The Death of Iraq's Christians

[BT]

I was thinking more in terms of you and I disagreeing on what should and should not qualify as legal immigration, but I suppose to you that amounts to the same thing.

Perhaps the difference is, you dwell on what, in your mind, should be, i on the other hand, concentrate on what is.

You think of ideals, i think in more pragmatic terms.

You are concerned with the rights of man, i am concerned with concrete items like infrastructure and institutional stress.

Perhaps we can meet in the middle when both sides of the equation are given equal weight.

[_JS]

I'll bet if you examined the cases of Assyrians who arrived in Canada during the time of Saddam Hussein, maybe a fifth to a third of them came in as illegals.  Due to the chaos of Iraq's wars with Iran and Kuwait, many of them took advantage to escape military service and certain death to flee the country, leaving relatives behind under a cloud of suspicion and prejudice.   But to the credit of our Canadian government, almost all of the illegals were granted refugee status and permanent residence, which leads to citizenship, if applied for, after (I think) five years' residence. 

People whose lives are in danger don't give a shit whose border they cross and whether the crossing is legal or illegal.  They just want to live and a decent country like ours now recognizes that fact (it didn't always) and lets them live.

Very true. Canada is known for their dedication to human rights and refugees.

The ones I know all want a new country to call home and they're very happy with this one.  And their relatives are very happy with Sweden and Australia.

In fairness, your sample includes those who have fled. I think that would include a natural bias, but I fully admit that I could very well be wrong.

I've never heard any complaints.  Most of them hate Arabs and Muslims.  They'd be a perfect fit with the Likudniks and other Zionist extremists in Israel.

Wow, really? I read a lot from the Patriarch in Jerusalem as well as the Catholic work conducted there and it is far from agreeing with the Likud or Israeli Government. About 9 to 10% of the non-Jewish Arab population of Israel and Palestinian territories are Christians, so I'm not sure why they'd hate Arabs (are they self-loathing?). In Lebanon and Syria the population of Christians is even higher.

The expansion of Israeli settlements, the laws that discriminate against Arabs and favor Jews also negatively discriminate against Christians. There have been Christians in high ranking positions in the PLO. I would be careful to listen to evangelical American Christians speak of Israel as opposed to those who actually live there. Many live under the same humiliating circumstances as the Muslims. They have to go through the same checkpoints. They aren't allowed to own the same land. In fact, Christian villages were destroyed in 1948 just as Muslim villages were destroyed.

<<I've not seen many calls from this country for human rights to be extended there.>>

Ain't gonna happen, JS.  Not as long as AIPAC bankrolls both sides of the "two-party" political system.
[/quote]

[Universe Prince]

Perhaps the difference is, you dwell on what, in your mind, should be, i on the other hand, concentrate on what is.

You think of ideals, i think in more pragmatic terms.

You are concerned with the rights of man, i am concerned with concrete items like infrastructure and institutional stress.

Perhaps we can meet in the middle when both sides of the equation are given equal weight.

You don't give me nearly enough credit. I think of what should be because I see what is and what is, is wrong. My concern is less with ideals than with needed (and sometimes hard) solutions to real problems. I am concerned with the rights of man because I see the very real effects of the abuse and/or denial of those rights. You say you are concerned about "concrete items like infrastructure and institutional stress." I find myself concerned about the people dying in the desert because they are trying to go where they can earn some money to salvage their own lives and the lives of their families. While you might prefer to think that I'm merely being an idealist while you're the pragmatist, I assure you I am very much concerned with very pragmatic and tangible issues.

[BT]

......I assure you I am very much concerned with very pragmatic and tangible issues.

Then perhaps you can expllain how a city like San Diogo can absorb 500k illegals in a two to three year period and provide schooling, health care and infrastructure to this unplanned for increase in their population base.

[The_Professor]

We should accept all the Iraqi Christians who want it to emigrate to the U.S. Evangelical churches should be in the forefront of this issue, yet I do not see this transpiring. Hmmm..

[BT]

We should accept all the Iraqi Christians who want it to emigrate to the U.S.

