Well it was a crazy and exhausting trip, however I survived. It typically takes me ~23 to get to my Shanghai hotel from the time I leave home. Well this time we got to Shanghai and learned we could not land because of fog or something, so we were diverted to some small island near South Koreas for refueling and then sent to Tokyo to secure new flights to China... What a BUMMER!!! So it took ~40 hours of catching a little sleep on planes and in a cab before I got there. On the upside the return flight went great.
So Jerry added the following comment to G2A Crazy People Everywhere
We are not talking about letting in ISIS personnel or not. We are talking about if we should let in Muslim refugees. The vast majority of whom do not support the violent actions committed by ISIS.
It reminds me of the Japanese internment camps. There was a risk of a few Japanese sympathizers and the answer was to imprison a whole demographic of American citizens.
In your view, should we do that to American Muslims? I mean this weeks actions in California definitely indicate that American Muslims are more likely to be swayed by the ISIS message. This was an interesting interview. How would we respond to learning that our brother had just killed 14 people... Does that mean everyone of the Muslims should be interred?
And of course most of the lone shooters are men... Should all of us men be interred?
Where do we stop? Do we let fear run our lives?
So Jerry added the following comment to G2A Crazy People Everywhere
"The basic premise of terrorism is that it forces the government to curtail freedoms to try to stop further terrorism, thus alienating the government from its own citizens. In other words, if we react too strenuously, the terrorists win.
That doesn't mean there isn't some level of caution and precaution that IS acceptable to the vast majority of us. Nor does it mean that every precaution is wise and effective; just look at the TSA. But allowing in people who have SAID they are coming in to commit acts of terrorism, as ISIS has, strikes me as too risky. Why is that even arguable?" Jerry
We are not talking about letting in ISIS personnel or not. We are talking about if we should let in Muslim refugees. The vast majority of whom do not support the violent actions committed by ISIS.
It reminds me of the Japanese internment camps. There was a risk of a few Japanese sympathizers and the answer was to imprison a whole demographic of American citizens.
In your view, should we do that to American Muslims? I mean this weeks actions in California definitely indicate that American Muslims are more likely to be swayed by the ISIS message. This was an interesting interview. How would we respond to learning that our brother had just killed 14 people... Does that mean everyone of the Muslims should be interred?
And of course most of the lone shooters are men... Should all of us men be interred?
Where do we stop? Do we let fear run our lives?
11 comments:
Based on the reports that his wife appears to have been the radicalizer and lied on her visa of her address (not verified??). It would point to a lack of proper screening which the FBI and HLS have said are not adequate for refugees. Therefore, how much risk are we willing to take in America??
Many Muslim countries in the Middle East are not willing to take in refugees tells me that we should not until they ALL take in their share 1ST.
Young single man should not be let in at all. Send them to fight for their country!!!!
Ron Stoffel
Here is a link to a sort of related blog post that I found intriguing, though a bit over the top. I sure people who comment here will find it way out of line:
time to tell the truth about conservative religious extremeism
From the post:
"What one is not allowed to do while remaining a member of good standing is tell to the truth: that to most rational people there is very little dividing line between the agendas of conservative Muslim extremists and conservative Christian ones. Both groups are strongly in favor of weaponizing the public, both are devoted to the imposition of theocracy, and both are opposed to expanded rights for women and those of alternate sexual orientations."
to me I agree that there are some similarites like those mentioned above but I would say that Muslim extremeists are much more extreme than Christian extremists in their terrorism, much more conservative in their treatment of women, and there are many more of them.
I think my comments also aply to conservative Muslims compared to conservative Christians (non radical, non extreme, non violent) When it comes to views on women I think Muslim views are more conservative and there are more Muslims holding those views. About theocracy and imminent end times and also about needing / owning weapons I don't know how to compare the two groups.
btw, 6 years of working with Somali Muslim families has given me little insight to their religion, though I know there is some variation in their practices such as some of the women cover their faces and most do not. They seem to me to treat women equally from what I can observe at least when it comes to educating their girls. I tend to see them as very moderate in their views (except for my student who told me I that as a pork eater I am doomed to hell fires.)
NG,
Conservatives are concerned about blocking refugees from entering the country, yet they continue to fight something as logical as mandatory background checks on all weapons purchases. Now I like my guns but that makes no sense.
CNN Obama Thoughts (ie GOP being irrational)
I think that congress should pass a bill that aims to stop suspected terrorists from legally buying guns.
GOP blocks bill to stop terrorists from buying guns
btw, on topic, I am against Muslim internment camps.
I think we should continue to let Muslim refugees into the country. Living with the risk of gun violence has become part of living in America I personally think my very small risk of being shot is as great from a deranged white guy as it is from a Muslim terrorist.
About gun violence, if it were up to me I'd make both automatic and semi automatic weapons illegal. I don't believe they are used by hunters. Maybe I'd let people rent them for use at a gun range or maybe make them very hard to get through a special permitting process. I know there is zero chance of this happening, but that is what I would do.
We are somewhat in agreement. I am not sure why normal hunters need bump fire AR15's.
about the gun control side topic of this thread. The weapons owned by this guy are mostly legal. it seems the false ID is his biggest crime. Seems pretty crazy to me.
Police find 8,300 rounds of ammo, assault rifle and body armor in home of Long Island man who impersonated Air Marshal
Several of my friends are gun nuts and probably have more guns and ammo at home. On the other hand none of them have vehicles made to look like a police car... :-)
One of my friends bought several safes from old banks and moved them into his basement to keep his collection safe. Ironically these guys don't tend to fire their guns very often. They are like car collectors who don't want to put miles on them.
Do your friends own a stockpile like in my link, including assault riffles? Do they have body armor?
No body armor, but they have rifles with big clips.
I don't think the fact that a couple of terrorists dressed themselves up in Muslim drag before committing their evil acts should affect our attitudes to that faith or any other.
--Hiram
Post a Comment