French - let immigrants int your homes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that the vast majority are single men, not families. I personally would not take that risk.

So you take in a family with a father and son and expect them not to act like single men when they are coming from a patriarchal society hmm

That's the point. They I've w backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values

This is such BS and I am really tired of seeing it repeated ad nauseam. Are you suggesting that Khizr Khan has a backward culture that isn't compatible with liberalized western values?

Jeff, I generally agree with you on Middle Eastern issues, but comparing Khzir Khan's beliefs to that of a Syrian refugee is not ideal. Khan and his wife -- like many Pakistanis and Indians of their generation --- made a decision to be educated in their countries so that would be more attractive as emigres to the US. Khan is a lawyer and may hold some traditional Islamic values but he is very westernized. I suspect the Khan's children are like the typical second generation Pakistanis and Indians who post on DCUM about the same first world concerns as Americans whose families have been here for a few more generations.

I believe what you are saying is that Khan does not fit the stereotype of a "culturally backwards" Muslim. If so, you are correct about that. However, it is similarly wrong to suggest that Syrian refugees fit that stereotype simply by virtue of being refugees. Educated and progressive people also become refugees. There are doctors and lawyers among the refugees. There are women who are university graduates. It is impossible to make blanket statements about the cultural values held by these individuals and certainly wrong to allege that none of them have values compatible with US society.

No I am not saying that Mr. Khan fits the stereotype of a "culturally backwards" Muslim. I don't stereotype people, partcularly Muslims, because I lived in Muslim countries and know the many variations of people who are followers of Islam. My point is that the Khans made a decision to come to the States and understood they would likely adapt some aspects of western culture that the would not have followed had they remained in Pakistan. The Syrian refugees are being forced from their country by a civil war and did not necessarily want to come to the west or adapt to our culture. I understand the educational levels of the Syrians I knew in Damascus, so I do not think the refugees are backward or uneducated in western culture and values. In fact, a large number of them had a least some of their education in the west. However, not all of the Syrians are ready to adapt the culture being forced on them by their relocation to the west.

Yes, I agree completely. That is more or less the same argument that I've been making but from another side. Some here seem to believe that none of the refugees are ready to adopt our culture. As you say, that is not true. But, I agree with you that it is similarly not true that all of them are. However, we don't plan to accept all of them and part of a successful relocation program would involve filtering out those who aren't and finding a more appropriate options for them.

Where are we allowed to ask people to adopt our culture? The only countries I have heard doing this are France (Burka / Burkini ban), some parts of Germany (education classes) and I think Sweden (video on nude sunbathing shown to immigrants). If we did any of these there would be a hue and outcry. A well known politician recently got slammed for suggesting folks who want sharia should not move here. How, pray tell, do you propose this culture litmus test which I am totally fine with but does not sound anything like the identity politics America we now lie in where students in the UC system are allowed to advertise for only "POC' roomates. Doesn't seem anyone is interesting in adopting anyone's culture these days. It's a free for all and lots of people willing to defend people's individual 'rights' over the general welfare.

Do they really show videos of nude sunbathers to Muslim immigrants in Sweden? That's hilarious. I would love to see a clip of that.

Yes, they actually started it long ago with people who were properly immigrating from countries that took a far more traditional view on these things. And sorry, it's Holland (see link below). Ironically, liberals in America would never allow our more liberal way of life to be promoted in such a way. They would call it "oppression". I am not sure there is any plan or program for 'integrating' refugees much less immigrants to America. Do you know of any besides our fairly random citizenship test for those who don't simply stick with a green card?

Sadly, even with these efforts Scandinavia and Germany and France are just more reviled by some immigrants, have a massive rape/touching problem and of course the recent terroristic attacks. So much for asking people nicely to adopt or be open to your culture.

http://www.religionnewsblog.com/14185/dutch-immigration-kit-offers-a-revealing-view

We don't show videos about American culture to immigrants because we are actually successful at integrating immigrants into our culture, not because liberals would ban it. Those videos are a too-little-too-late effort on the part of countries that have failed at creating an inclusive society.

