Categories
2017 February

Another sign

“I just received the following note from one of our Inner Circle members.  Below the note is my response.”


https://groups.yahoo.com/


Mike’s response:

The issue here is he’s not against immigrants and neither am I, but something is going on in the world of Islam that Islam itself is not dealing with, in fact strategically they are using it.

I’m sorry but I have a problem with allowing open borders into a country where we all have to take our shoes off and our belts, our liquids are put into small bottles and we have to wait in long lines and explain things in our luggage…

There are consequences to all of this and SOME OF US ARE TIRED OF IT, I know I am, our country and our freedoms are being assailed by a particular group of people.

Trump issued a broad order on those likely countries, not against immigration but inverted immigration.

My wife and his wife worked hard to get through–in my case–7 years of a pain in the ass process to have the right to be here, so no one needs to inform us about immigration and vetting!!

He’s not against immigration and I’m not either, but I don’t want open borders and u vetted people entering our country to partake of our hard fought freedoms!

My grandparents families all have their names at Ellis island and while it wasn’t as strong a vetting process as we need, it was one.

The argument is never and will never be about immigration, it is about a few people who want to disrupt our way of life, AND THEY HAVE BEEN DOING A PRETTY DAMNED GOOD JOB OF IT!

I’m tired of it and I don’t want a few people dictating my life and my freedoms, yet that’s exactly what’s happening–in whichever way you want to look at it.

Europe has made a HUGE, irretractable mistake with refugees, we should learn from it?

He has ALWAYS SAID, we need to figure out what’s going on, not a ban to immigration, I’m with him and I’m glad he’s disrupting the system and at the same time sorry for the lives it’s changing as a result.

Do you have a better idea?

mike

 

18 replies on “Another sign”

Thanks for that perspective.
I wasn’t commenting on the ban.
Just thought it was humorous.

Like you say, “it is about a few people who want to disrupt our way of life, AND THEY HAVE BEEN DOING A PRETTY DAMNED GOOD JOB OF IT!”

Both groups of few people disrupting.
Even the ban is a reaction to something.

Mike –

In what way are our borders dangerously open? The rhetoric I get from the White House is as though you just need a plane ticket to get into the US. Since 911 I believe there has been little terrorism in the US and most of it not from people coming in. It looks to me like the system to protect the borders has been working well.

I don’t believe there have been more than 300 Americans killed by terrorism since 911, so including 911, that’s 3,300 terrorism deaths in America, 1/3 the number killed every year by guns and a fraction of those killed by health care.

I don’t see evidence of danger from people coming through the systems we already have in place.

What am I missing?

Herb

I’d like a wall between me and my racist neighbors. The terrorist who murdered all the people at the church in Charleston lived less than ten miles from me.

Heidi Mehltretter

I really believe that our freedoms will not lead to tolerance but to fractionalization, because for most people tolerance is too difficult!

We have to remember that tolerance “may” be one of the motives that Reiss missed because it’s often indirect, but it’s picked up in iwam and I am convinced the tolerance may be a core motive which makes it very difficult to understand intolerance, it’s virtuous opposite.

mike

Or…we are all profoundly intolerant and we relentlessly fractionalize regardless of the context or degrees of freedom. As social animals, we group ourselves. We cannot craft our own identity without doing this.

The question becomes how large our group is and who we understand our group to be.

The issue of tolerance is more strategically important as it relates to the process of assimilation. If I reject you, there is no possibility for me to have a relationship with you, to bring you into my group.

I would also say that US society is deeply fractionalized, always has been. Wave after wave of immigrants find their niche, usually with their own clans initially. Eventually, through breeding (literally) this clan structure can be broken down unless your clan structure (like the Amish) has tight boundaries of entry and exit.

And then we “re-clan” ourselves a thousand other ways through the groups we identify with (political, religious, economic, race, etc)

I still don’t get the logic of this travel ban. Nor the claim that our borders are open. I heard some White House spokesman argue that that the ban most be implemented immediately because lives are at stake when any number of other measures would save lives and it seems our security people are staying on top of the issue. It’s not as though we don’t have any screening process in place, It’s not as though we don’t have a very effective screening process in place. Kellyanne Conway justifies the ban referring to a nonexistent Bowling Green massacre. Sean Spicer cites the murder of Muslims in a mosque in Quebec as a reason to be extra vigilant – an attack ON Muslims, not by Muslims, but by a home-grown Quebecois Trump fan.

