“Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who have fled their homeland are likely to seek refugee status in the United States, humanitarian groups said, putting intense pressure on the Bush administration to reexamine a policy that authorizes only 500 Iraqis to be resettled here next year.”—from this article
The American people should not be asked to pay, with further endangerment of their security, for the mistakes of the American government, or rather, for the inevitable Sunni-Shi'a friction and hostilities in Iraq. Those hostilities became inevitable because of the nature of societies suffused with Islam (and therefore unable to compromise and naturally aggressive not only toward Infidels, but toward all those who in some way were different, were not the same), once American soldiers undid the Sunni despotism of Saddam Hussein.
Americans have spent or committed close to half-a-trillion dollars in the effort to make Iraq a better place. They have discovered that far from demonstrating any real gratitude, the Arabs of Iraq, both Sunni and Shi'a, have been content to grab as much money -- fantastic sums -- and stuff of all kinds, and to watch the Americans, under hellish conditions, attempt not to "re-construct" but rather to construct all kinds of things for them, in a vain effort to pull them out of the primitive and aggressive and Hobbesian world in which they live.
It is not the Iraqis who have been doing much of the fighting to bring about a better Iraq. Many Iraqi soldiers routinely show up only to collect paychecks. Many run in combat situations, leaving the Americans to fight and die for a place called "Iraq" that the so-called "Iraqis" have no loyalty to, and on every occasion, by the testimony of so many of our fed-up and disgusted soldiers, have left the Americans in the lurch or substituted their own brutal methods of treatment of the population and ignored everything the Americans have tried to teach them.
We owe the Iraqis exactly nothing. We do not owe any Iraqis asylum at all. If asylum is to be given, it should be strictly limited to Christians and the handful of Mandeans and other non-Muslims. Not a single Muslim needs to come to swell the Muslim ranks in this country, adding to the security risk, adding to all sorts of worries.
To those who say, as someone does in the article linked above, that we let in Vietnamese refugees, the answer should be obvious. The Vietnamese Buddhists and Christians were fully able to integrate into American society. They were not raised on a belief system that counselled them, that taught them, to see others as their enemies and to work to dominate them, and to spread a belief-system that was inimical in every way to the legal, political and other institutions and arrangements and understandings of this country. That is quite different from the permanent problem posed by Islam.
Anyone who begins to prate about "what we owe the Iraqis" should be reminded of who has been fighting for the idea of "Iraq" over the past few years, who has been spending or committing a half-trillion dollars, receiving only more demands for more-more-more, and whining, and ingratitude, and the occasional smile as some "Iraqi" asks for a "Marshall Plan" for Iraq. Oh, they've had their Marshall Plan. They've had all kinds of things.
And they've got the oil wealth to live on, like all the other Muslim oil states that are rich through no effort on their own. They can stay there in Iraq. They can move about - Shi'a to Shi'a controlled regions, Sunni to Sunni controlled regions in Iraq, or outside Iraq, to other Arab countries. But examine the attitude of Iraqis toward the Americans who rescued them from a murderous despot who had ruled for 35 years, and whose homicidal sons were prepared to succeed him and to rule for another 35. Examine the behavior of both Iraqi civilians and the Iraqi soldiers and police, the former in often demonstrating indifference to or even taking pleasure in the killings of Americans, and the latter often neglecting their duties or running away, or selling the weapons supplied to them by the Americans on the black market, and almost in no case providing the kind of minimal aid that the Americans had, and have, every right to expect that people will offer. It is, after all, their country and supposedly it is they who care about it.
But we have had quite a demonstration of how the Iraqis think and behave. It has been edifying. And the officers and men of the American military, who have served in Iraq, ought to be consulted first about whether or not they think that we "owe Iraqis" something and whether or not they think tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Muslims should be allowed to settle in our country, or for that matter other Infidel lands.
The response of those officers and men should be instructive.