Oh really?

http://www.labornotes.org/2008/10/muslim-workers-demand-time-prayer-meatpacking-plants

https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Clash_of_cultures:_Somali_and_Latino_workers_at_U.S._meat_packing_plants
"
"Plant worker Fidencio Sandoval, a naturalized United States citizen who was born in Mexico, had polite reservations. "I kind of admire all the effort they make to follow that religion, but sometimes you have to adapt to the workplace." An immigrant from El Salvador was less sympathetic. "They used to go to the bathroom," said José Amaya, "but actually they're praying and the rest of us have to do their work." Raul A. García, a 73-year-old Mexican meat packer, told The New York Times, “The Latino is very humble, but they [the Somalis] are arrogant... They act like the United States owes them.”"

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-violence-women-honourkillings-idUSKBN0OY2UK20150618

Are you citing these stories as evidence of something? U.S. law requires reasonable accommodation of religion. Leave it to the courts to decide what is reasonable, just like we do for everything else. These workers can walk out and lose their jobs if they don't want to work with the employer. Again, what is your point?

I am responding to the person who said we are successfully integrating refugees. Honor killing your daughters is not successful integration. Living in clusters working menial dead end jobs (chicken factories) is not integration, and tensions with fellow workers from other backgrounds is not integration. Just saying it's not all so rosy here-it just hasn't impacted you. I think as you open the doors to Syrian refugees it is wise to have some kind of integration program and supports, but at the same time I think it would never fly here because liberals would squeak about oppression if we had enculturation classes as they've had in Europe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Oh really?

http://www.labornotes.org/2008/10/muslim-workers-demand-time-prayer-meatpacking-plants

https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Clash_of_cultures:_Somali_and_Latino_workers_at_U.S._meat_packing_plants
"
"Plant worker Fidencio Sandoval, a naturalized United States citizen who was born in Mexico, had polite reservations. "I kind of admire all the effort they make to follow that religion, but sometimes you have to adapt to the workplace." An immigrant from El Salvador was less sympathetic. "They used to go to the bathroom," said José Amaya, "but actually they're praying and the rest of us have to do their work." Raul A. García, a 73-year-old Mexican meat packer, told The New York Times, “The Latino is very humble, but they [the Somalis] are arrogant... They act like the United States owes them.”"

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-violence-women-honourkillings-idUSKBN0OY2UK20150618

Are you citing these stories as evidence of something? U.S. law requires reasonable accommodation of religion. Leave it to the courts to decide what is reasonable, just like we do for everything else. These workers can walk out and lose their jobs if they don't want to work with the employer. Again, what is your point?

I am responding to the person who said we are successfully integrating refugees. Honor killing your daughters is not successful integration. Living in clusters working menial dead end jobs (chicken factories) is not integration, and tensions with fellow workers from other backgrounds is not integration. Just saying it's not all so rosy here-it just hasn't impacted you. I think as you open the doors to Syrian refugees it is wise to have some kind of integration program and supports, but at the same time I think it would never fly here because liberals would squeak about oppression if we had enculturation classes as they've had in Europe.

So a story about meatpackers from 2008 (2008!) and a murder last year (by a man who was sexually abusing his daughters, something that is abhored in any religion) are evidence of a larger trend to you in a country with 300+ million people and more than 3 million Muslims?

Sorry, try again.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, you can't just say we have zero problem with integration when we've had a spate of incidents like second generation terrorists (san Bernardino, Orlando, Boston). Sorry to you. These are just other examples of places where there are tensions occurring. And since we can see the issues Europe is having, why wouldn't we discuss how to not have the same issues?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I am responding to the person who said we are successfully integrating refugees. Honor killing your daughters is not successful integration. Living in clusters working menial dead end jobs (chicken factories) is not integration, and tensions with fellow workers from other backgrounds is not integration. Just saying it's not all so rosy here-it just hasn't impacted you. I think as you open the doors to Syrian refugees it is wise to have some kind of integration program and supports, but at the same time I think it would never fly here because liberals would squeak about oppression if we had enculturation classes as they've had in Europe.