What am I missing here?

Herb

I hear two issues in your query, Herb.

1) Why do some people wish to slow Muslim immigration?
2) Why the ‘ban’ (or BAN, as some prefer) as implemented?

In response to the first question, the author Sam Harris discussed this on Bill Maher’s show last Friday with Ben Affleck and company as foils representing a different view. Many clips and follow-up analyses are available on Youtube.

More broadly, I came across this piece that speaks to #1 and a collection of other desires as part of a values-based revolt.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2017-01-20/jacksonian-revolt?

In response to #2, there are many who want #1 but think the ‘ban’/BAN wasn’t the way to go. There are some who support whatever Trump does, which is identity-based reasoning, not logic. As such, it’s hard to tell reasons from rationalizations. Which probably lends to your confusion.

Alicia Parr

I think all the rest of your questions are rhetorical;)

“Mike, do you believe that the current system allows an unacceptable number of Moslem terrorists into the country.”

I’ll tell u what I think.

Islam is hot and of course in moderation, or so thought the British, and Europe, who are now in a much different place regarding the failures of “immigration.”

Over the years we have “allowed” purposefully millions of Hispanic, mostly Mexicans to become part of our culture.

That assimilation occurred because of Catholicism.

Islam is a different cat.

In answer to your question about allowing immigration of people who are in a totally different place culturally, I’ll (probably mistakenly so) point U to how well we have done with negroes.

I’m sure that idea will add polarity here but if u study things memetically, the best place for all those people is in their culture.

What we should be doing is inviting the best and brightest as we do some if we are to strengthen the necessary density and frequency for where we are?

People think (mostly green) that anyone can assimilate, I disagree because people must pass through particular stages in order to evolve.

We should stop believing that large numbers of immigrants @ different levels of evolution can assimilate without creating significant difficulty and we should help them not by bringing them here and expecting them to assimilate.

That’s my logic, even if it’s not logical.

People think Islam is just another religion, I do not, it is “different” in almost every aspect, and of course practiced by and in our culture will be similar, but that’s doesn’t mean you bring people here who are steeped in the fundamentals and @ a different place memeticalky = BO-PURPLE.

Of course immigration will continue to play an important role in our future but I vote for slowing it down, making it more robust, using proven pathways to citizenship and not short-cutting the process,but that’s just me;)

Hope that answers the question u posed.

Japan takes no one, there is no outrage, boycotts or demonstrations? Why?

mike

“And what I think is missing from our conversations on this and on faux green is where our young people fall in these discussions. I think we should be exploring what they think, what they want, and what they worry about, because we may find it surprising.”

What kind of young people?

The ones “waters” interviews consistently on Fox News?

I listen to my daughters aged 35, and 36 and their friends.

You will find the same thing stratified throughout our society, values exist at every level and they are different among us–just like the kingdom of God…I forgot the verse in the Bible.

I’m not an anti-progressive, but we need to slow things down. Delays will allow us time to create less complex problems and we are SO MUCH IN OVER OUR HEADS.

If this stuff is so much common sense, then why can’t we make heads or tails out of what’s going on.

As to fear mongering, I would say the elite media is generating most of that.

There is a whole strata of values in the USA, perhaps more than anywhere else in the world–excepting Japan–that is weary of the progressive agenda.

It’s like Bannon said…”the media still can’t figure out (mostly green) why Trump won…” and it had nothing to do with the Russians;)

Each value system has its rights and wrongs, its logic, its fears and it’s mongering of its favorite elixir.

There is one thing that I can’t get very many people to grok…and it has to do with progression…and GRAVES noted this also:

Complexity is infinite.

It’s a mole game, you’re not going to get anywhere with the next progression…except to the next progression.

Until u can grok that you won’t see that there is some benefits to being able to sit still in a room by yourself.

We are quickly surpassing our ability to cope and in large part the inequality that is appearing in various forms is do to fewer and fewer being able to keep pace…and those who can keep pace are hinging almost NO CONSIDERATION to a world where most people can’t.

Almost anything that slows things down is going to be largely beneficial: all the “club of Rome” assumptions would benefit: population, pollution, resources, etc.

I’m certain that this “civil” war is going to do that, and it’s probably going to be beneficial, mostly;)

Green has plans to throw so many “sticks in the spokes” of TRUMP’s wagon, that it will create a huge backlash in the flows of the system, which will come to a head in November 2018, possibly before–that will be a watershed to see the density and frequency of the values in this “civil” war play out.

My main worry is that we are experiencing a convergence of global cycles and things could grind to a halt rather than slow down.

Europe is the canary in the “coal mine” I suspect as things are happening there on so many fronts, that the whole thing might come apart.

We have major strategic balls in the air in Asia, the Middle East, Europe and North America, so it’s going to be a fireworks show that we can only imagine.

There was ONE thing I said which was “interesting” related to American Capitalism which I singled out.

So Japanese, German, French, Chinese, etc. capitalism are different and don’t have similar aims?

mike

There are some who support whatever Trump does, which is identity-based reasoning, not logic.

It is a logic, and the logic is slow Muslim immigration until “we figure out what’s going on.”

We are “slowing all immigration” at the wall, until we get a handle on whose coming in.

The prior administration did EVERYTHING they could to allow and pull immigrants into this country in any fashion possible.

The majority of people voted to stop that, it’s a simple logic emergent from different values.

The courts have no business legislating, another logic that the majority voted to stop.

The two states are arguing that it violates rights that immigrants don’t have?

That also is a logic emergent from values, but the majority voted against those values and elected a president with their values.

Anyone can argue right or wrong about anything in politics does and they would be both right and wrong according to values.

There is a great CIVIL WAR going on, it’s going to be interesting to see what forms it takes.

mike

Mike –

Thanks for that elaboration of your earlier point.

“There are some who support whatever Trump does, which is identity-based reasoning, not logic”

If by reasoning is meant anything beyond logical calculations, then it’s not driven by logic but by motive. I expect just about every decision could be seen to be grounded in one’s identity.

You’ve helped me understand more deeply that bias is inescapable. It is not a deviation from “good” reasoning but one of the drivers of reasoning.

I try hard not to get too subject to my left-leaning, Democratic beliefs, values and identities. Mind you, the performances of the Democratic Party and the NY Times leading up to the election helped free me from my subjectivity to them.

Here’s what I still don’t get.

If the immigration issue is about people who used to be or feel to be in power and in the majority now finding themselves in minority positions, I get it. Not everyone gets a kick out of diversity. I’d like our country to be generous, but I don’t have an answer for those in need who wonder why we’re supporting new immigrants who aren’t even citizens yet.

But the issue seems to be about security. And what I read s that we are remarkably secure. Not because here is no threat but because we seem to be good at being vigilant. No such system can be perfect. But my understanding is that we vet immigrants very carefully and very effectively. There has been remarkably little terrorism in the US since 9/11

“The prior administration did EVERYTHING they could to allow and pull immigrants into this country in any fashion possible. The majority of people voted to stop that, it’s a simple logic emergent from different values”

I know which candidate got more votes (and I understand and accept the constitutional irrelevance of that fact) but I don’t know what issues the majority voted for. I can get it that if a significant majority considers an issue, e.g. security, to be significant, that creates a mandate, maybe an accountability, to address that issue. But if that majority has impractical ideas of how to address that issue – e.g. keep Muslims from entering the country to make us more secure – I’d think it’s the job of the President and Congress to figure the best path to the goal.

“Why not slow it down and do a better job of selection, or are u advocating open borders as is basically the case now?”

I would expect if the borders were basically open now we’d have all kinds of terrorists coming into the country and many more incidents and significant fatalities. What do you mean by saying the borders are basically open now?

Do we urgently need of doing a better job of selection? Are we really letting in an unacceptable number of bad hombres?

Mike, do you believe that the current system allows an unacceptable number of Moslem terrorists into the country?

Herb

You say: The prior administration did EVERYTHING they could to allow and pull immigrants into this country in any fashion possible.

I do not think that statement is true.

According to Snopes:
As of 2015, more than 2.5 million undocumented people had been deported by immigration authorities since President Obama took office in 2009, a total which is indeed record-setting. During the two terms of his predecessor, President George W. Bush, just over 2 million people were deported.

What does the term, “until we know what’s going on” mean? Why do we not know what’s going on? What is the real mystery here?

