Oklahoma bombing anyone.Bertster7 wrote:
That's not true either.Harmor wrote:
I'm not saying that ALL doctors from Pakistan are terrorists, but so far all terrorists have been extremist Muslims.sergeriver wrote:
Wtf? This thread is full of prejudice, bigotry and it's clearly poorly thought. Now, a doctor from Pakistan must be a terrorist coz he's from a country that harbors terrorists? Oh, go Harbor, eh Harmor, Fox News is about to start don't miss it.
There have been two successful terror attacks in the UK this year, one of which was conducted by extremist Muslims. That's only half.
I was talking about the UK, specifically this year - but if you want to bring the US into it......sergeriver wrote:
Oklahoma bombing anyone.Bertster7 wrote:
That's not true either.Harmor wrote:
I'm not saying that ALL doctors from Pakistan are terrorists, but so far all terrorists have been extremist Muslims.
There have been two successful terror attacks in the UK this year, one of which was conducted by extremist Muslims. That's only half.
How about; the UNABOMBER, Anthrax attacks and the Olympic bombings (which were carried out by an extremist Christian).
In history yes, Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini to name a few. But lets talk about the last 20 years.jonsimon wrote:
There have been tons of white terrorists throughout history. You meant to say "but so far all islamic terrorists have been extreme muslims."Harmor wrote:
I'm not saying that ALL doctors from Pakistan are terrorists, but so far all terrorists have been extremist Muslims.
No, in the last 20 years, who has been responsible for all the embassy bombings, the 234 Americans killed in the Bruit bombing in Lebanon, the Cole bombing in Yemen, 9/11, 7/7 bombings, and Spain train bombings? I don't think they were White Anglosaxon males with Ph.Ds?
Now I guess you could make a case that actions of white males lead to them doing these killings of thousands of innocent civilians.
This topic is disgustingly prejudice and totally wrong in so many ways. Britain has so many people coming in from all around the world doing all sorts of work, are we to suspect that our strawberries might blow up while we watch wimbledon now, or that we are buying nerve gas instead of lighter gas when we shop at a corner shop. OMG, I might have nitroglycerine in my petrol tank cos the guy who works at the petrol station is a pakistani.
Go bury your head again and dont come out again until you have some global awareness you stupid child.
Go bury your head again and dont come out again until you have some global awareness you stupid child.
Good point, the Unabomber, Ted Kandinsky, sent dozens of mail bombs. What also about Timothy McVey in the Oklahoma bombings? The Anthrax attacks after 9/11 were never pinned on anyone - a scientists in Florida was suspected, but no one was ever charged. I don't recall exactly who was responsible for the Olympic bombings in Atlanta in 1996 I believe (1 person died in that attack?).Bertster7 wrote:
How about; the UNABOMBER, Anthrax attacks and the Olympic bombings (which were carried out by an extremist Christian).
Ok, so not ALL terrorists attacks in the last 20 years have been from extremist Muslims, but a HUGE percentage of them have. Is that a more accurate statement?
You're just picking and choosing specific incidents to support your agenda.Harmor wrote:
In history yes, Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini to name a few. But lets talk about the last 20 years.jonsimon wrote:
There have been tons of white terrorists throughout history. You meant to say "but so far all islamic terrorists have been extreme muslims."Harmor wrote:
I'm not saying that ALL doctors from Pakistan are terrorists, but so far all terrorists have been extremist Muslims.
No, in the last 20 years, who has been responsible for all the embassy bombings, the 234 Americans killed in the Bruit bombing in Lebanon, the Cole bombing in Yemen, 9/11, 7/7 bombings, and Spain train bombings? I don't think they were White Anglosaxon males with Ph.Ds?
Now I guess you could make a case that actions of white males lead to them doing these killings of thousands of innocent civilians.
168 Americans were killed by the Oklahoma bombing, 111 Americans were wounded in the Centennial Olympic Park bombing - I don't see you mentioning those.
