence, sectarian divisions, and plain old insanity rule your nation from the top down.
your laws are in general , a mess, inconsistant and stutus dependant (a charge that is becomming increasingly possible here BTW)
you are as, if not more so "ghettoised" than we are.
and whilst your cities may be crowded....you have far less people per sq mile than us.....
and..the worst of it is.....despite all your propaganda and that of YOUR lefties......human life (of your OWN people) is worth less in your neck of the wood than it is here
(and it could be argued that that applies also to those elsewhere as well...despite your welcome banners to all and sundry)

It IS rather hypocritical of you to have up the banner "welcome to all you Muslims" and at the same time be involved over there indiscriminately blowing those same people into fragments...

 and it may well be pointed out that those italian gangs very nearly won....had you had lefties in control they would have done...they were NOT beaten by the authorities "being nice"...at all. The police actions taken against them were more reminiscent of war rather than policing.

It IS rather hypocritical of you to have up the banner "welcome to all you Muslims" and at the same time be involved over there indiscriminately blowing those same people into fragments...

4EVER2 wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

4EVER2 wrote:*****SNIP*****
Got me to thinking about all of the 'HUDDLED-MASSES' that came to our American shores; whether from their own methods or as a 'WORK FORCE' {slave or indentured servant}, fleeing some destitute situation from their homeland - we've had the multitudes of nations drop into our country and some assimilate rapidly while others brought with them their unique method of GANG violence.
Italian Mafia - Chinese Gangs - Mexican Gangs - Fighting Iris, just wasn't a polite nickname etc., etc., etc.  
We've suffered and are still dealing with their own unique ways of 'tribal social skills' --- but aren't we a better country as a WHOLE with this melting pot of cultures then if we'd kept our borders closed and excluded 'those that we found UN-acceptable'?

Seriously...isn't any meshing of social groups going to take some adjustments and getting used to each other?  And if within those refugees there will be 'THOSE' exceptional few that are bent on doing wrong - behaving badly - breaking the laws - doesn't that come with the very nature of allowing humanity to cross into our country and become a citizen?

Aren't we - WE the better part of humanity - supposed to be giving a hand up instead of showing how intolerant we can be? 
Just asking...I think it's an important discussion.



****SNIP*****

firstly 4ever when these "huddled masses " came to your shores...like veyas antipodean dirt pile.....you HAD no "culture" to speak of....there was really nothing to consider uniquely "your own"  Hell you barely even, had a "cohesive society"  and it may well be pointed out that those italian gangs very nearly won....had you had lefties in control they would have done...they were NOT beaten by the authorities "being nice"...at all. The police actions taken against them were more reminiscent of war rather than policing.
secondly, what makes you think that your present society is in any way shape or form "desirable" or particularly virtuous?
gang violence, sectarian divisions, and plain old insanity rule your nation from the top down.
your laws are in general , a mess, inconsistant and stutus dependant (a charge that is becomming increasingly possible here BTW)
you are as, if not more so "ghettoised" than we are.
and whilst your cities may be crowded....you have far less people per sq mile than us.....
and..the worst of it is.....despite all your propaganda and that of YOUR lefties......human life (of your OWN people) is worth less in your neck of the wood than it is here
(and it could be argued that that applies also to those elsewhere as well...despite your welcome banners to all and sundry)

It IS rather hypocritical of you to have up the banner "welcome to all you Muslims" and at the same time be involved over there indiscriminately blowing those same people into fragments...

GEEZE, you do manage to get stuck in that rut of 'LEFTY vs RIGHTY' mentality; gets quite confusing since your 'Lefty VS Righty' is polar opposite from our definition of those terms!  So for the sake of this discussion - I'm willfully choosing to IGNORE that.

Lack of a established society: True, in some sections of America that was true but for those 'fresh off the boats' in New York...it wasn't so and the humanity dumped on our shores were often regulated to the 'slums' of inner New York City - once they survived their indoctrination on Ellis Island.
Unless they had established families waiting on the docks to pick them up and drive them off to further locations.  Those boats arriving daily had such mass amounts of varieties from all over the globe --- of course there was the Irish refugee's from the potato famine etc., etc., etc.,  

 and it may well be pointed out that those italian gangs very nearly won....had you had lefties in control they would have done...they were NOT beaten by the authorities "being nice"...at all. The police actions taken against them were more reminiscent of war rather than policing.

Excellent point; what we learned about money = corruption and military grade weapons being allowed onto the streets into the hands of thugs/mafia/criminals left our law enforcement totally ill prepared to compete - hence the formation of the FBI Leaving the 'Lefty vs Righty' out of WTF happened; allowing criminal minded/agenda driven millionaires the power to control our elections caused much of those mafia warring years.  Criminals tend to think more 'futuristic' and lawmakers are more 'reactive'! IMO  

It IS rather hypocritical of you to have up the banner "welcome to all you Muslims" and at the same time be involved over there indiscriminately blowing those same people into fragments...

Good Point; but being asked to become the 'POLICE ENFORCEMENT' for the world is a horrible job --- but who else do you call when the 'CALL' has to be made?

4EVER2 wrote:

 LordFoul replied> and this is why you fail 100% every time....
firstly you fail to EVER show any reason why I should care about those "not my tribe"...
what possible "meaning" do they have to me.....
what is the cost/benefit equation?
etc
the answer is NOT "becasue its the right thing to do" since THAT is a relative standpoint dependant upon a set POV.
secondly you REFUSE to accept that whilst I have ...repeatedly..... over a long time pointed out that I have no particular objection to people from other nations comming here, there are preconditions attached to that.
you repeatedly condone and promote the erosion of our way of life in favour of the incommer....
you promote their rudeness and ignorance
you condone their refusal to integrate.. (and as it turns out it is THEIR refusal to integrate ...NOT some sort of vague we dont want you message from us natives)
you condone and indeed encourage them to not only celebrate but push their difference
you expect me to pay for it all
you expect me to find their less pleasant habits acceptable (the whole hand wash thing for a start)
you expect me to find their contempt for western women aceptable ...and are prepared to blame our women for that...rather than recognising that their primitive religion is to blame
and even when presented with reasonable evidence (as I did in the handshake thread, over the "dont greet non Muslims first" post I made) ignore it since it doesnt coincide with your agenda.
I have., in te past asked this question ...and every time it has been avoided....I requote from the handshake thread here...rather than re write it all
you surrender on this issue (the handshake thing)
you have surendered on sharia laws
you have virtually surrendered on the issue of hiding their faces
you surrendered (and not just to Muslims) years ago on ritual slaughter
you surrendered years ago to the sikhs on the issue of crash helmets
In every case AFAIK where asian grooming gangs were allowed to run amok it was on the watch of lefty councils (and the reason given in these cases was "community cohesion and fear of accusations of racism...which is the ACTUAL point......It wasnt a case of money buying immunity (as was the case with others of similar ilk) it was a case of leftys rolling over to have their tums tickled....to sell your soul for cash is despicable.......... to sell your soul for a warped political principle cant even be measured on the scale of turpitude.....)
you run from/deny even matters of fact take fasting for instance...where strong evidence exists of increased accident rates for Muslims during ramadan, yet you wouldnt hear of a driving ban during that period for those participating...once again the REST of us are the ones thereby at risk and have to "suck it up"
when will YOU say ...enough....now settle down and fit in???????????????????????????
or will you ONLY be happy when you are face down arse up 5 times a day???
IF....they came here...settled down, and got on with things (which I agree a FEW have done.... but it really IS "only a few") and actually integrated , instead of trying to force US to change to their ways (which constitutes a much greater "few") there would be less of a problem.....

