Virtue Signal Detected

Bluff called. 😀

“Please bear in mind that the greatest demand is for single males.”
https://twitter.com/GodfreyElfwick/status/777510584426369024

As many residents of, say, Sweden and Germany can now attest.
Weeel, if noting immigration increases, granting that some got to attest, with the rather definite awareness that the criminals quite remained the extreme minority when compared to the rest of the immigrants, and that such an extreme minority is rather prolly also outnumbered by the native criminals who already were and remain a different category of issue to assess.
—At least there is the definite advantage of being able to lump all immigrant criminals in with the native criminals, which has merely been going on for years . . . .
Such a pity about that Prohibition . . . after all, it was all for the best and what possibly could have gone wrong?!?!?!?!

?!?!?!?!
My doctor told me not to ingest too much irony.

In that, while one person’s pretentious virtue signalling is merely risible, when pretentious virtue signalling becomes fashionable and even a motor of social policy, it can be quite destructive.
Ah ah ah! You wouldn’t want to be charged with guilt by association for using verboten terminology, would you? Purge that wordcrime from your vocabulary if you know what’s good for you!

What, then, are the benefits for allowing these immigrants (if that’s what you wish to call them) in?
Are the drawbacks greater than the benefits?
Ah . . . . Really???!?!?!!!!
Ah well, fine. What you are actually asking is What are the benefits of immigration, and are the drawbacks greater than the benefits.
No, you don’t get to claim that the focus is These immigrants, for that I leave you to claim to defend, oh, for a totally easy reference, NINA.
From there, regarding immigration, yeah, rather blatantly easy historical references do rather tend to note immigration being rather handy for the receiving country . . . and yes, those are general references, where even where you’ll have to go and be reminded on your own, anything that is more specific is also rather utterly easily picked up here and there and also reminding you of the same rather well documented and additional benefits . . . .
—And I’m spending more time typing up and formatting the above then I did pulling up quite random references . . . .
Oh yeah, there’s one more thing. You still want to claim that to be a Syrian or a child of one is to be a criminal and has absolutely no benefit?? ‘K fine, You do that.
Or try to. We’ll just point and laugh.

Ok, here’s a fandom illustration https://twitter.com/Ricky_Vaughn99/status/778083939542073344

Hal: I point and laugh back.
Learn to discriminate. Insisting that all discussion of immigration be considered at the level of undifferentiated global humanity is like telling you you’ll eat gruel and like it; it’s food like any other, after all, and no, you don’t get to claim that this kind of food is any better or worse than any other in any potential way. Bigot.

While it’s certainly true that in the U.S., all immigrant groups have faced resistance from the locals at one time or another–see, e.g. newspaper editorials in St. Louis between 1838-1860 regarding the “German menace”–the immigrants shared a broad cultural foundation with their adopted country which facilitated assimilation. Further, immigrant economic contribution was inevitable inasmuch as there was no grab-bag of social benefits to which they were entitled merely by getting off the boat. The fear of the “German Menace” listed above disappeared in large part because the Germans rallied to the defense of the Union in 1861-1865.
Obviously, that’s not the case today for reasons Fen mentions, even if there are those within the current crop of Islamic migrants who would be fine additions to a community all things being equal.
The real question is whether any nation has the right to restrict immigration as necessary for its own benefit. It’s clear that a large segment of the population believe that such considerations are somehow tawdry. It’s another manifestation of the penchant of some to feel guilty for things which are completely outside of their control.
Disclosure: I am married to an immigrant.

“Sharia law preferable to American law.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU3G-bHCZhc

Plenty of Moslem servicemen have died in the Middle East in the service of their new countries. So much for the bigots saying that they will always put Islam above anything else.
I recall an accounting a while back indicating that America has lost more soldiers to such Moslem servicemen (Fort Hood et al) than it has lost Moslem servicemen, in the Middle East or elsewhere. So color me unconvinced on this point.

No, no! It IS about food!
You haven’t had Mexican food until you’ve had it from a truck owned by a Vietnamese couple.
Man Oh Man. Talk about your cultural Appropriation! Yum!

You haven’t had Mexican food until you’ve had it from a truck owned by a Vietnamese couple.
One pizza place near me has a staff of all Asian Indian, another is all Chinese.
—-The former is bog standard, out of the box, low end franchise with the franchise varieties of pizzas, the latter a standalone shop that does. oh, basically the same sorts of pizzas as everyone else and yeah, a level up from the franchise . . .

The only time I have been stoned in public was in Geneva, by a pack of Muslims unhappy about a group of Jews walking to synagogue. It’s all fun and games until they stone YOU Hal, then you start to think about self-preservation rather than being nice to foreigners.

I believe the “bowl of skittles” thing is an old feminist meme about men being rapists. Which is probably why Trump Jr. used it as it is quite appropriate, and makes the media fall over themselves before someone finally picks up on its origins, at which point it’ll be buried quickly to avoid offending the feminists.

“Your “deeper and broad Judeo-Christian background” is all in your head.”
That isn’t only not right, it’s not even wrong.
The legal and social cultures of all Western countries are marked profoundly by their origins as part of Christendom. This applies equally to countries that originated as settled colonies of Western countries. Even where different legal systems are in use (e.g. based on Common or Roman Law), the most profound underlying principles are shared.
Those countries that were on the other side of the Great Schism are recognisably part of Christendom, tho’ the divergence has been greater. And Jews, for all their difficulties with Christendom, have always been part of this shared tradition, culture and history.
Islam does not share this tradition. Indeed, it consciously rejects the idea that it has inherited anything from anyone anywhere, since it was perfect out of the box. Many Muslims, in the privacy of their thoughts, must see this is nonsense: but it is the official line.
So, allow Muslim numbers to edge upwards and, sooner rather than later, calls for sharia to be imposed (along with all the cultural baggage) will follow. The threat of violence is implicit within the demand, and no amount of NTDWI-ing will make it less real.
Is that a serious problem? I rather think it is.

Chester, I was going to respond, but Fen immediately above did so quite well. I’ll note only that you continue to refuse to respond to the original points made by Fen farther above and me, preferring to try to drag the argument into meaningless diversions by derailing the discussion of general trends, inclinations & probablities among large, discrete demographic groups and accusing those whose opinions differ from yours of bad faith or imbecility. Again, well & nobly done.

Oops, oops, and oops.

Chester
In your view, are all cultures equally compatible, or are some cultures less compatible with other cultures?

Religious Jews however, like religious Muslims, largely reject it.
I don’t see Orthodox Jews gang-raping women on New Years Eve, or planting bombs in New York and New Jersey, or going on stabbing/shooting sprees at malls in Minnesota and Washington state. Even the most hardcore Orthodox Jew is not the same as a highly religious Muslim, nor are the more devout Christians, Hindus, etc…

I didn’t say they did, just that they reject Western culture.
Judging from the Sunni-on-Shiite/Shiite-on-Sunni/etc. violence, the bombing of mosques done overwhelmingly by other Muslims, it seems that they even reject their own culture. What little of it there is left. Ahh, but can you blame them?

And, as we’ve discussed and confirmed before, the quarreling branches of Islam are now doing what the quarreling branches of Christianity did before them, and exactly as the quarreling branches of Judaism also were doing around the time that Christianity was being thought up . . . .
Sooo, at this point, we’ve seen this before:
The Muslim world now, like “Christendom” in the 16th century, is made up of many independent countries. And the current phase of the Muslim wars of religion is being fought out between Shias and Sunnis in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, just as the first phase of the Christian wars of religion was fought out mainly between Catholics and Protestants in individual countries.
This really is a tiresome argument. Shiite and Sunni have been killing each other ever since Mohammed died. It’s not like Islam was all peaceful back then and only Christianity was at war. Everyone was killing everyone in the 16th Century. Tamerlane (14th/15th century if you wanna get picky) was a viscous murdering bastard. But he loved him his Islam back in the day. It is estimated he killed 5% of the world population at the time. Iran/Persia population didn’t recover from his conquests until the 20th century.

This really is a tiresome argument.
Observation y’mean? There isn’t an argument being presented there.
Tamerlane (14th/15th century if you wanna get picky) was a viscous murdering bastard. But he loved him his Islam back in the day. It is estimated he killed 5% of the world population at the time. Iran/Persia population didn’t recover from his conquests until the 20th century.
So as you’re agreeing, just like the Catholics and the Protestants back a bit . . .

. . . just as the first phase of the Christian wars of religion was fought out mainly between Catholics and Protestants in individual countries.
From the start of the conflict in Europe, however, each European state tried to help its co-believers in neighbouring countries as well, and alliances were increasingly shaped by religious considerations. In the second phase, these alliances dragged most of Europe into the catastrophic Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648), fought mostly in the middle of Europe but involving armies from as far apart as Sweden and Spain.
The main battleground, Germany, lost between one-third and one-half of its population. Nobody won, of course, and in the very long run everybody just lost interest in the question. But it was a very great waste of lives, time and money.
The Muslim world is already caught up in the first phase of a comparable process, but it is not condemned to go the whole distance. One big difference is that the Sunni-Shia split is ancient – more than 1,350 years old – whereas the Catholic-Protestant split was new and still full of passion at the time of the Christian wars.
More than 99 percent of today’s Muslims were simply born Sunni or Shia, whereas many 16th-century Christians had made a conscious choice about their religion. The current killings in the Muslim world are mostly driven by state policy, so maybe Muslims will not throw away a couple of generations following the same foolish, bloody road that the Christians took 500 years ago.

. . . about bathtub falls killing more people than terrorism. The point is bathtubs are not actively engaged in trying to kill us. They don’t stalk people in shopping malls or fly airplanes into buildings.
Exactly. On one hand, there is a collection of assorted lunatics claiming that there should be assorted mayhem, where as noted,

The Middle East is a disaster area but it is an isolated disaster area, apart from occasional small-scale terrorist outrages in Western countries. To live in fear of a world-wide Islamic caliphate is as delusional as to hope for it.

And then on the other hand, there is some apparently larger number of claimed deaths by perfectly innocuous bathtubs, and there are the noted traffic deaths where the traffic does not go about declaring Death To Pedestrians!!!
Quite yes, absolutely, anyone who has to be among or goes to be among the Islamist lunatics—Not Muslims, Islamist lunatics—-is not expected to have any sort of extended lifespan. Then again, anyone who goes wandering out on the track during the Indianapolis 500 is also not expected to have any sort of extended lifespan.
And when the reverse is done, unplanned and unintended deaths by vehicle resemble that of World War rates of death, and quite by contrast, the lunatics with intent still manage to have a totally piss poor level of success.
Soo, as you’re acknowledging, yes there are deaths by lightening, there are deaths by homicidal lunatics, there are deaths by plane crash, and all three causes of death remain quite genuine, but remain extremely minor matters that get headlines because of being so unusual and rare.

The answer is: . . .
Numbers? Or are you just enabling?

TL;BSIHNBTDRN…
So as you’re agreeing,
Bakatcha…For most of human existence life was nasty, brutish, and short for a reason. It was this way for Europeans, Africans, Asians, Native Americans, on down the line. As I stated previously, to say that “well the Christians were all killing each other in the 16th century” is to ignore the fact that such was life for everyone. The point is, the vast majority of people on this planet have progressed to some extent beyond that. Yes there are ideological differences, religious differences, etc. etc. etc. To excuse Islamic hate, murder, and killing, be it xenophobic or intramural, as “it’s just a phase they’re going through” is wishful thinking based on a parallel that doesn’t exist.
Not Muslims, Islamist lunatics
Lunatics do not organize. I have no fear that if we let John Hinkley and Mark David Chapman out of prison that they will join forces or learn to fly airplanes into buildings. Even if they somehow do quote the same religious text, such people are truly mentally unstable. They have a real mental illness. The people who build sophisticated bombs, who train with AK-47s to work in unison attacking a European capital or travel to MUSLIM countries to learn their death trade so that they can return to the West to kill innocents are not mentally ill. They are committing conscious acts.
More than 99 percent of today’s Muslims were simply born Sunni or Shia, whereas many 16th-century Christians had made a conscious choice about their religion. The current killings in the Muslim world are mostly driven by state policy, so maybe Muslims will not throw away a couple of generations following the same foolish, bloody road that the Christians took 500 years ago.
This is so messed up there’s no telling where to start. You can slice it so many ways. So Muslims are unthinking drones but Christians are philosophic? “Driven by state policy”…what? Even if true, WTF does that have to do with anything? It’s still Muslims killing with the aid of the state. And every one of those states that aid them are heavily Islamic. Even the more secular ones. Thanks to Attaturk, Turkey was the lone exception while it lasted but even it is slipping back into theocracy. Unless this douchey statement is implying that Muslim killings are driven by the policies of Western states. It’s logical gobbletygook. “so maybe Muslims will not throw away a couple of generations following the same foolish, bloody road that the Christians took 500 years ago”…What means “maybe”? It’s what they’ve been doing for generations already.
And of course I must say this or the cry of RAAAACISM will come out, yes most Muslims are not interested in these things. And there truly are many, many good and decent Muslims. I even know a few. That doesn’t excuse the fact that large numbers of them are full of hate for all non-Muslims. When a Tim McViegh or the KKK or any other western terrorist commits horrific crimes, you don’t find large numbers of Christians or Jews dancing in the streets celebrating.
What is Islam?

What is Islam?
Ehn, as noted, it’s another one of the several often interchangeable Abrahamic faiths, even with the common confusion of faith vs religion.