The Oklahoma terrorists were white anglosaxon males, but I don't think they had Ph.Ds.Harmor wrote:
In history yes, Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini to name a few. But lets talk about the last 20 years.jonsimon wrote:
There have been tons of white terrorists throughout history. You meant to say "but so far all islamic terrorists have been extreme muslims."Harmor wrote:
I'm not saying that ALL doctors from Pakistan are terrorists, but so far all terrorists have been extremist Muslims.
No, in the last 20 years, who has been responsible for all the embassy bombings, the 234 Americans killed in the Bruit bombing in Lebanon, the Cole bombing in Yemen, 9/11, 7/7 bombings, and Spain train bombings? I don't think they were White Anglosaxon males with Ph.Ds?
Now I guess you could make a case that actions of white males lead to them doing these killings of thousands of innocent civilians.
Not really, no (well, it's more accurate, in that it's less wrong).Harmor wrote:
Good point, the Unabomber, Ted Kandinsky, sent dozens of mail bombs. What also about Timothy McVey in the Oklahoma bombings? The Anthrax attacks after 9/11 were never pinned on anyone - a scientists in Florida was suspected, but no one was ever charged. I don't recall exactly who was responsible for the Olympic bombings in Atlanta in 1996 I believe (1 person died in that attack?).Bertster7 wrote:
How about; the UNABOMBER, Anthrax attacks and the Olympic bombings (which were carried out by an extremist Christian).
Ok, so not ALL terrorists attacks in the last 20 years have been from extremist Muslims, but a HUGE percentage of them have. Is that a more accurate statement?
In the UK there have been 6 terrorist attacks since the millenium. 2 of those were conducted by Muslims. That's only one third.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-07-06 08:14:41)
Why do we allow foreign doctors from countries that harbor/support terrorists? What I'm saying is that if you stop visas from these countries that we would have alot less terrorism.sergeriver wrote:
Dude, I don't want to be rude, but you need to stop living in paranoia. There are terrorists around, that's true. But you can't live having suspicion on everyone coz of their origin. I agree that those doctors should be punished, but you can't punish all the doctors from Pakistan or anywhere else where terrorists are sponsored. You won't beat terrorism with prejudice and stereotyping, you can beat it using good information and attacking the well educated assholes who sponsor these terrorists.
Are all people from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan terrorists, no, but a much larger percentage of them are and until they moderate their religion and stamp out their extremism I don't think we should be importing their doctors.
Is that an idea that is too radical?
But 1/4 of the World are Muslims, so they have more terrorists per capita /sarcasm.Bertster7 wrote:
Not really, no.Harmor wrote:
Good point, the Unabomber, Ted Kandinsky, sent dozens of mail bombs. What also about Timothy McVey in the Oklahoma bombings? The Anthrax attacks after 9/11 were never pinned on anyone - a scientists in Florida was suspected, but no one was ever charged. I don't recall exactly who was responsible for the Olympic bombings in Atlanta in 1996 I believe (1 person died in that attack?).Bertster7 wrote:
How about; the UNABOMBER, Anthrax attacks and the Olympic bombings (which were carried out by an extremist Christian).
Ok, so not ALL terrorists attacks in the last 20 years have been from extremist Muslims, but a HUGE percentage of them have. Is that a more accurate statement?
In the UK there have been 6 terrorist attacks since the millenium. 2 of those were conducted by Muslims. That's only one third.
Over the last 20 years, Britain was more at risk from bombs coming out of Ireland than from Muslim extremists. I have got to stop reading this thread. God am I offended by it.
Well as long as I'm more accurate that's ok with me.Bertster7 wrote:
Not really, no (well, it's more accurate, in that it's less wrong).
What were the other 4? Where those IRA attacks?Bertster7 wrote:
In the UK there have been 6 terrorist attacks since the millenium. 2 of those were conducted by Muslims. That's only one third.