When the polish, irish, etc.. immigrants did this very same thing, were they also not willing to integrate? There are enclaves of 100% white areas where maybe the majority work in chicken farms. Are they not willing to integrate into American society, too? So, if an immigrant lives in an area with immigrants doing menial jobs, then that means they are not willing to integrate? They don't speak the language, yet you .. what? expect them to take on office jobs? I find that part of your post very stupid.

I do think refugees and all immigrants should be required to take a course about our Constitution and customs, but to say that they are not integrating because they want to live amongst other immigrants and only take on menial jobs is too dumb for words.

[Anonymous]

Polish etc. also settled in Europe. Where are the communities that are having the problems?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We don't show videos about American culture to immigrants because we are actually successful at integrating immigrants into our culture, not because liberals would ban it. Those videos are a too-little-too-late effort on the part of countries that have failed at creating an inclusive society.

Part of making sure that we integrate successfully is screening immigrants and allowing in those who are aligned with our ideals. Notice I said ideals and not ideas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Polish etc. also settled in Europe. Where are the communities that are having the problems?

Many of the people who voted for Brexit cited being against immigration from Eastern European countries.

[Anonymous]

I would gladly take a family. We have a big house and plenty to share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, you can't just say we have zero problem with integration when we've had a spate of incidents like second generation terrorists (san Bernardino, Orlando, Boston). Sorry to you. These are just other examples of places where there are tensions occurring. And since we can see the issues Europe is having, why wouldn't we discuss how to not have the same issues?

Three terrorist attacks over a course of several years is a "spate?" If this is your standard, then we have a much larger problem with white male terrorists in this country.

No politician is ever going to say it, but Islamic terrorism is part of our lives now. This is part of living in a globalized society. The threat from ISIS is diffuse and will not go away anytime soon. We can talk about issues in Islamic countries, but we have to do so in a polite, diplomatic manner. We have 3 million Muslims in our country, and to alienate them will lead more people to ISIS. Talking shit about someone else's religion is never a smart idea, and it is especially not smart for an entire country to take it as an official stance.

Muslims in America are well-integrated. And they may be the reformers who lead to a more modern version of Islam becoming the norm.

And no one has suggested that Americans let Syrians in without vetting. The people against the refugees say that it is basically impossible to vet them, which makes no sense. If it is impossible to vet the refugees than it is impossible to vet anybody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Polish etc. also settled in Europe. Where are the communities that are having the problems?

Many of the people who voted for Brexit cited being against immigration from Eastern European countries.

Absolutely, for economic issues. Just like many people here have a problem with illegal immigration from South of the Border. That has nothing to do with the question of integrating to western ideals. laws and social mores. But thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, you can't just say we have zero problem with integration when we've had a spate of incidents like second generation terrorists (san Bernardino, Orlando, Boston). Sorry to you. These are just other examples of places where there are tensions occurring. And since we can see the issues Europe is having, why wouldn't we discuss how to not have the same issues?

Three terrorist attacks over a course of several years is a "spate?" If this is your standard, then we have a much larger problem with white male terrorists in this country.

No politician is ever going to say it, but Islamic terrorism is part of our lives now. This is part of living in a globalized society. The threat from ISIS is diffuse and will not go away anytime soon. We can talk about issues in Islamic countries, but we have to do so in a polite, diplomatic manner. We have 3 million Muslims in our country, and to alienate them will lead more people to ISIS. Talking shit about someone else's religion is never a smart idea, and it is especially not smart for an entire country to take it as an official stance.

Muslims in America are well-integrated. And they may be the reformers who lead to a more modern version of Islam becoming the norm.

And no one has suggested that Americans let Syrians in without vetting. The people against the refugees say that it is basically impossible to vet them, which makes no sense. If it is impossible to vet the refugees than it is impossible to vet anybody.