Hugh is 1000 percent right-we owe the Iraqis zilch. We gave those people the best gift possible-liberation from decades of the blood Baath regime that long preceded Saddam Hussein. And what have the Iraqi people done with that gift? They have taken the opportunity to make an even worse world for themselves. The Christians coming to the US I can live with but not the Muslims-as I've said before they need to stay home and either build a new Iraq or wipe each other out in their effort to see who really is Mo's chosen Muslims. In short, Muslims need not apply to come to the US-we have too many as it is.
Hey, we're figthing them over there so we won't have to fight 'em over here, right?
Hey, we're figthing them over there so we won't have to fight 'em over here, right?
Posted by: germaninamerica at December 12, 2006 08:03 AM
Yup-that's one of the reasons why I favored the war at one time. Now that the Iraqis are doing such a great job of killing one another we can leave. No point at being a sitting duck while watching the crazies go at it.
Iraqis are well aware of the benefits we got out of having Hussein in charge, so no gratitude's needed for his removal.
Other than that I pretty much agree with this post. Muslims need to either convert to another religion or factor in Muhammad's weaknesses when reading the Koran and the hadiths.
Muhammah, BTW, was in INTJ personality. I am too, and it takes one to know one. We're very potent spiritually and are master system builders (sound familiar?) but can become unbalanced by our unexamined emotions and undeveloped sensations. Read about us here. And here. Pay careful attention to how we behave when under stress. Everything about Muhammad will be an open book to you then. His shyness. The women. The anger. The modest lifestyle. It's all there.
Tell you what pneumatikon, why don't we read about you and mohammad here
here and here.
What master system did you build?
Indeed, what master system did mohammad build?
As far as the pedophilia, the anger, and the supposed shyness you say you share with mohammad, there about 100 million other people with those same qualities. Most of them are on the internet.
"Muhammah, BTW, was in INTJ personality. I am too, and it takes one to know one. We're very potent spiritually and are master system builders..."
-- from a posting above
An Iranian scholar in American exile has just written a book analyzing Muhammad's behavior and explaining it as a series of epileptic seizures. And he is not alone. Many over the years have suggested as much.
An Iranian scholar in American exile has just written a book analyzing Muhammad's behavior and explaining it as a series of epileptic seizures. And he is not alone. Many over the years have suggested as much.
Posted by: Hugh at December 12, 2006 09:13 AM
No doubt that scholar is in hiding for his life after writing that. If true it sure is wonderful to know that 1400 years of the misery Islam has caused was indeed due to delusions. Many here would not be surprised.
Uh... Islam?
Just clink on my name an read my blogs.
"Iraqis are well aware of the benefits we got out of having Hussein in charge, so no gratitude's needed for his removal."
-- from a posting above
That "we" in the sentence above is ambiguous.
If it is meant to refer to Iraqis ("we Iraqis") it is false. No Shi'a and no Kurds lament the going of Saddam Hussein, and all educated Sunnis have been happy to see his end. Some Sunnis, in their fury and fearfulness -- fury over the transfer of political and economic power to the Shi'a, fearfulness about their future in a Shi'a-dominated state that now controls the army -- long for the good old days of Saddam Hussein, but only as a symbol of what they have lost, and wish to regain.
If by "we" you mean "Americans," then your point is illogical. If "we (the Americans)" received "benefits...out of having Hussein in charge" yet, despite that, in order to help people in Iraq, we ignored our own geopolitical interests out of compassion, and spent all that money, and sacrificed all those dead and wounded, and used up all that equipment, in what would be -- by your own account -- a mission of mercy, and not one of geopolitical calculation, all the more reason to expect gratitude not from the non-existent "Iraqis" but from the people of Iraq.
Either way, the point you are attempting to make is wrong.
Why does everything have to be epilepsy? Demonic possession... Revelations... Enlightenment... I'm not a doctor so I can't know that, but still... I'm sure Arabs had already come across their fair share of epileptics. Surely the'd know the difference.
Really? Is that why Rumsfeld was shaking Hussein's hand and cutting deals with him? Is that why he used our tech to gas the Kurds; which, may I add, the Brits did decades before? Is they why we stretched out the war with Iran by playing both sides? Because we got no use out of him?