Some were. Not all.Harmor wrote:
Well as long as I'm more accurate that's ok with me.Bertster7 wrote:
Not really, no (well, it's more accurate, in that it's less wrong).What were the other 4? Where those IRA attacks?Bertster7 wrote:
In the UK there have been 6 terrorist attacks since the millenium. 2 of those were conducted by Muslims. That's only one third.
I concede that point with your two examples. But can we agree that extremist Muslims killed thousands of more people and are by far more dangerous in the near term?Bertster7 wrote:
168 Americans were killed by the Oklahoma bombing, 111 Americans were wounded in the Centennial Olympic Park bombing - I don't see you mentioning those.
Absolutely not a good idea and let me tell you why. While you can deny visas to people from those countries, terrorists will always find the way in. And meanwhile you'll be punishing millions of innocent people for the actions of a few assholes.Harmor wrote:
Why do we allow foreign doctors from countries that harbor/support terrorists? What I'm saying is that if you stop visas from these countries that we would have alot less terrorism.sergeriver wrote:
Dude, I don't want to be rude, but you need to stop living in paranoia. There are terrorists around, that's true. But you can't live having suspicion on everyone coz of their origin. I agree that those doctors should be punished, but you can't punish all the doctors from Pakistan or anywhere else where terrorists are sponsored. You won't beat terrorism with prejudice and stereotyping, you can beat it using good information and attacking the well educated assholes who sponsor these terrorists.
Are all people from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan terrorists, no, but a much larger percentage of them are and until they moderate their religion and stamp out their extremism I don't think we should be importing their doctors.
Is that an idea that is too radical?
What if a good doctor from Pakistan wants to work in the UK to help people coz that's his vocation, and he wouldn't be allowed to do so coz he's from Pakistan?
You need to remember that the people who sponsor and control terrorist organizations are not amateurs or uneducated. Au contraire. Sadly, these assholes have studied at good universities and are very intelligent people. They won't kill themselves, that's for sure, they will brainwash some poor bastard who believes in the 72 virgins stuff. Do you really think that these people can't find their way in even with harder security at the airports? What happened after 9/11? We all need to waste a ridiculous amount of time at the airports and pay a lot of security taxes coz of the actions of a few. And shit still happens. You can't win this war punishing everyone, that won't work.
They're certainly a high risk group. But then so are random nutters.Harmor wrote:
I concede that point with your two examples. But can we agree that extremist Muslims killed thousands of more people and are by far more dangerous in the near term?Bertster7 wrote:
168 Americans were killed by the Oklahoma bombing, 111 Americans were wounded in the Centennial Olympic Park bombing - I don't see you mentioning those.
But fortunately Muslims are much easier to keep an eye on, hence the large number of foilled terror plots by Muslims, compared to the very small number of foilled terror plots by random nutters.
I'd be prepared to bet that random, non-muslim, nutters kill more people than their Jihading counterparts in the West.
To me its this attitude that thinks that ALL foreigners from these terrorist supporting/harboring countries come 'in peace'. As much as I would like to believe that its not true. I wish everyone we welcomed into our country from poorer, disaffected countries, were coming here to peacefully integrate into our society, but that's not true.Chaos_nation wrote:
This topic is disgustingly prejudice and totally wrong in so many ways. Britain has so many people coming in from all around the world doing all sorts of work, are we to suspect that our strawberries might blow up while we watch wimbledon now, or that we are buying nerve gas instead of lighter gas when we shop at a corner shop. OMG, I might have nitroglycerine in my petrol tank cos the guy who works at the petrol station is a pakistani.
Go bury your head again and dont come out again until you have some global awareness you stupid child.
Do I sound like a bigot when I say that, yes to some, but is it not true that they are killing innocent civilians in droves? I know earlier in this debate that I said all extremist Muslims were terrorists, but has had been pointed out already, I was wrong; however, a large majority of terrorists are extremist Muslims and it doesn't seem the flow will stop any time soon.
Not to derail the debate, 27% of all people in federal/state prisons in the United States are illegal aliens. So the theory that all foreigners come 'in peace' is wrong. What we need a responsible immigration policy that tries to weed out as many of these people who are bent on killing us or causing us harm. As we have seen that even doctors can be terrorists and that is very troubling.
If it means anything I'm a Hispanic, first generation in the United States. Both my parents legally immigrated from the Dominican Republic when they were 13 and 14 respectively.
In fact Britain has already implemented a scheme that gives preferential immigration status to doctors from within the EU. We need foreign doctors anyway, the cost in lives of not having enough skilled doctors does not make severe restrictions on migrant doctors worthwhile.sergeriver wrote:
Absolutely not a good idea and let me tell you why. While you can deny visas to people from those countries, terrorists will always find the way in. And meanwhile you'll be punishing millions of innocent people for the actions of a few assholes.Harmor wrote:
Why do we allow foreign doctors from countries that harbor/support terrorists? What I'm saying is that if you stop visas from these countries that we would have alot less terrorism.sergeriver wrote:
Dude, I don't want to be rude, but you need to stop living in paranoia. There are terrorists around, that's true. But you can't live having suspicion on everyone coz of their origin. I agree that those doctors should be punished, but you can't punish all the doctors from Pakistan or anywhere else where terrorists are sponsored. You won't beat terrorism with prejudice and stereotyping, you can beat it using good information and attacking the well educated assholes who sponsor these terrorists.
Are all people from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan terrorists, no, but a much larger percentage of them are and until they moderate their religion and stamp out their extremism I don't think we should be importing their doctors.
Is that an idea that is too radical?
What if a good doctor from Pakistan wants to work in the UK to help people coz that's his vocation, and he wouldn't be allowed to do so coz he's from Pakistan?
You need to remember that the people who sponsor and control terrorist organizations are not amateurs or uneducated. Au contraire. Sadly, these assholes have studied at good universities and are very intelligent people. They won't kill themselves, that's for sure, they will brainwash some poor bastard who believes in the 72 virgins stuff. Do you really think that these people can't find their way in even with harder security at the airports? What happened after 9/11? We all need to waste a ridiculous amount of time at the airports and pay a lot of security taxes coz of the actions of a few. And shit still happens. You can't win this war punishing everyone, that won't work.
You've also been demonstrated to be wrong about the majority of terrorists being extremist Muslims, at least in the UK.Harmor wrote:
Do I sound like a bigot when I say that, yes to some, but is it not true that they are killing innocent civilians in droves? I know earlier in this debate that I said all extremist Muslims were terrorists, but has had been pointed out already, I was wrong; however, a large majority of terrorists are extremist Muslims and it doesn't seem the flow will stop any time soon.
Muslims doctors killing innocent civilians in droves? I think you'll find there has yet to be an incident involving a Muslim doctor killing anyone through terrorist actions in the UK.
Ok so if we want to allow doctors, in this case, from Pakistan for the reasons you gave above then we shouldn't be surprised that a very small percentage of them are terrorists? We should then accept this and take the resulting deaths of these terrorist acts that will no doubt killed scores of innocent civilians with a grain of salt?sergeriver wrote:
Absolutely not a good idea and let me tell you why. While you can deny visas to people from those countries, terrorists will always find the way in. And meanwhile you'll be punishing millions of innocent people for the actions of a few assholes.
What if a good doctor from Pakistan wants to work in the UK to help people coz that's his vocation, and he wouldn't be allowed to do so coz he's from Pakistan?
I think that is where we differ.
I don't doubt that terrorists will find a way, but at least the way should be has hard as possible.sergeriver wrote:
You need to remember that the people who sponsor and control terrorist organizations are not amateurs or uneducated. Au contraire. Sadly, these assholes have studied at good universities and are very intelligent people. They won't kill themselves, that's for sure, they will brainwash some poor bastard who believes in the 72 virgins stuff. Do you really think that these people can't find their way in even with harder security at the airports?
Well all this highten security at airports has deterred them at least. Last summer wasn't there a plot to down 10 airliners from Europe to the United States? That would had killed almost 10,000 people, dwarfing 9/11. That attack could had worked if we didn't "waste this ridiculous amount of time at hte airports and pay a lot of security taxes."sergeriver wrote:
What happened after 9/11? We all need to waste a ridiculous amount of time at the airports and pay a lot of security taxes coz of the actions of a few. And shit still happens.
I agree that these extremist Muslims have spoiled the bunch. I would rather punish everyone from these terrorist harboring/supporting states than have more innocent civilians killed.sergeriver wrote:
You can't win this war punishing everyone, that won't work.
When I said 'they' I meant extremist Muslims, not the Doctor Terrorists in the most recent UK attack that only managed to burn the driver of Jeep and injure a few people.Bertster7 wrote:
You've also been demonstrated to be wrong about the majority of terrorists being extremist Muslims, at least in the UK.Harmor wrote:
Do I sound like a bigot when I say that, yes to some, but is it not true that they are killing innocent civilians in droves? I know earlier in this debate that I said all extremist Muslims were terrorists, but has had been pointed out already, I was wrong; however, a large majority of terrorists are extremist Muslims and it doesn't seem the flow will stop any time soon.
Muslims doctors killing innocent civilians in droves? I think you'll find there has yet to be an incident involving a Muslim doctor killing anyone through terrorist actions in the UK.
You consider Pakistan to be a terrorist harboring state?Harmor wrote:
I agree that these extremist Muslims have spoiled the bunch. I would rather punish everyone from these terrorist harboring/supporting states than have more innocent civilians killed.
Despite the fact they have fully cooperated with Western security services and been actively engaged in tracking down and arresting and great number of terror suspects? On top of the fact they have given their consent for Western forces to seek and destroy terrorist training camps within Pakistan? Something I believe a large number of the troops currently in Iraq should be redeployed to do - since it should be a top priority.
Harboring terrorists would be providing them with a safe haven, much like the Taliban did in the past in Afghanistan, Pakistan do not harbor terrorists.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-07-06 08:57:25)
Statistacally, a higher percentage of immigrants find themselves in jails due to ignorance of laws and legislation, and difficulties in integrating into new societies due to disaffection from resident citizens. A more open policy at integration and support to immigrants would result in fewer of them ending up in prison.Harmor wrote:
To me its this attitude that thinks that ALL foreigners from these terrorist supporting/harboring countries come 'in peace'. As much as I would like to believe that its not true. I wish everyone we welcomed into our country from poorer, disaffected countries, were coming here to peacefully integrate into our society, but that's not true.Chaos_nation wrote:
This topic is disgustingly prejudice and totally wrong in so many ways. Britain has so many people coming in from all around the world doing all sorts of work, are we to suspect that our strawberries might blow up while we watch wimbledon now, or that we are buying nerve gas instead of lighter gas when we shop at a corner shop. OMG, I might have nitroglycerine in my petrol tank cos the guy who works at the petrol station is a pakistani.
Go bury your head again and dont come out again until you have some global awareness you stupid child.
Do I sound like a bigot when I say that, yes to some, but is it not true that they are killing innocent civilians in droves? I know earlier in this debate that I said all extremist Muslims were terrorists, but has had been pointed out already, I was wrong; however, a large majority of terrorists are extremist Muslims and it doesn't seem the flow will stop any time soon.
Not to derail the debate, 27% of all people in federal/state prisons in the United States are illegal aliens. So the theory that all foreigners come 'in peace' is wrong. What we need a responsible immigration policy that tries to weed out as many of these people who are bent on killing us or causing us harm. As we have seen that even doctors can be terrorists and that is very troubling.
