• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Truck plows into crowd at Christmas street market in Berlin

bobknightfan said:
RJ is a total fucking idiot. I still think his brain was fried before he left WF in 1974. His position as stated...and I'm being deadly serious here....is that people who have been abused are more likely to become abusers. Therefore, we need to take in as many of these people as we can so that we can offer them more taxpayer-funded services. That's solid gold stuff. You can't make up bullshit like this.
Click to expand...

You are one sad, mean, duplicitous old bastard. I am very happy to be 2500 miles from you and feel truly sorry for those who come in direct personal contact with you in real life. it must be a terrifying and negative experience.
 
RJ,

Deacman has been incredibly patient and respectful towards you. More so than any poster to date. I don't know anyone who has the patience to go that long with you and your crazy takes.

I think you should publicly apologize to Deacman so that you will still have one person who will engage you straight up.

Just looking out for you, man. It's Christmas.
 
Your questions and more have been answered over the course of the last several decades. The integration and assimilation of large Muslim minorities by western societies have not worked particularly well. Caution, circumspection, and strict controls on of Muslim immigration into western societies offer better prospects at this time for reducing and pacifying potential cultural conflicts, than open borders and everyone Willkommen. This is certainly true for western European countries, which seem to have ignored a good deal of historical experience in their belief that modern western liberal culture would serve as a kind of superior universal cultural solvent. It can't, and it wont. Too often in the past large numbers of Muslims living side by side with large numbers of Christians has resulted in violence and forced eviction along with forced conversion.
 
Last edited:
RJKarl said:
If you don't start with putting me down, I won't hit back.

In the past twenty years, you've always thought yourself superior and not have wanted discussions of equals who may have differing opinions. In the past you could flex and ban people. You can't do that here, but you continue to be snarky and condescending.

Everything in your post is meant to insult. Why would I want to respond when that is I'll ever get back from you? If you want to put think in a civil manner, maybe you'll get a response.

The reality is on this thread and on the thread about Islam, your stance is very clear and disturbing.

By the way, here are the FBI's hate crime stats where Muslims were the victims, - http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...-assaults-reach-911-era-levels-fbi-data-show/ . Here's another that shows hate crimes going fueled by attacks on Muslims.

No group is perfect and Muslims aren't. Some commit crimes just like some Jews do and some Christians do and some atheists do.

Here;s a breakdown of hate crimes in the US. https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2012/topic-pages/victims/victims_final

"Religious bias
Of the 1,340 victims of an anti-religious hate crime:

62.4 percent were victims of an offender’s anti-Jewish bias.
11.6 percent were victims of an anti-Islamic bias.
7.5 percent were victims of a bias against groups of individuals of varying religions (anti-multiple religions, group).
6.4 percent were victims of an anti-Catholic bias.
2.6 percent were victims of an anti-Protestant bias.
0.9 percent were victims of an anti-Atheist/Agnostic bias.
8.6 percent were victims of a bias against other religions (anti-other religion)

Although I'm not directly answering DeacMan until he becomes more and respectful, one should think about Somali problem in MN also having more EU tendencies due to the fact that a large number of that population live in virtually segregated neighborhoods and lower income areas. When you add those factors, to the nature of their home country, using this group as an indicator of anything other than groups with this extreme set of criteria is not useful in discussing general Muslim assimilation in US.
Click to expand...

So in my first post I called you a progressive, liberal - which you acknowledged was accurate in your reply where you called me an Anti-America, Non-Thinker who thought all Muslims were barbaric. Seems proportional. Anyway, I then asked you a series of questions. You have refused to answer any of them and stated that said asks were all designed to insult you.

Putting this all to the side, I'll just keep trying to get you to engage in a meaningful way and address your latest post.

1 - OK. It is acknowledged that Muslims are victims hate crimes. And that fact need not be mutually exclusive from having a meaningful discussion about the Muslim community in Minnesota or elsewhere. So let's just fold hate crimes into the overall discussion of these communities. Because my presumption is that if people are victims of hate crimes it will not smooth any potential path to assimilation.

In our community, we talk a lot about hate crimes and how such acts need to be addressed. Here's a recent article that quotes the husband of a former work colleague of mine. It notes that hate crimes against Muslims are on the rise in Minnesota. Why? Are people becoming more bigoted, are there tensions between the cultures that are boiling over? Is it both? http://www.startribune.com/feds-zero-in-on-rise-in-anti-muslim-hate-crimes-in-minnesota-nationally/399231181/

2 - I presume your last paragraph is designed to be a retreat on your stance that 99% of Muslims are fully assimilated in our country. If so, address the questions I raised of you in my prior post. And, given your last sentence - which seems designed to distance religion as part of the reason for the views and actions of some Somalis in Minnesota - I'll add to the questions:

a - When refugees from the Somali community leave to join Al-Shabaab or attempt to join ISIS are they being recruited on the basis of religion? How does such recruitment take place?

b - Given almost all Somalis in Minnesota are first generation immigrants or their children, would you expect that population to reflect the views of Somali Muslims in Somalia?

c - Over 60% of Sub-Saharan African Muslims believe Sharia should be the official legal system of their country. And unlike a lot of other Sub-Saharan African countries, Somalia is almost exclusively Muslim. Is Sharia law consistent with Western secular society?

d - Would you expect if we saw an increase in refugees from other Muslim nations that find themselves embroiled in conflict that such populations would easily assimilate without the types of tensions we see within the Somali community in Minnesota? If large numbers of Syrian refugees who have suffered great trauma arrived in, say, Jacksonville - what could we expect? And, to the extent, there were significant tensions and issues, how would they be dealt with best?

Again, you are being invited to engage. It isn't a simple discussion.
 
Last edited:
Deacman you are tireless and truly amazing. No one has ever tried to engage RJ straight up for such an extended conversation.

Maybe you could have a break through.

No one has ever lasted this long without resorting to insults. RJ has never had to go the distance before.

Fascinating.
 
DeacMan's entire discussion is to extrapolate that all Muslims are like a small sub-group with backgrounds that are different than the vast majority of Muslims in the US. Further, in most of the rest of the US, Muslims are not segregated like the are in MN. There are other factors like education and poverty that come into play as well.

This study shows how the group in MN is less educated and less affluent than Muslims in general in the US. Thus their problems will be different. http://www.allied-media.com/AM/

It's not legitimate to make the extrapolations that he is trying to make.

Even using his own numbers for crimes in MN by Somaiis, I showed it was virtually identical to the crime rate of the general population.

The group he chose was inherently more at risk than almost any other group of Muslims in our country. Yet, he want to say it's representative of the whole.
 
RJKarl said:
DeacMan's entire discussion is to extrapolate that all Muslims are like a small sub-group with backgrounds that are different than the vast majority of Muslims in the US. Further, in most of the rest of the US, Muslims are not segregated like the are in MN. There are other factors like education and poverty that come into play as well.

This study shows how the group in MN is less educated and less affluent than Muslims in general in the US. Thus their problems will be different. http://www.allied-media.com/AM/

It's not legitimate to make the extrapolations that he is trying to make.

Even using his own numbers for crimes in MN by Somaiis, I showed it was virtually identical to the crime rate of the general population.

The group he chose was inherently more at risk than almost any other group of Muslims in our country. Yet, he want to say it's representative of the whole.
Click to expand...

I have made no reference to extrapolation. In fact, so far in this discussion it is you who has made broad claims such as 99% of Muslims in the U.S. are assimilated into our Western, secular way of life and that they do not live in poor conditions. If I am going to question your claims so as to get you to acknowledge there are actual, real concerns, I naturally have to offer you examples that don't hold to your sound bit narrative. And, since my own community offers an example, I provided it. A group of refugees who have significant tensions and complexities within their own community between law abiding residents and those who are less prone or less able to assimilate into a Western secular society.

In turn, when I bring up these communities you acknowledge they would be more prone to have problems, but then quickly pivot to try and assert they don't really exemplify those risks you admit they are prone to face. And you do this solely on the basis of their socio-economic background and not their religion - which I think is rather silly given how they interact with their religion is very much a part of their overall makeup. Regardless, as an example, you continue to try and assert that when I provide you with details on the number of Somalis who have been set for deportation because of their criminal histories that this somehow conflates to an actual crime rate. As I've already pointed out to you, the number of Somalis set for deportation is not remotely the same thing as a crime rate in the Somali community. Again, as I'm sure you already know, a person set for deportation must (a) commit at least one serious crime, (b) be arrested, (c) get convicted and then, finally (d) be subject to a determination they should be deported. That is many steps removed from a crime rate. Never mind not every person convicted of a crime is set for deportation.

In addition to somehow wanting to equate deportation figures to crime rates, you also have stated that taking in communities like the Somalis is a "moral obligation" and our path to "economic growth". In turn, I've raised a number of questions related to these claims which you have not addressed in any way. Instead, you've just continued to assert that I'm somehow conflating Somalis in Minnesota with the condition of all Muslims. Hell, I'm not even lumping all Somali Muslims in Minnesota into the same bucket, much less all Muslims.

So, once again, I'll engage on your points in an effort to get you to actually answer some more complex questions instead of simply trying to create some simple "on-off" analysis.

It does make sense that if you have a population of highly educated, highly skilled immigrants they will be less prone to struggle to assimilate and, presumably, be much more prone to respect living in a secular society. For instance, LA has a significant population of Iranian immigrants. Those people presumably arrived largely in connection with the 1979 Iranian revolution - many of them being relatively affluent and actually fleeing that revolution. In other areas we no doubt have pockets of highly educated and skilled people who have immigrated from places such as Pakistan or India. Such individuals again would have an easier path to assimilation and would be less prone to radicalization. Fair enough.

But on a national level when we talk about immigration from Muslim countries today, the focus is very much on whether we should be accepting individuals from war torn areas that have been subjected to great trauma (e.g. - Syria). And that debate centers not only on the socio-economic background of these refugees but also upon the possibility ISIS and other groups will seek to carry out on threats to infiltrate these populations with their members so they can carry out attacks in our country - a recent added issue to refugee immigration that, frankly, was not a direct concern when Minnesota started accepting Somali refugees.

So, again, I ask you to go back and ask the questions I raised. Because on the one hand you state taking in poor, less educated populations creates more risks (a la your critique of the EU), but then state it is also a "moral obligation" and a path to economic growth. Are there any limits in who we should be admitting to our nation in the first place? And once here what should our policy be on individuals remaining in the nation? And what of potential radicalization more generally - individuals who openly state they do not wish to live in a Western, secular society but rather wish to impose their will on others? We know, for instance, that law enforcement officials keep tabs on mosques that are potential centers of radical thought? Those exist in many states - not just Minnesota.
 
You keep bringing up Muslims want Sharia Law. Your Congressman is Muslim. He never brings it up. There is Muslim Congressman from IN who never brings it up. There are Muslims in virtually level of local governments around the country and they don't bring it up. Communities like Dearborn, MI and some cities in NJ that have large Muslim communities have never tried implement these codes. Sharia Law is a canard. It's used by those who want to keep all Muslims out. Politicians and those who object to Muslims immigration will likely make some Muslims fearful and more radical.

Again you parse what I said, it's not just taking in less educated and less affluent people now. It's also about the less affluent and educated who come from war torn nations or areas being forced to live in segregated neighborhoods. One of the key components of the 10,000+ Syrians who have been brought to America is that they have been widely dispersed. You may have 50 in one town and 200 in another. We have also looked for Muslim families and communities to help them assimilate more easily and quickly rather than just dumping them after they arrive. This is also something EU countries haven't done.

Let's say that we did take as many as 50,000 Syrians over a two year period. It would be much more rational to put 100-300 people in each of 150-500 communities around the country than to drop 1000 or 5000 or 10,000 in one place at a time. Put them in places where they have family (which many do), can find work, won't being massive attention from the haters, won't displace others. We shouldn't create places where they will be obvious targets and not given the chance to become part of their communities.

It also takes a longer time to be sent to live in America than getting on a train or walking into Europe. Whether it's Italians, Germans, Dutch or other groups, it's the kids who are born here who also help parents and grandparents to assimilate.

You cannot deny having a POTUS-elect who used hate, fear and bigotry of Muslims as a cornerstone of his campaign won't cause massive fear in Muslims in the US and attract a more radical element who want to teach the bigot in the WH a lesson or two. A major part of leadership in our country is making every American and their families feel welcome in our country. It's also to show the world that we don't discriminate based on faith. Trump and people around have grotesquely failed at this and in some cases are doubling down.

At the heart of all your worries are theoretical concepts that have not come into any sort of reality even when they have had the chance. The first step is to never use the ridiculous and intentionally disruptive canard of Sharia Law as a wedge. It won't happen in the US.
 
simosfrostyone said:
Deacman seems to have really made some progress here.
Click to expand...

If someone cannot even acknowledge there are radical Islamists in our country, there's no point in continuing.

His positions are just so "on-off" and yet he complains about his words being parsed. He's not capable of engaging in any sort of critical (much less nuanced) thought, which is really quite sad. Just remember, there are no Muslim immigrants in our country who are adverse to living in a Western, secular society. It simply is not an issue because all have assimilated. And to the extent we see problems in any group of immigrants, it is our fault any problems arise and any radicalization that occurs or is acted upon has nothing to do with religion. Hell, he's even tacitly suggested that we dictate where people live and implied Somalis somehow have been forced to live in a large impoverished community devoid of any personal services in Minnesota. It apparently has never occurred to him that any group of immigrants will seek to find and live among people they find familiar (i.e. people of a similar background) and that their background is not just economic and social but also religious. Really, we're going to dictate where people live? Why would we ever do this?
 
Last edited:
DeacMan said:
If someone cannot even acknowledge there are radical Islamists in our country, there's no point in continuing.

His positions are just so "on-off" and yet he complains about his words being parsed. He's not capable of engaging in any sort of critical (much less nuanced) thought, which is really quite sad. Just remember, there are no Muslim immigrants in our country who are adverse to living in a Western, secular society. It simply is not an issue because all have assimilated. And to the extent we see problems in any group of immigrants, it is our fault any problems arise and any radicalization that occurs or is acted upon has nothing to do with religion. Hell, he's even tacitly suggested that we dictate where people live and implied Somalis somehow have been forced to live in a large impoverished community devoid of any personal services in Minnesota. It apparently has never occurred to him that any group of immigrants will seek to find and live among people they find familiar (i.e. people of a similar background) and that their background is not just economic and social but also religious. Really, we're going to dictate where people live? Why would we ever do this?
Click to expand...

You have tried harder and longer and with more forbearance than anyone could have expected. Long before you started, we all new the impossibility of your task, yet who could not watch.

I have found 3 viable options when engaging with RJ.

The preferable option is trolling.
The second fine option is "heavy snark".
The smartest but least enjoyable option is to ignore him, kinda like a fart in polite company.

The only approach that is bound for sure failure is full engagement. Never try full engagement.
 
There are folks on this board who, while they have definite opinions, enjoy reasoned debate and will concede a point well made. RJKarl is not one of them. The left in France and Germany has learned the hard way that these Muslim immigrants are a time bomb. This is also partly what Brexit was about, when British Labor voters abandoned their party in part because of this immigration. Why some cannot learn from this is beyond me.
 
DeacMan said:
If someone cannot even acknowledge there are radical Islamists in our country, there's no point in continuing.

His positions are just so "on-off" and yet he complains about his words being parsed. He's not capable of engaging in any sort of critical (much less nuanced) thought, which is really quite sad. Just remember, there are no Muslim immigrants in our country who are adverse to living in a Western, secular society. It simply is not an issue because all have assimilated. And to the extent we see problems in any group of immigrants, it is our fault any problems arise and any radicalization that occurs or is acted upon has nothing to do with religion. Hell, he's even tacitly suggested that we dictate where people live and implied Somalis somehow have been forced to live in a large impoverished community devoid of any personal services in Minnesota. It apparently has never occurred to him that any group of immigrants will seek to find and live among people they find familiar (i.e. people of a similar background) and that their background is not just economic and social but also religious. Really, we're going to dictate where people live? Why would we ever do this?
Click to expand...

I've never said anything like that and you know it. This is how you have acted for the twenty years.

You are known by the company you keep. Your brethren are simos, knowell, the bobs and sailor. This speaks volumes about your positions.
 
RJKarl said:
You are known by the company you keep. Your brethren are simos, knowell, the bobs and sailor. This speaks volumes about your positions.
Click to expand...

At least he complimented you. Maybe the healing is happening. A Festivus miracle.
 
RJKarl said:
I've never said anything like that and you know it. This is how you have acted for the twenty years.

You are known by the company you keep. Your brethren are simos, knowell, the bobs and sailor. This speaks volumes about your positions.
Click to expand...

RJKarl said:
The 98-99+% of American Muslims have been integrated into our society.
Click to expand...

I guess you can claim 98-99+% isn't "all", but I'm not sure how you'll juxtapose that with "anything like that" when comparing "98-99+%" and "all".

Indignation noted.
 
Last edited:
simosfrostyone said:
There are folks on this board who, while they have definite opinions, enjoy reasoned debate and will concede a point well made. RJKarl is not one of them.
Click to expand...

So why keep arguing with him?
 
DeacMan said:
I guess you can claim 98-99+% isn't "all", but I'm not sure how you'll juxtapose that with "anything like that" when comparing "98-99+%" and "all".

Indignation noted.
Click to expand...

There are several million Muslims in the US. even 1% of 3M is 30,000. If there were 30,000 people who have become radicalized, it's unlikely we'd have as few incidents as we have had.

You won't address the fact that many Muslims have been elected to public office and haven't tried to pass any religious based laws. Now compare that to Christians in America. In 29 states have used their Bible to justify making it legal to fire people just because they are gay. You talk about what you think Muslims would do while ignoring what Christians are currently doing,

It's likely that Christians in the House and Senate will pass a law to defund Planned Parenthood based on lies and their faith. For forty years, it has been illegal to use a single cent of federal money for abortion services, yet Christian Republicans say it is happening. Because of Christians exercising what they think is their faith the health of millions of American women could be negatively impacted due to Christians theoretically, and erroneously, exercising their faith.

You worry about things that haven't happened, but excuse and ignore things that are happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top