If they are determined as a class to be political or religious refugees we have a process for that.

[Universe Prince]

Then perhaps you can expllain how a city like San Diogo can absorb 500k illegals in a two to three year period and provide schooling, health care and infrastructure to this unplanned for increase in their population base.

There are some obvious answers like the immigrants not being illegal, thus legitimately adding them to the tax base for the city, but we know that isn't going to happen. Perhaps the problem isn't that the growth was unplanned, but that the city is trying to plan for such things. But then, we know that isn't going to stop happening. Though, frankly, I think it is something that should be considered. How do the San Diego grocery stores provide enough groceries for this unplanned population growth? But these are long term issues. I think you're looking for short-term solutions. But pragmatically speaking, there are no sufficient short term solutions for these problems. It's the equivalent of having carefully painted oneself into a corner. The pragmatic solution is to not have the city trying to plan health care and schools and the like. The problem exists because the city planners created it, not the immigrants.

I'm sure you ready to tell me this doesn't help the situation now. In the short-term, I would advise the city to look to the private sector, provide benefits to those businesses and individuals that will put forth the money, labor, equipment for building and operating whatever it is the city needs. Find ways to encourage the private sector to step up and do what it really should have been doing all along, and then find ways to remove the city planners and the government from the process thereby allowing the private sector continue to handle these things. Then the city won't have to wonder how to handle an unplanned influx of immigrants, just like it doesn't have to wonder how to make sure the grocery stores are handling the increased population.

Sorry I didn't get to this sooner. I've had a lot to do today.

[Universe Prince]

We should accept all the Iraqi Christians who want it to emigrate to the U.S.

So are you, Professor, essentially agreeing with Mr. Bandow?

[The_Professor]

I believe these Christians should be given "refugee" status and admitted forthwith.

This doesn't mean I believe in open or closed borders.

[BT]

I believe these Christians should be given "refugee" status and admitted forthwith.

Should they be given preference over Russian Jews, Tibetan Buddhists, or Rwandan Animists?

[The_Professor]

I believe you know my answer to that. 

[Xavier_Onassis]

Christian America may soon be the death of Iraqi Christians. Although Islam long has been in the ascendancy in Iraq, the so-called Assyrians, who speak a neo-Aramaic language, predate the rise of Islam. Today, however, the Iraqi Christian community faces possible extermination.


The irony is extraordinary: America, a nation with deep Christian roots, has inadvertently loosed the vicious forces bent on destroying Iraqi Christians.  Persecuted by Islamic extremists and targeted for their frequent cooperation with occupation authorities, Christians have ever less hope in a nation that has fallen into violent chaos.
====================================================
IRONY?


Try STUPIDITY.

It is not like the existence of these people was some sort of deep dark secret. The State Dept, the CIA, the DEA, the Department of Anthropology at Yale and every other major university knew about Assyrian Christians.

Everyone with an IQ above room temperature and any knowledge whatever about the Middle East and Islam knows about the cultural and class differences between the Shia and the Sunni.

Everyone except the extremely ignorant warmongering assholes in the Juniorbush administration. Those in the know even included  such  luminaries as Olebush and James Baker.

Poking at a hornet's honest is always unwise.

Your idols have feet of clay. Not to mention heads of solid granite.

Is it really a good idea to monger wars in countries where we risk destroying their culture by invading, and our own buy importing refugees our stupid warmongering has disrupted?

If so how? Please explain.

[BT]

beleive you know my answer to that. 

Maybe.

Defend it.

[The_Professor]

I believe we were founded to be a Christian nation and have deep Christian roots. I therefore believe, to a degree anyway, bordered by reason, we are a defender of Christiandom. Following this line of thoguht then, I believe it is generally in our best NATIONAL INTERESTS to do this.

<now, watch what happens now...>

[BT]

I believe we were founded to be a Christian nation and have deep Christian roots. I therefore believe, to a degree anyway, bordered by reason, we are a defender of Christiandom. Following this line of thoguht then, I believe it is generally in our best NATIONAL INTERESTS to do this.

How does that stance reconcile with the establishment clause?