Got me to thinking about all of the 'HUDDLED-MASSES' that came to our American shores; whether from their own methods or as a 'WORK FORCE' {slave or indentured servant}, fleeing some destitute situation from their homeland - we've had the multitudes of nations drop into our country and some assimilate rapidly while others brought with them their unique method of GANG violence.
Italian Mafia - Chinese Gangs - Mexican Gangs - Fighting Iris, just wasn't a polite nickname etc., etc., etc.  
We've suffered and are still dealing with their own unique ways of 'tribal social skills' --- but aren't we a better country as a WHOLE with this melting pot of cultures then if we'd kept our borders closed and excluded 'those that we found UN-acceptable'?

Seriously...isn't any meshing of social groups going to take some adjustments and getting used to each other?  And if within those refugees there will be 'THOSE' exceptional few that are bent on doing wrong - behaving badly - breaking the laws - doesn't that come with the very nature of allowing humanity to cross into our country and become a citizen?

Aren't we - WE the better part of humanity - supposed to be giving a hand up instead of showing how intolerant we can be? 
Just asking...I think it's an important discussion.

Irn's stated > Vic, where is their refusal to integrate? The poll from the Phillips dude suggest to vast majprity of Muslims do integrate and have no problem living here and condemn extremism. Just because they wear their own form of clothing or stick wiith their form of faith doesn't mean they haven't integrated surely?

The attack on the immigrant comunity and particulary Muslims happens on here elsewhere day in day out with most of it is based on what comes out of the mouths of the radical Mullahs as if they represented all the Muslims.

LF stated > I dont think anyone actually directly involved "asked " you.......did they?

you just kinda went and did it...and very selectively too....only where oil was involved........

In light of the goals of the 2002 U.S. National Security Policy, which asserts that the United States will champion aspirations for human dignity, work with others to defuse regional conflicts, and expand the circle of development by opening societies and building the infrastructure of democracy, it is evident that formulating policy regarding humanitarian and peace operations has become increasingly important to our national interest.
Nevertheless, cases in which military intervention may be the only way to prevent human slaughter often do not concern, and may even oppose, the nation’s vital interests. Our dilemma arises when certain absolute moral imperatives call us to act anyway. For example, genocide should be recognized universally as immoral. However, U.S. foreign policy traditionally has followed realist “power politics” thinking, where national interests always overrule humanitarian ones. Hence, in Rwanda in 1994, the United States refrained from taking action when more than half a million people were slaughtered by primitive methods in only six weeks, and 15,700 cases of rape were reported (the actual figure may have been 250,000 to 500,000). The extremity of the genocide in Rwanda not only serves as an example of universal moral injustice, but also shows how humanitarian crises are fraught with moral complications for other countries that have an ethical responsibility to intervene.
The United States no longer can ignore global moral imperatives. Those who have the capability have a moral obligation to intervene in certain cases, even when national interests are not at stake. At the same time, no nation should dive heedlessly into a humanitarian crisis simply because the perceived injustice is emotionally appalling. Leaders who act purely from emotion may risk straining the nation’s resources while neglecting their primary responsibility of serving the interests of the citizens. http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,NI_1204_Intervene,00.html 

Stormee wrote:What is the point, advantage to us whitiz of allowing masses of scrounging, hostile forunuz who will NOT integrate, who are different to us in ALL ways onto our island with their sole intention of taking us over completely, making OUR island theirs?????????

What good will come of it?????

Death, destruction and tears  is the answer.

4EVER2 wrote:

Stormee wrote:What is the point, advantage to us whitiz of allowing masses of scrounging, hostile forunuz who will NOT integrate, who are different to us in ALL ways onto our island with their sole intention of taking us over completely, making OUR island theirs?????????

What good will come of it?????

Death, destruction and tears  is the answer.

Hmmm, well try to think of it this way; had your 'Blue Blooded Royals' not brought in some foreigners and that fresh bloodline then the chances of your 'PEOPLE' being led around by some half-wit moron would have been greatly enhanced

You over stimulated fear of the refugee leaves little room for the number of dreadful/heinous crimes committed by the very people born & bred right there in your own country! 

Stormee wrote:But why have more from another country who will not benefit us for reasons stated by so many of us all over the world including forumuz.

Stormee wrote:The NHS would survive if we encouraged and trained our OWN youngsters, it is so frustrating seeing a medico of some sort and not being able to understand them.