If it means anything I'm a Hispanic, first generation in the United States. Both my parents legally immigrated from the Dominican Republic when they were 13 and 14 respectively.
That said, we are now talking about immigrants who are legally crossing borders whereas your statement " 27% of all people in federal/state prisons in the United States are illegal aliens. " tends to indicate those who are not legally crossing borders. That isn't an immigration problem, its a border control problem which isn't quite the same thing.
Short of closing down all borders and then kicking out every one who cannot trace back their roots at least till the 1900's there is no way you would ever stop the spread of terrorism.
You yourself are a first generation American, so are most of the kids in the UK that are being duped into extremism. Their parents come to the UK for a better way of life (and a free health service, income support, child benefit etc) and for the most part are hard working and peaceful people. Their children are the ones who kick off so should we protect our great nation by exporting the kids and their parents as well so the kids will have no excuse to come back on a visit??
Considering how many billion people there are on this planet, a very small percentage, so small it would be hard to put a figure to are engaged in some sort of terrorism in some respect. To punish the majority for 0.00000000000000000001% of the planet's actions is ludicrous. It is a far better policy to integrate newcomers into the community and let the communities assist with detecting the terrorists.
Regardless of what policies are put into place, you will not stop someone with a deathwish from killing themselves and taking whoever is near them along with them to meet the virgins.
I am just thankful that the leaders of our nations do not have the isolated views that have been shown in this thread.
I don't say let anyone in, but if a doctor that meets all the requirements of immigration wants to get a job, let him. If you really need doctors from other countries, of course.Harmor wrote:
Ok so if we want to allow doctors, in this case, from Pakistan for the reasons you gave above then we shouldn't be surprised that a very small percentage of them are terrorists? We should then accept this and take the resulting deaths of these terrorist acts that will no doubt killed scores of innocent civilians with a grain of salt?sergeriver wrote:
Absolutely not a good idea and let me tell you why. While you can deny visas to people from those countries, terrorists will always find the way in. And meanwhile you'll be punishing millions of innocent people for the actions of a few assholes.
What if a good doctor from Pakistan wants to work in the UK to help people coz that's his vocation, and he wouldn't be allowed to do so coz he's from Pakistan?
I think that is where we differ.
Agreed. The way should be as hard as possible for them, not for everyone.Harmor wrote:
I don't doubt that terrorists will find a way, but at least the way should be has hard as possible.sergeriver wrote:
You need to remember that the people who sponsor and control terrorist organizations are not amateurs or uneducated. Au contraire. Sadly, these assholes have studied at good universities and are very intelligent people. They won't kill themselves, that's for sure, they will brainwash some poor bastard who believes in the 72 virgins stuff. Do you really think that these people can't find their way in even with harder security at the airports?
Good point.Harmor wrote:
Well all this highten security at airports has deterred them at least. Last summer wasn't there a plot to down 10 airliners from Europe to the United States? That would had killed almost 10,000 people, dwarfing 9/11. That attack could had worked if we didn't "waste this ridiculous amount of time at hte airports and pay a lot of security taxes."sergeriver wrote:
What happened after 9/11? We all need to waste a ridiculous amount of time at the airports and pay a lot of security taxes coz of the actions of a few. And shit still happens.
That's unfair. Should all the white anglosaxon males be profiled in the US coz of the Oklahoma bombing?Harmor wrote:
I agree that these extremist Muslims have spoiled the bunch. I would rather punish everyone from these terrorist harboring/supporting states than have more innocent civilians killed.sergeriver wrote:
You can't win this war punishing everyone, that won't work.
Yes, and the armed forces perpetuates soldier terrorists (Timothy McVeigh, John Allen Muhammad), going to church perpetuates religious terrorists (Eric Rudolph, James Kopp), and listening to goth music perpetuates outcast terrorists (Columbine).
Dur dur dur...
Dur dur dur...