So we are scared of "alienating" the Muslims here? They are that fragile that you think anything but polite talk will drive them to Isis? And in the same breath you say support a wider welcome mat?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, you can't just say we have zero problem with integration when we've had a spate of incidents like second generation terrorists (san Bernardino, Orlando, Boston). Sorry to you. These are just other examples of places where there are tensions occurring. And since we can see the issues Europe is having, why wouldn't we discuss how to not have the same issues?

Three terrorist attacks over a course of several years is a "spate?" If this is your standard, then we have a much larger problem with white male terrorists in this country.

No politician is ever going to say it, but Islamic terrorism is part of our lives now. This is part of living in a globalized society. The threat from ISIS is diffuse and will not go away anytime soon. We can talk about issues in Islamic countries, but we have to do so in a polite, diplomatic manner. We have 3 million Muslims in our country, and to alienate them will lead more people to ISIS. Talking shit about someone else's religion is never a smart idea, and it is especially not smart for an entire country to take it as an official stance.

Muslims in America are well-integrated. And they may be the reformers who lead to a more modern version of Islam becoming the norm.

And no one has suggested that Americans let Syrians in without vetting. The people against the refugees say that it is basically impossible to vet them, which makes no sense. If it is impossible to vet the refugees than it is impossible to vet anybody.

So we are scared of "alienating" the Muslims here? They are that fragile that you think anything but polite talk will drive them to Isis? And in the same breath you say support a wider welcome mat?

You are the one coming from a place of fear. And it is that fear that leads to stupid decisions and hateful speech. Why wouldn't we talk politely about Islam? Is politeness automatically associated with being a stupid wimp now? Being polite and humane is strength, not weakness. It is unwise and stupid to alienate a vulnerable minority. I don't even think Islam is a good religion but I'm able to recognize that we can't wall ourselves off from these types of problems. We can't be afraid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not writing that off. It seems a bit early to just write off Syria to the garbage dump of history as a land of no return. My grandparents (and the world) waited around a lot longer and finally came as refugees when the camps closed and the country was firmly established as a place of no return. I have nothing against refugees and I am aware there are worthy political refugees from across the entire world and we have a process for this. However, a whole population fleeing a conflict zone is hopefully a temporary situation. It was a very well established country and it is sad to see people like you giving up on it, instead of driving a political/military process that will get these people back to their homes/farms/livlihoods which I guarantee they would prefer.

I feel like you may not be well-informed about the situation in Syria. The war has already been going longer than five years. It shows no sign of stopping. It is a war with essentially three, if not four, major sides. Internal factions have support from the US, the Gulf Arabs, and Russia. Funding and weapons are not a problem. Both Russia and NATO are directly involved in the fighting. I would love to see peace prevail and I agree whole-heartedly that refugees would like nothing better than to return to peace and prosperity in their own country. But, as your own family's experience demonstrate, things don't always work out that way. There is little indication that it will happen in Syria.

I fully support a reconciliation process leading to a situation that allows for the refugees to return. I am not sure what I can do to "drive" that as you suggest. At the moment, I can't even vote for my own Senator or Representative, let alone set our Middle East policy. But, while we wait for peace to return to Syria, we can't really abandon our role in the world by closing our doors to refugees. We didn't do that for your grandparents and we shouldn't do that now.

There are efforts underway by people like Ambassador Ryan Crocker to try a diplomatic settlement in Syria. While there at least four parties with disparate interests involved, a diplomatic solution will eventually work. Meanwhile, the Syrian diaspora will have occurred, and Syria will be re-created by the few who return and those who were too powerful or too power-less to leave.

Exactly. My mom participated in heavy advocacy and demonstrations in Washington, joined community groups, met with representatives and even the president. There is plenty you can do. And eventually her homeland found its footing. Of course, having grown up in America and with American kids--she was never going back except to visit. The worst thing you can do, if you actually care about Syria, is encourage this massive diaspora. Then it truly will be left to the gang from the Star Wars bar to carve up, and the few innocent people left in the crossfire are going to have a heck of a time.