By "we" I mean our government, and since I live in a democracy I am willing to take responsibility for it.
The United States has never offered refuge to the oppressed and endangered because it owes them anything. We've done so because it's the right thing to do.
This site occasionally shows a mean-spiritedness (also in the matter of Keith Emerson and his Koran) which makes me a bit queasy.
Hugh:
"...a series of epileptic seizures. And he is not alone. Many over the years have suggested as much".
Yes. Including Swami Vivekananda.
I could only agree to the immigration of Iraqi Christians and other minorities whose initiative and talents have been proven in the past, and whose migration to our shores would prove to be an asset to our country.
The United States has never offered refuge to the oppressed and endangered because it owes them anything. We've done so because it's the right thing to do.
This site occasionally shows a mean-spiritedness (also in the matter of Keith Emerson and his Koran) which makes me a bit queasy.
Posted by: Karl Pov
EXCUSE ME!! The Iraqi m0slems are FAR from opressed. m0slems are the oppressors worldwide. Just look at hos the somalis whom we allowed in behave now!!
Yes, the Iraqi Christiand and other non-m0slem minotrites are oppressed and they deserve consideration.
What we do NOT need is 1.4 million people, 100s of 1000s of whom know how to make suicide belts and IEDs and other nice things.
Yes NEED mean-spiritedness if we are to survive. The enemy finally needs to see our TEETH!
"'Either way, the point you are attempting to make is wrong.'
Really? Is that why Rumsfeld was shaking Hussein's hand and cutting deals with him? Is that why he used our tech to gas the Kurds; which, may I add, the Brits did decades before? Is they why we stretched out the war with Iran by playing both sides? Because we got no use out of him?
By "we" I mean our government, and since I live in a democracy I am willing to take responsibility for it."
-- reply from the same poster
The support given to Saddam Hussein during his war with Iran, support which consisted both in winking as Saudi Arabia trans-shipped American tanks it had bought, with the Saudi markings carefully painted over, and in the sharing of intelligence about Iranian troop movements (so we are told) made sense. It made sense just the way American support for the Soviet Union, from 1942 on, with shipments to Murmansk of all kinds of stuff, made sense. In the case of the Soviet Union, it made sense because the Red Army inflicted the most damage on the Nazis of any army, and in the case of Iraq, for eight years it managed to preoccupy the Islamic Republic of Iran. In both cases there was an intelligent application of Realpolitik. In neither case should Americans feel uneasy, and certainly they owe no one an apology.
"Is that why he used our tech to gas the Kurds; which, may I add, the Brits did decades before?"
-- from the same poster
Your entire rhetorical strategy is both transparent, and absurd. You attemt to engage in obvious me-shifting from those who actually use poison gas, to those whom you, with no evidence offered in support, suggest deliberately supplied the poison gas, is transparent. ,
You talk about the "gas" supplied by the Americans (and decades before, by the British) thus shifting blame a bit too quickly, I'm afraid, from those who actually do gas their own people, and those who may or may not have been resonsible for the manufacture of such gas (are you telling me that the Iraqis could only have been supplied by the Americans? Aren't there any number of sources, and in any case, can't the Arabs produce their own poison gas should the spirit move them? You tell me where the Iraqis got the poison gas they used against the Iranians --was it Germans, or Russians, or their own homegrown scientists? And tell me further, please, where Nasser got the poison gas that he used in the mid-1960s in his war in the Yemen against the so-called "Royalists" (i.e., the Saudi-backed forces)?
Sunni, Shia, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Iraqi.....all irrelevant. They are all the same.
They are followers of Islam, the true enemy of the non-Muslim world.
We do owe Iraq absolutely nothing. We can, however, better our collective position against Islam by encouraging de-stabilization in the Middle East. Let the different factions kill each other. A nice decade long civil war only aids our cause of distracting the enemy while we awaken the slumbering in this country and prepare for the war that has already been explicitly declared against us.
"The United States has never offered refuge to the oppressed and endangered because it owes them anything. We've done so because it's the right thing to do.
This site occasionally shows a mean-spiritedness (also in the matter of Keith Emerson and his Koran) which makes me a bit queasy."
-- from a poster above
What is the United States? A kind of fun fair and park, open to all? Open to all even if they bring with them, undeclared, in their mental baggage, a belief-system that causes the new arrival to be permanently hostile to all Infidels, and certainly to the political and legal institututions, including the right of free speech and free exercise of conscience, and legal equality for all belief-systems designated as "religions," and certainly implacable enemies of pluralism, people who, if they are real Muslims, and not merely Muslims-for-identification-purposes-only Muslims, realize that Jihad is a central duty for Muslims, to be pursued by whatever means -- sometimes military, sometimes through use of the wealth weapon, sometimes through Da'wa or the campaign to spread Islam, sometimes through demographic conquest, sometimes through combinations of one or more of these instruments of Jihad -- possible. For Islam must dominate, and all barriers to its spread be removed, and Muslims eventually dominate.
This is so clear in the texts -- Qur'an and Hadith and Sira -- so clear in all the writings of every single major Muslim thinker, including jurisconsults of the four major schools of jurisprudence in Sunni Islam, by Shi'a scholars, by Sufis including Al-Ghazali, by such thinkers as Ibn Khaldun -- that only a fool or someone wilfully trying to avoid seeing what is staring him in the face (and there are many such people) could conceivably misunderstand or ignore this.
The Muslims of Iraq are not "oppressed" or "endangered" by some bullying government. They are "oppressed" and "endangered" by each other. And in any case, they have all kinds of options, including remaining in Iraq to fight over the vast spoils (which is essentially what is happening: a fight between Sunnis and Shi'a over political and economic power), or moving to Sunni or Shi'a lands right next door.
But in any case, Iraq is not going to empty out. Of course some Iraqis will use the excuse of Sunni-Shi'a warfare to try to get into the United States. Everybody all over the world, and especially among Muslim Arabs, is tryingb to get into the United States. So what? We have our own interests, our own political and legal institutions to protect. The behavior of Muslims in this country gives no reason for anyone to be sanguine. We don't need more viewers of Al-Jazeera here, more people who shout down others and threaten them on university campuses, more people who vote as a bloc, more people who through CAIR make every effort to limit our most sensible measures of self-defense and intelligent domestic security. We have no obligation to let such people into our country, any more than we did Nazi sympathizers, or those were not refugees from Communism but who thought, and continue to think, that Stalin was a swell guy.
Admission to the United States is not a party-favor, not the confetti, or dragees, neatly wrapped in little white baskets with a white ribbon on top, handed out to the guests at a festive Italian wedding. It is precious. It is sought by many. It should be given to those who are guaranteed not to pose a danger, either to our institutions, or to us, to our physical security. Given the tenets of Islam, Muslims are the very last people who should be admitted to this, or to any Infidel land.
Oh boy, the comments relating to this post are spinning my head. The Globe article was interesting more for the comments about the Iraqi Christians who I am concerned about. The whole fixation of the State department and the UN about "not showing favoritism" is ludicrous. Yes, Sunni and Shia are killing each other with glee, but there is no chance that a whole sale decimation of either community will happen. Both side are obviously armed to the teeth. The Chaldeans/Assyrians are a tiny minorty of about 600,000 probably who are defenseless. They, the Mandeans (a gnostic group with small numbers), and the Yezidi (sort of Zoroastrian group mostly in Kurdish area), are the religious minorities the Muslims would love to get rid of.
As far as what Myers-Brigg psycho-social group Muhammad belonged to was an interesting aside. Interesting mental masturbation. In the enneagram he was definitely an 8 with a seven wing--powerhungry, overpowering personality with gluttonous tendencies. Islam is definitely a cut and paste religion, and I have to say that Mo did a fabulous job at cutting and pasting long before the PC or the Internet was invented. He may have been a great cook. Islam is like a recipe; a few cups of Judaism, a pinch of Christianity, a few pounds of Arab polytheism, marinated in trans fatty delusion and polyunsaturated meshugas.
Right on Hugh, give 'em hell !!
By the way, it would be nice to find one politician in this country besides recently defeated Rick Santorum to think this way.
The direct, "don't piss down my back and call it rain" retort to all these disingenuine Muslims would solve a lot of problems rather quickly.
"Queasy."
-- from the same poster above
You feel a bit "queasy" because many of us, having studied Islam and the history of Islamic conquest, and the subsequent treatment, over 1350 years, from Spain to East Asia, of all non-Muslims under Muslim rule, and furthermore have followed closely the observable behavior of Muslims throughout the world, as they empty out their own countries, through their persecution and even at times murder, of non-Muslims -- look at how Istanbul, which in 1914 was 50% non-Muslim, is now 1% non-Muslim, how Turkey itself, which was 20% non-Muslim, is now 1/2 of 1% non-Muslm, look at how Pakistan, which had a Hindu population of 15% at independence, now has a Hindu population of 1.5%, or Bangladesh had a non-Muslim (Hindu, Buddhist, and Christian) population that was 35% non-Muslim, and is now down to 8%. Look everywhere in the Muslim world, and see what has happened, over the last century, in the full light of history, whenever Muslims felt powerful enough, they simply began treatinig non-Muslims as, according to Islam, they should be treated but, when Western powers were still able, either as a colonial presence or merely as a great power (as with Ottoman Turkey) was not always put into practice with the aggression and cruelty it is wherever that Western pressure dissipates or even disappears.
"Queasy" you say? You are made "queasy" by the idea that we might actually distinguish between immigrants who pose no permanent threat, and those who do, on the basis of their own declared adherence to a belief-system the tenets and attitudes of which are readily available for inspection and analysis?
Well, well.
I'll tell you what makes me "queasy." It's the Muslim websites that show Daniel Pearl and Michael Berg and many other Infidels being decapitated, while the Qur'anic verses about Infidels are chanted in the background. What makes me "queasy" are the Muslim mobs marching in the middle of Paris shouting "Death to France." It's the Danish imams touring the MIddle East, trying to whip up anti-Danish sentiment and the issuance of threats against all Danes abroad. It's the Muslims making much of Malmo a no-go zone for Swedes, and Rotterdam a no-go zone for Dutch. It's the Muslim rapists in Scandinavia who are responsible for 70-80% of the rapes. It's the Muslims in England who still, after the bombing of the London Underground, still declare their support for Muslim terrorism and further declare their allegiance to Islam but not to Great Britain. It's the murderous attacks on Buddhist monks and farmers and schoolteachers in southern Thailand, the decapitation of Christian schoolgirls and the destruction of thousands of churches in Indonesia, it's the attacks on the Copts in Egypt, the nonstop Die-Sturmer like attacks on Jews everywhere in the Arab press and radio and television, it's the firm support given by all the Arabs to the massacre of 1.8 million Christians in the southern Sudan, and now of hundreds of thousands of "inferior" becuase non-Arab, merely black African, Muslims in Darfur, and now in Chad.
Oh, it's all of those things, and so much more, that make me, as you say, "a bit queasy."
It's all those things.
Hey.. if anyone in NYC cares to know.. Dhimmy Carter is about to come on on NPR. 12:40 PM. I don't know if they're going to have this elsewhere at the same time. I am sure they can't wait to spread Dhimmy's "wisdom".
This should be good for some sad laughs.
Apartheid my left foot!
SUDAN is what Djimmi should be concerned with..
Keith Emmerson???
Funny.
We should let all the Chaldean and Asyrian Christians immigrate, and send all the Sunni, and Shiites back to Iraq!
Marching through the Streets of Paris , New York or London or any other Western City Chanting
" Death to Paris , London " etc..
should be a crime punishable by instant Deportation , even for Native Born Muslims. This is a War for our civilization and Traitors need to be treated as such. Traitors need to be removed . It's a declaration of their intent to do harm , and needs to be treated as one.
This would never have been allowed to stand During WWII. if Germans did this in the streets of New York what would have happened?
Free speech should stop at treasonous Intent.
I shudder to think of the consequences of allowing yet another tens or hundreds of thousands of muslims unrestricted entry.. first of all, you can be sure that die hard Jihadi's will use this as an opportunity to slip in.
But that aside, we should have learned from our experience with the Iranians, after the fall of the Shah we opened our gates to Iranians, the vast majority of whom are unthinking loyal Islamists, oh they don't like the Mullahcracy, but they are still Islamists, I have read the bio of a couple of them on Free Republic, and have debated with them on Liberty Forum.
And I agree with Hugh 100% we owe the Iraqi's nothing, nada, zilch, zero..I give to them what they give to us..nothing but grief thank you.
Suckers aren't even grateful that they got rid of Saddam (same with the Kurds when push gets to shove)...It is haram, unIslamic, for a muslim to have any gratitude at all towards the kaffir.. and any generosity given by the kaffir is accepted by the muslim as his just due..Jizyah.
Mistakes of the government? Like going in to help an oppressed nation when the U.N sat on their butts and did NOTHING? Mistakes like freeing millions of people while the world turned a blind eye to the attrocities? No sir- the only 'mistakes' that were made were made by a terror coddling world that shirked their moral duty to help out people who desperately needed our help- We've gone in there and done what practically no other nations would do- take a one of the greatest human rights violators of all time.
As Donald Rumsfeld pointed out, people expect immediate success, but when you're fighting an enemy that hides itself and won't show their face, like true warriors do, it is going to take a very long time and will be very difficult, and success will not be immediate- contray to the impatient publics opinions! No- we've suceeded in this war on terror as best we can and continue in success despite the lying media's portrayals! http://sacredscoop.com
Say, I heard that these are all CHRISTIANS, and they are petrified of being exterminated by the Muslims.
I think we should allow the CHRISTIANS to immigrate.
From that Globe article:
****
In particular, more than 120,000 Christians who have fled Iraq are unlikely to go home and about 100,000 of them want to come to the United States, where many have relatives, according to a group representing the Christians...
****
I say let them come! They will be butchered if we don't take them! They crucify 14 year old boys there, you know! Let them come.
"Suckers aren't even grateful that they got rid of Saddam (same with the Kurds when push gets to shove)...It is haram, unIslamic, for a muslim to have any gratitude at all towards the kaffir.. and any generosity given by the kaffir is accepted by the muslim as his just due..Jizyah."
Some generosity given by the kaffir is deeply offensive to some Muslims, such as the prisoner who was given mouth to mouth resuscitation by a fellow inmate, as described below.
He complained about his failing health during his application and told the court that he had shortness of breath and had to be given mouth-to-mouth resuscitation by friends sharing his cell at Pollsmoor Prison.
"It is not good for my health, as a Muslim man, to be given mouth-to-mouth by non-Muslim people who eat different food,", he told magistrate Jackie Redelinghuys.
Queasier and queasier.
Look, guys, I proudly claim Islamophope status. I despise the Koran, and I am repulsed by the example set by the life of Muhammad.
But I'm an American. I believe that human beings need to be judged individually, not on the basis of a religious affiliation many were simply born into. I have high hopes that Muslims born in this country will see the light and come to prefer American ideals to Muhammadan ideals. Whether this will be expressed by some sort of reform of Islam (damned hard in my view) or by abandonment of that despicable religion, only time will tell.
I don't know what kind of blinders are being worn by those who claim that Muslims are not being oppressed in Iraq today. Of course Muslims are being oppressed. By other Muslims, to be sure. Innocent Muslims are being murdered every day. If the United States does leave Iraq, I certainly hope it will accept a sizeable refugee population, just as we did with the Vietnamese, good people who are among my colleagues today.
I wish people here would try to resist the temptation to hate all Muslims. Islam is crap. Muslims are not. They are human beings, some good and some bad.