INVEST IN OUR OWN.

When I was young, teenybopper wanted to go into nursing, not now though, WHY?????

Stormee wrote:But why have more from another country who will not benefit us for reasons stated by so many of us all over the world including forumuz.

Syl wrote:

Stormee wrote:But why have more from another country who will not benefit us for reasons stated by so many of us all over the world including forumuz.

I think we should control much more carefully who comes in....if we do leave the EU no doubt that will happen.
I would love to see the ones who treat this country and the people like idiots whooshed off back to whence they came.
I would like to see everyone making the effort to learn the language and contribute....it would also be good if family benefit was cut off at two children....for lots of reasons.
But immigration has helped this country enormously in the past. For eg the NHS would not have survived without dedicated foreigners working in it....many of them for a pittance.
I live in a mixed society....mostly it works, when it doesn't it's more the authorities that are to blame rather than the immigrants themselves.

4EVER2 wrote:

LF stated > I dont think anyone actually directly involved "asked " you.......did they?

you just kinda went and did it...and very selectively too....only where oil was involved........

Well, oddly enough or subjectively enough; America's Foreign Policy is rife with requests for both of our military and financial aide - ANNUALLY and as I've had my dragged into many a topic around here - I thought that I'd covered this issue quite sufficiently
But here's a excellent piece regarding this very issue:

In light of the goals of the 2002 U.S. National Security Policy, which asserts that the United States will champion aspirations for human dignity, work with others to defuse regional conflicts, and expand the circle of development by opening societies and building the infrastructure of democracy, it is evident that formulating policy regarding humanitarian and peace operations has become increasingly important to our national interest.
Nevertheless, cases in which military intervention may be the only way to prevent human slaughter often do not concern, and may even oppose, the nation’s vital interests. Our dilemma arises when certain absolute moral imperatives call us to act anyway. For example, genocide should be recognized universally as immoral. However, U.S. foreign policy traditionally has followed realist “power politics” thinking, where national interests always overrule humanitarian ones. Hence, in Rwanda in 1994, the United States refrained from taking action when more than half a million people were slaughtered by primitive methods in only six weeks, and 15,700 cases of rape were reported (the actual figure may have been 250,000 to 500,000). The extremity of the genocide in Rwanda not only serves as an example of universal moral injustice, but also shows how humanitarian crises are fraught with moral complications for other countries that have an ethical responsibility to intervene.
The United States no longer can ignore global moral imperatives. Those who have the capability have a moral obligation to intervene in certain cases, even when national interests are not at stake. At the same time, no nation should dive heedlessly into a humanitarian crisis simply because the perceived injustice is emotionally appalling. Leaders who act purely from emotion may risk straining the nation’s resources while neglecting their primary responsibility of serving the interests of the citizens. http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,NI_1204_Intervene,00.html 

Our current POTUS has been reamed over the coals many a time: 'doesn't respond fast enough - is responding to fast - don't send troops - too many boots on the ground'...there's no WIN-WIN in this foreign policy deployment issue - EVER
But I will agree with you and the suspicions about our past and those regions that have CRUDE OIL  

HT - you really are quite 'OBTUSE' and yet since you've found my method of posting so annoying it's left you lame and lacking for knowledge about my linage
But you really DO NOT CARE so I'll leave it alone and allow your pathetic post to die for lack of 'give-a-shit' and keep the topic moving forward

HT > One is either obtuse or not. The prefix 'quite' is erroneous. And I think you mean lineage. Linage is the number of lines in printed matter on paper, which, ironically, does pertain to you!

4EVER2 wrote:

HT > One is either obtuse or not. The prefix 'quite' is erroneous. And I think you mean lineage. Linage is the number of lines in printed matter on paper, which, ironically, does pertain to you!

when lacking anything of merit to add to the topic/discussion...always - always
fall back on making fun of the members method of posting and then make a return
visit to 'nit-pic' about verbiage and spelling! 
You are quite the community worthy debater --- sadly it's only in your own mind!