There are hundreds of thousands of people displaced by war – wars we actively contribute to, and by climate changes – which we debate whether or not we contribute to. We have an intense refugee vetting process in place that takes years to complete. According to my close friend who worked 20 years in the American Embassy in Addis, we’ve been further tightening our controls over who we let in even more in the past five years, under OBAMA.

We take in many, many women and children that could hardly be considered a “threat”. We do not at all have the same situation we saw in Europe last year, where single men with the ability to pay smugglers were streaming into the train stations of Germany.

The chance of getting killed by a foreign terrorist in the States, much less a refugee who becomes a terrorist is akin to being struck by lighting, if not greater odds than that.

We have plenty of home grown terrorists, like my neighbor who murdered people in a church, who I believe are being empowered by the racist rhetoric that is being encouraged by this president.

What really is going on? This ban on visa holders and green card holders and grad students and refugees seems like a smoke screen to me. I would like to know the real reasons for this bizarre ban from specific countries that have given us ZERO terrorists so far.

Heidi Mehltretter

My last line of my email was misleading – I meant zero fatal attacks from terrorists and I said zero terrorists.

It’s been bugging me and I just found a quote that explains it:
Here’s a look back at the major terrorist attacks that have taken place on U.S. soil since 9/11, including the nationalities of the perpetrator, or perpetrators.

Of this list, zero fatal attacks were carried out by immigrants from the seven Muslim-majority countries targeted by the ban. Two attacks were carried out by individuals with ties to the seven countries: the 2006 UNC SUV attack, and the 2016 Ohio State University attack. Neither of those plots resulted in American deaths.

This is from this article (from People, a bastion of serious news), though I’ve seen this statistic elsewhere as well. It’s a good list, however.

https://www.yahoo.com/celebrity/many-terrorist-attacks-u-carried-150056041.html

Heidi Mehltretter

Need comparative figures of how many were allowed to stay and deported and allowed back in, but your point is clear, as is mine.

What does the term, “until we know what’s going on” mean? Why do we not know what’s going on? What is the real mystery here?

I’m not sure how close you are to what’s really going on, but I think there is a huge mystery.

As to always helping people sure, as to allowing people who are part of a group that has shown to be radical, do you want to take responsibility for the next attacks?

Do you really know who is coming into our country illegally and legally?

I don’t and it’s my understanding neither does anyone else…I think that’s what it means, and it is a mystery to some of us.

Why not slow it down and do a better job of selection, or are u advocating open borders as is basically the case now?

mike

I don’t advocate for open borders and I don’t believe they are fully open as I’ve met many people throughout the world who would love to come here and don’t have a chance in hell of getting in. The wall is a ridiculous idea from a fiscal perspective alone so I’m opposed to that. There are enough laws on the books to stem the tide of South Americans (without for-profit internment camps), but we don’t enforce them for reasons that I’m guessing have more to do with things like cheap strawberries and profitable cocaine.

What I am strongly against is fear-mongering, and elected leaders participating in easy demonization of any group to obscure the important and complex issues facing us – issues like inequity of wealth, problems with American style capitalism – the quarterly profit model, climate issues, technology replacing jobs, the impacts of our meddling in other countries for financial gain etc.

And what I think is missing from our conversations on this and on faux green is where our young people fall in these discussions. I think we should be exploring what they think, what they want, and what they worry about, because we may find it surprising.

https://twitter.com/JonHaidt/status/829299861673615364

Above is a link to a tweet by Jonathan Haiti with survey results from European citizens about stopping immigration from muslim countries.

The focus on solely removing terrorism danger as the only reason is misleading. Many are concerned about elements of the Muslim belief system that are incompatible with the freedoms we enjoy in the west. Calling that fear ‘intolerance’ or, more pejoratively ‘racism’, is only true on the surface while simultaneously getting it backwards. Many who are very vocal about throttling the pace of Muslim immigration also warmly welcome the Muslim brothers and sisters who abandon the intolerant views of the religion and embrace the mores of western culture. The rub is the difference between the types is notoriously difficult to vet for. That’s the gist of what I hear and read.

Personally, I’m wired to enjoy and appreciate exposure to cultural variety. That’s what was modeled by my parents. That’s a big influence in the decisions I make with where I live, the school my son attends, etc. I also recognize that prescribing my preferences to the whole of society is foolhardy, and if over-applied, could end up reducing my freedoms.

Alicia Parr

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *