It is sometimes good
to listen to those you disagree with, and not jump to conclusions about their
motives.
Another point you make:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What we need from politicians now is not certainty but assurance, not rectitude but sympathetic concern. We need politicians who are willing to say, “I understand your fear, but…” -
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is not what I want from a politician. I want him to tell me the unbiased pros and cons of a situation, not as you or as I, in response, have done, Just the fact. Treat me like an adult and tell me what Your decision was. Then I can support or oppose it.
On the last point, of course, I agree with you. I was a born in a Japanese concentration camp, so I am pretty much for providing safety for refugees. I outlined the steps in my blog a number of times, but will do so again here:
If the Jewish Community wants to help and give asylum support the following type of actions by our country:
- Accept women of all ages
- Accept males under 14 and above 60
- Place all refugees in locations outside of the US so that none can claim birthright citizenship.
- Provide weapons and support the males to fight and take back their homes.
- Reunite the families at their point of origin when the war has been successfully concluded. And make sure it concludes successfully.
- If you have limited space, provide it to those that need it most, the Christians of the region, the minorities who are being wiped out by both Shiites and Sunnis.
==================================================================
Response to “The refugee debate hides the real threat from the
Islamic State” by Ruth
Marcus
“To channel Clinton on Benghazi, at this point
what difference does it make?”
It makes a huge difference as to who to believe!
Do you believe a pair of liars who concocted a story for purely political
leaders, or a bloviator who shoots from the hip? I’ll take the bloviator since
I know where he lives. The liars can change without me recognizing the change
behind their lying masks.
---------------------------------
“If the Islamic State wants to strike in the
United States, terrorists posing as refugees would be an enormously inefficient
path. There are far easier methods: either home-grown operatives or those who
arrive through so-called visa waiver countries with far less intensive checking
than the process for refugees.”
Interesting therefore that they did infiltrate
using refugees in the Paris mass murder, and that we had the same in the Boston
case with the Tsaernev brothers. Also, I haven’t heard anyone say that we
should continue our laxness with the Visa program.
----------------------------------
“Donald Trump has said it may be necessary to close mosques and create a national database of Muslims. Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush called for sorting refugees by religion. Chris Christie would exclude even 5-year-old orphans. Ben Carson referred to “rabid dogs” and tried to raise money
off the issue.”
Neither Ted Cruz nor Jeb Bush called for “sorting”.
They stated the obvious fact that if you are a minority (Christian, Kurd) you
are attacked by both Sunni’s and Shiites, and as a Christian community you have
all but disappeared. This is facts, and recognition of them, not “religionism”
-------------------------------------
“What’s the bigger risk: that terrorists posing as refugees will
slip through in a year or two, or that young Muslims here will listen to this
bigotry and become radicalized? The answer seems obvious.”
Not to me, the 9/11 attack was not carried out because we were
nasty and bigoted against Muslims, nor was the 1992(?) attack. Please stop making unwarranted assumptions
based on ignoring facts.
--------------------------------------
Response to “The refugee debate hides the real threat from the
Islamic State” by Ruth
Marcus
“To channel Clinton on Benghazi, at this point
what difference does it make?”
It makes a huge difference as to who to believe!
Do you believe a pair of liars who concocted a story for purely political
leaders, or a bloviator who shoots from the hip? I’ll take the bloviator since
I know where he lives. The liars can change without me recognizing the change
behind their lying masks.
---------------------------------
“If the Islamic State wants to strike in the
United States, terrorists posing as refugees would be an enormously inefficient
path. There are far easier methods: either home-grown operatives or those who
arrive through so-called visa waiver countries with far less intensive checking
than the process for refugees.”
Interesting therefore that they did infiltrate
using refugees in the Paris mass murder, and that we had the same in the Boston
case with the Tsaernev brothers. Also, I haven’t heard anyone say that we
should continue our laxness with the Visa program.
----------------------------------
“Donald Trump has said it may be necessary to close mosques and create a national database of Muslims. Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush called for sorting refugees by religion. Chris Christie would exclude even 5-year-old orphans. Ben Carson referred to “rabid dogs” and tried to raise money
off the issue.”
Neither Ted Cruz nor Jeb Bush called for “sorting”.
They stated the obvious fact that if you are a minority (Christian, Kurd) you
are attacked by both Sunni’s and Shiites, and as a Christian community you have
all but disappeared. This is facts, and recognition of them, not “religionism.”
As to Trump, he is a bloviator expressing his anger, after which he comes up with pretty sensible positions. Follow him, give him the benefit of the doubt, and he'll be less threatening to you.
-------------------------------------
“What’s the bigger risk: that terrorists posing as refugees will
slip through in a year or two, or that young Muslims here will listen to this
bigotry and become radicalized? The answer seems obvious.”
Not to me, the 9/11 attack was not carried out because we were
nasty and bigoted against Muslims, nor was the 1992(?) attack. Please stop making unwarranted assumptions
based on ignoring facts.
--------------------------------------
Lastly, why not spend our energy trying to find a solution
satisfactory to all our population. Here is my proposal
1.
Accept women of all ages
2.
Accept males under 14 and above 60
3.
Place all refugees in locations outside of the US so that none can
claim birthright citizenship.
4.
Provide weapons and support the males to fight and take back their
homes.
5.
Reunite the families at their point of origin when the war has
been successfully concluded. And make sure it concludes successfully.
6.
If you have limited space, provide it to those that need it most,
the Christians of the region, the minorities who are being wiped out by both
Shiites and Sunnis.
This answers the security problems of Republicans, the religious
worries of our religious population, and the worries about immigration of those
worried about it. It takes it out of politics, and hopefully makes it possible.
========================
AP
Fact
Check: When truth is a casualty of terrorist fears --
CALVIN WOODWARD -- Response
This fact check is a leftist propaganda arm. Let’s go through
their latest fact check:
"Our president wants
to take in 250,000 from Syria." Trump also states that most of the people
leaving Syria are men, with very few children, an observation he made at one
point by seeing the crowds on TV.
Clearly the 250K is
bloviating but it probably comes from the fact that there are over 3M refugees
from Syria (CNN
) and our taking 10K doesn’t compute at all!
According to UNHCR the
demographics for those leaving Syria for Europe are:
22% Children,
16% Women,
62% Men
So
the claim by the “fact finders” that “sexes are split about equally, and only 2
percent are single men of combat age.” Is not “fact checkable” but a bunch of
nonsense. Unless they are claiming that UNHCR is a republican establishment.
BUSH: "In the law, it
requires a religious test. ... It is a requirement, as you go through the
screening process, that religion is an element to it."
THE FACTS: No religious test is required for
people seeking asylum or refugee status.
AP
is using a lawyers trick on this. Religion can be used as a discriminator
(hence is a test) but only if “if someone cites it as a reason to seek refuge,
but it is not a test in law.” In the next paragraph. Give us a break and stop talking lawyerlike. Bush is right in stating that such a test
should be made, and using slightly incorrect language doesn’t change that.
Trump on requiring Muslims
to register. Not exactly what he claimed, it could be interpreted that way, but
it could also be interpreted as meaning that list of potential terrorists might
include a good proportion of Muslim Clerics, Muslim VIPs etc., as probably is
already the case. But even if he did. We did this in WWII and for many of us,
the situation feels like a real war.