Wow. Plus start up money in the USA. How did she support herself? The most recent come overs in our family got off a boat, no government cash and moved off to boarding houses or living with relatives/friends of family. Worked in quarries, factories, maids, etc. Learned English etc. You come here, work, send kids to school. Value our laws and constitution. Loyal to USA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not writing that off. It seems a bit early to just write off Syria to the garbage dump of history as a land of no return. My grandparents (and the world) waited around a lot longer and finally came as refugees when the camps closed and the country was firmly established as a place of no return. I have nothing against refugees and I am aware there are worthy political refugees from across the entire world and we have a process for this. However, a whole population fleeing a conflict zone is hopefully a temporary situation. It was a very well established country and it is sad to see people like you giving up on it, instead of driving a political/military process that will get these people back to their homes/farms/livlihoods which I guarantee they would prefer.

I feel like you may not be well-informed about the situation in Syria. The war has already been going longer than five years. It shows no sign of stopping. It is a war with essentially three, if not four, major sides. Internal factions have support from the US, the Gulf Arabs, and Russia. Funding and weapons are not a problem. Both Russia and NATO are directly involved in the fighting. I would love to see peace prevail and I agree whole-heartedly that refugees would like nothing better than to return to peace and prosperity in their own country. But, as your own family's experience demonstrate, things don't always work out that way. There is little indication that it will happen in Syria.

I fully support a reconciliation process leading to a situation that allows for the refugees to return. I am not sure what I can do to "drive" that as you suggest. At the moment, I can't even vote for my own Senator or Representative, let alone set our Middle East policy. But, while we wait for peace to return to Syria, we can't really abandon our role in the world by closing our doors to refugees. We didn't do that for your grandparents and we shouldn't do that now.

There are efforts underway by people like Ambassador Ryan Crocker to try a diplomatic settlement in Syria. While there at least four parties with disparate interests involved, a diplomatic solution will eventually work. Meanwhile, the Syrian diaspora will have occurred, and Syria will be re-created by the few who return and those who were too powerful or too power-less to leave.

Exactly. My mom participated in heavy advocacy and demonstrations in Washington, joined community groups, met with representatives and even the president. There is plenty you can do. And eventually her homeland found its footing. Of course, having grown up in America and with American kids--she was never going back except to visit. The worst thing you can do, if you actually care about Syria, is encourage this massive diaspora. Then it truly will be left to the gang from the Star Wars bar to carve up, and the few innocent people left in the crossfire are going to have a heck of a time.

Wow. Plus start up money in the USA. How did she support herself? The most recent come overs in our family got off a boat, no government cash and moved off to boarding houses or living with relatives/friends of family. Worked in quarries, factories, maids, etc. Learned English etc. You come here, work, send kids to school. Value our laws and constitution. Loyal to USA.

Same with the most recent come overs in my family. (Legally.) Worked menial jobs by day and went to school at night to learn English. The objective was to assimilate into American culture, which they did. Never took a penny of welfare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, you can't just say we have zero problem with integration when we've had a spate of incidents like second generation terrorists (san Bernardino, Orlando, Boston). Sorry to you. These are just other examples of places where there are tensions occurring. And since we can see the issues Europe is having, why wouldn't we discuss how to not have the same issues?

Three terrorist attacks over a course of several years is a "spate?" If this is your standard, then we have a much larger problem with white male terrorists in this country.

No politician is ever going to say it, but Islamic terrorism is part of our lives now. This is part of living in a globalized society. The threat from ISIS is diffuse and will not go away anytime soon. We can talk about issues in Islamic countries, but we have to do so in a polite, diplomatic manner. We have 3 million Muslims in our country, and to alienate them will lead more people to ISIS. Talking shit about someone else's religion is never a smart idea, and it is especially not smart for an entire country to take it as an official stance.

Muslims in America are well-integrated. And they may be the reformers who lead to a more modern version of Islam becoming the norm.

And no one has suggested that Americans let Syrians in without vetting. The people against the refugees say that it is basically impossible to vet them, which makes no sense. If it is impossible to vet the refugees than it is impossible to vet anybody.

In other words, you are willing to sacrifice my family or anyone else's family so long as the goal of a globalized society is me. What quota seems fair to you - how many per year? How many murders? How many rapes?