Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
How long
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2816487" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>He just showed you and Ace a huge list that proves he was wrong, including the most senior and closest advisor to the President of the United States. Yet you cherry pick one area that's mildly underrepresented? American Indians are 1% of the population and they only have 2 members of the 113th Congress as well. Does that mean non-Native Americans are xenophobic of Native Americans?</p><p></p><p>Pointing out and discussing facts is not xenophobia. If it is, then the word itself is no longer a negative adjective. It merely means that what you don't know may be harmful until determined to be otherwise. Would you want to invite members of ISIS to America? If not, does that make you xenophobic? After all, you're categorizing an entire foreign population who are strange and different from you as bad for America, right? How do you know for sure they won't arrive here and renounce the Caliphate? You don't, but you can assign a "risk score" to the proposition. It's called "intelligence". </p><p></p><p>Simply put, not one single person has provided a valid reason why the Syrian refugees would be better placed in the U.S. than one of the numerous predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East with functional governments and cash to burn. Or why they'd be better off living in the woods in Northern Sweden for that matter. One person categorized all of them as "sh$t holes nobody wants to live in". If anything, categorizing an entire region run by ethnic Muslims as a "sh$thole" would be xenophobic, correct? </p><p></p><p>Pointing out facts is not xenophobia. Pointing out that 2nd & 3rd generation Muslim immigrants are traveling to Syria to fight for the Caliphate isn't xenophobia, nor is pointing out that the U.S. government has a terrible track record at "vetting" our own security clearance holders with fully transparent records and histories. Do you really think they're going to do better with refugees from Syria, a country we've had on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list since 1979? Seriously?</p><p></p><p>This isn't xenophobia, so why don't you stop with that nonsense already. It is exceedingly tedious, not to mention inherently false. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2816487, member: 1132"] He just showed you and Ace a huge list that proves he was wrong, including the most senior and closest advisor to the President of the United States. Yet you cherry pick one area that's mildly underrepresented? American Indians are 1% of the population and they only have 2 members of the 113th Congress as well. Does that mean non-Native Americans are xenophobic of Native Americans? Pointing out and discussing facts is not xenophobia. If it is, then the word itself is no longer a negative adjective. It merely means that what you don't know may be harmful until determined to be otherwise. Would you want to invite members of ISIS to America? If not, does that make you xenophobic? After all, you're categorizing an entire foreign population who are strange and different from you as bad for America, right? How do you know for sure they won't arrive here and renounce the Caliphate? You don't, but you can assign a "risk score" to the proposition. It's called "intelligence". Simply put, not one single person has provided a valid reason why the Syrian refugees would be better placed in the U.S. than one of the numerous predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East with functional governments and cash to burn. Or why they'd be better off living in the woods in Northern Sweden for that matter. One person categorized all of them as "sh$t holes nobody wants to live in". If anything, categorizing an entire region run by ethnic Muslims as a "sh$thole" would be xenophobic, correct? Pointing out facts is not xenophobia. Pointing out that 2nd & 3rd generation Muslim immigrants are traveling to Syria to fight for the Caliphate isn't xenophobia, nor is pointing out that the U.S. government has a terrible track record at "vetting" our own security clearance holders with fully transparent records and histories. Do you really think they're going to do better with refugees from Syria, a country we've had on the State Sponsors of Terrorism list since 1979? Seriously? This isn't xenophobia, so why don't you stop with that nonsense already. It is exceedingly tedious, not to mention inherently false. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
How long
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom