Possible "Terrorist Incident" in Westminster, 4 killed

[The Klishi Islands]

He was English, given that he was born in the UK.

And you're honestly suggesting that we should ban either Middle Easterners, South Asians, or Muslims because of what their grandchildren might do? That's absurd.

We did it in America for about 200 years. Worked pretty well while it lasted.

No we didn't. That's completely false. Immigration restrictions weren't put into place in the US until the Chinese Exclusion Act in the 1880s, followed by gradual restrictions on areas of the world not populated by WASPs (white Anglo-Saxon Protestants), which remained mostly in place until the 1960s, when nationality quotas were replaced with a family-based system blind to race or ethnicity.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

Control their immigration? Dude was born in the far-off land of Kent.

We could build a wall around Kent?

I don't recall there being historical populations of muslims in the U.K. before the 20th century. Certainly, controls on immigration origin would have prevented his parents, grandparents or whomever from immigrating in the first place.

Yeah no.

Control their immigration? Dude was born in the far-off land of Kent.

That may be so, but he was not English.

Do define the criteria for someone being English.[/quote]

Well, a DNA test would be able to solve that in fairly short order. having the DNA of someone of Anglo-saxon origin, for example. I took a DNA test recently and discovered that i am actually 87.5% English, 12.5% Irish. Interestingly.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

We did it in America for about 200 years. Worked pretty well while it lasted.

No we didn't. That's completely false. Immigration restrictions weren't put into place in the US until the Chinese Exclusion Act in the 1880s, followed by gradual restrictions on areas of the world not populated by WASPs (white Anglo-Saxon Protestants), which remained mostly in place until the 1960s, when nationality quotas were replaced with a family-based system blind to race or ethnicity.

It was unnecessary before the 1880s because most immigrants were from western civilization. Those that were not, were wrongfully and forcefully brought to America against their will as slaves.

[Vassenor]

We could build a wall around Kent?


Yeah no.




That may be so, but he was not English.

Do define the criteria for someone being English.

Well, a DNA test would be able to solve that in fairly short order. having the DNA of someone of Anglo-saxon origin, for example. I took a DNA test recently and discovered that i am actually 87.5% English, 12.5% Irish. Interestingly.[/quote]

So no-one of Celtic or Nordic extraction then?

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

Do define the criteria for someone being English.

Well, a DNA test would be able to solve that in fairly short order. having the DNA of someone of Anglo-saxon origin, for example. I took a DNA test recently and discovered that i am actually 87.5% English, 12.5% Irish. Interestingly.

So no-one of Celtic or Nordic extraction then?[/quote]

Not necessarily, any European would do. 'Western Civilization'. I'd include Japanese and South Koreans in that figure, though. I feel their culture is sufficiently advanced to not be a threat to society.

[Great Nepal]

Well, a DNA test would be able to solve that in fairly short order. having the DNA of someone of Anglo-saxon origin, for example. I took a DNA test recently and discovered that i am actually 87.5% English, 12.5% Irish. Interestingly.

Why are you drawing that line at Anglo Saxon exactly? They aren't English - they're Germans who moved here.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

Well, a DNA test would be able to solve that in fairly short order. having the DNA of someone of Anglo-saxon origin, for example. I took a DNA test recently and discovered that i am actually 87.5% English, 12.5% Irish. Interestingly.

Why are you drawing that line at Anglo Saxon exactly? They aren't English - they're Germans who moved here.

My problem is not necessarily ethnic -- It's mostly cultural. The individual was a Muslim, not a native religion to England. Therefore, he did not properly assimilate, obviously.

[Great Nepal]

Why are you drawing that line at Anglo Saxon exactly? They aren't English - they're Germans who moved here.

My problem is not necessarily ethnic -- It's mostly cultural. The individual was a Muslim, not a native religion to England. Therefore, he did not properly assimilate, obviously.

Christianity isn't a native religion to England; quite clearly Christians haven't assimilated and need to be banned from England.

[The Klishi Islands]

No we didn't. That's completely false. Immigration restrictions weren't put into place in the US until the Chinese Exclusion Act in the 1880s, followed by gradual restrictions on areas of the world not populated by WASPs (white Anglo-Saxon Protestants), which remained mostly in place until the 1960s, when nationality quotas were replaced with a family-based system blind to race or ethnicity.

It was unnecessary before the 1880s because most immigrants were from western civilization. Those that were not, were wrongfully and forcefully brought to America against their will as slaves.

Immigration restrictions were primarily put in place to keep Italians, Poles, Eastern European Jews (all Europeans), as well as Asians out. They were advocated for by, among other groups, the Klan, though were widely embraced by both parties for a limited amount of time. They were absolutely absurd, however, and today are widely seen as a dark part of America's history, where rather than let in anyone who wishes to make a good life and contribute to society, we excluded based solely on the color of their skin.

[Vassenor]

Why are you drawing that line at Anglo Saxon exactly? They aren't English - they're Germans who moved here.

My problem is not necessarily ethnic -- It's mostly cultural. The individual was a Muslim, not a native religion to England. Therefore, he did not properly assimilate, obviously.

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

It was unnecessary before the 1880s because most immigrants were from western civilization. Those that were not, were wrongfully and forcefully brought to America against their will as slaves.

Immigration restrictions were primarily put in place to keep Italians, Poles, Eastern European Jews (all Europeans), as well as Asians out. They were advocated for by, among other groups, the Klan, though were widely embraced by both parties for a limited amount of time. They were absolutely absurd, however, and today are widely seen as a dark part of America's history, where rather than let in anyone who wishes to make a good life and contribute to society, we excluded based solely on the color of their skin.

Seems like a waste of time. Our immigration policy should benefit the people of the country and it's economy, and not be designed to benefit the people of OTHER countries. That's common sense, in my humble opinion anyway.

It's not a matter of skin colour, it's a matter of culture. Have you seen some of the referendums taken in the British muslim community, or the community in their home countries? pretty breathtaking.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... in-UK.html

Why risk it when there are so many people from countries like Japan, South Korea and elsewhere that are not a threat to society and have similar modern culture?

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

My problem is not necessarily ethnic -- It's mostly cultural. The individual was a Muslim, not a native religion to England. Therefore, he did not properly assimilate, obviously.

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

No, i want to ban people from regions where the culture and prevalent attitudes are incompatible with western values and civilization.

[Vassenor]

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

No, i want to ban people from regions where the culture and prevalent attitudes are incompatible with western values and civilization.

You do realise that ethnic cleansing is still a crime against humanity and the definition still includes religious groups, right?

[Fartsniffage]

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

No, i want to ban people from regions where the culture and prevalent attitudes are incompatible with western values and civilization.

So we should be banning fundamentalist Americans from the UK? No admittance for Mike Pence?

[Great Nepal]

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

No, i want to ban people from regions where the culture and prevalent attitudes are incompatible with western values and civilization.

Define western values and civilization.

My problem is not necessarily ethnic -- It's mostly cultural. The individual was a Muslim, not a native religion to England. Therefore, he did not properly assimilate, obviously.

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

Atheist really; cant believe in god if there are no one to believe...

[The Alma Mater]

My problem is not necessarily ethnic -- It's mostly cultural. The individual was a Muslim, not a native religion to England. Therefore, he did not properly assimilate, obviously.

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

Queen worship ? The Church of England is a thing

[The Klishi Islands]

Immigration restrictions were primarily put in place to keep Italians, Poles, Eastern European Jews (all Europeans), as well as Asians out. They were advocated for by, among other groups, the Klan, though were widely embraced by both parties for a limited amount of time. They were absolutely absurd, however, and today are widely seen as a dark part of America's history, where rather than let in anyone who wishes to make a good life and contribute to society, we excluded based solely on the color of their skin.

Seems like a waste of time. Our immigration policy should benefit the people of the country and it's economy, and not be designed to benefit the people of OTHER countries. That's common sense, in my humble opinion anyway.

It's not a matter of skin colour, it's a matter of culture. Have you seen some of the referendums taken in the British muslim community, or the community in their home countries? pretty breathtaking.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... in-UK.html

Why risk it when there are so many people from countries like Japan, South Korea and elsewhere that are not a threat to society and have similar modern culture?

I guess I should inform the wildly successful Iranian-American, Indian-American, Syrian-American, Filipino-American, Lebanese-American, Palestinian-American, and Nigerian-American communities that they haven't properly assimilated and should leave.

Those are all Muslim-influenced, non-Western cultures whose immigrant groups have, on average, a much higher average income than an average American.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

No, i want to ban people from regions where the culture and prevalent attitudes are incompatible with western values and civilization.

Define western values and civilization.

So in other words you want to ban anyone from worshipping any deity other than the Celtic ones? Because that's as close as we get to a "native" religon.

Atheist really; cant believe in god if there are no one to believe...

You're asking me to define something that encompasses a very wide variety of cultures and civilizations.

I'd say Atheism is preferable, personally. If you believe that women are property, if your attitude is that you can 'honour kill' your daughter, if you believe that Allah will give you 72 virgins if you blow yourself up, if you sympathize with terrorists or their activities... You shouldn't be allowed in.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

Seems like a waste of time. Our immigration policy should benefit the people of the country and it's economy, and not be designed to benefit the people of OTHER countries. That's common sense, in my humble opinion anyway.

It's not a matter of skin colour, it's a matter of culture. Have you seen some of the referendums taken in the British muslim community, or the community in their home countries? pretty breathtaking.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... in-UK.html

Why risk it when there are so many people from countries like Japan, South Korea and elsewhere that are not a threat to society and have similar modern culture?

I guess I should inform the wildly successful Iranian-American, Indian-American, Syrian-American, Filipino-American, Lebanese-American, Palestinian-American, and Nigerian-American communities that they haven't properly assimilated and should leave.

Those are all Muslim-influenced, non-Western cultures whose immigrant groups have, on average, a much higher average income than an average American.

Iran tended to be a more secular society before the Revolution. So i think that's OK. Indians from the Indian subcontinent are actually mostly Hindu, i haven't heard of any Hindu terrorist attacks lately, so they're fine.

Filipinos aren't all Muslim, most of them are Catholic.

Palestinian American? Not many of them.

Those that have higher income than Average Americans tend to come from places like Japan, China and India where education is very valued. Not exactly the immigrant from Pakistan, Iraq or Saudi Arabia that tend to have problems flying airplanes. Not that all of them are like that, but it's not like we can't find good immigrants from elsewhere.

[Great Nepal]

Define western values and civilization.


Atheist really; cant believe in god if there are no one to believe...

You're asking me to define something that encompasses a very wide variety of cultures and civilizations.

I'd say Atheism is preferable, personally. If you believe that women are property, if your attitude is that you can 'honour kill' your daughter, if you believe that Allah will give you 72 virgins if you blow yourself up, if you sympathize with terrorists or their activities... You shouldn't be allowed in.

Considering you want to ban people who don't share those values; yes I'm asking that you define exactly what those values entail - I don't think that is unreasonable.

Cool so we can start by deporting Christians given their overwhelming number.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

You're asking me to define something that encompasses a very wide variety of cultures and civilizations.

I'd say Atheism is preferable, personally. If you believe that women are property, if your attitude is that you can 'honour kill' your daughter, if you believe that Allah will give you 72 virgins if you blow yourself up, if you sympathize with terrorists or their activities... You shouldn't be allowed in.

Considering you want to ban people who don't share those values; yes I'm asking that you define exactly what those values entail - I don't think that is unreasonable.

Cool so we can start by deporting Christians given their overwhelming number.

If those Christians are like Timothy Mcveigh, i have no problem deporting their asses. It's just they're fewer and far between, comparatively.

I'd say Secular beliefs and liberal attitudes(live and let live) are the cornerstone of 'values' that should be screened for with immigrants.

[Geilinor]

Well, a DNA test would be able to solve that in fairly short order. having the DNA of someone of Anglo-saxon origin, for example. I took a DNA test recently and discovered that i am actually 87.5% English, 12.5% Irish. Interestingly.

So no-one of Celtic or Nordic extraction then?

Not necessarily, any European would do. 'Western Civilization'. I'd include Japanese and South Koreans in that figure, though. I feel their culture is sufficiently advanced to not be a threat to society.[/quote]
Japanese and Koreans are English now?

[The Klishi Islands]

I guess I should inform the wildly successful Iranian-American, Indian-American, Syrian-American, Filipino-American, Lebanese-American, Palestinian-American, and Nigerian-American communities that they haven't properly assimilated and should leave.

Those are all Muslim-influenced, non-Western cultures whose immigrant groups have, on average, a much higher average income than an average American.

Iran tended to be a more secular society before the Revolution. So i think that's OK. Indians from the Indian subcontinent are actually mostly Hindu, i haven't heard of any Hindu terrorist attacks lately, so they're fine.

Filipinos aren't all Muslim, most of them are Catholic.

Palestinian American? Not many of them.

Those that have higher income than Average Americans tend to come from places like Japan, China and India where education is very valued. Not exactly the immigrant from Pakistan, Iraq or Saudi Arabia that tend to have problems flying airplanes. Not that all of them are like that, but it's not like we can't find good immigrants from elsewhere.

My point is that there are millions of potentially successful immigrants from every country in the world. We should accept anyone who wishes to come in and contribute to society, and we should by no means reject somebody for what their grandchild has a less-than-miniscule chance of doing.

Oh, and I should note that, overall, immigrants (legal ones, I assume) have a lower crime rate than native-born Americans.

[Great Nepal]

Considering you want to ban people who don't share those values; yes I'm asking that you define exactly what those values entail - I don't think that is unreasonable.

Cool so we can start by deporting Christians given their overwhelming number.

If those Christians are like Timothy Mcveigh, i have no problem deporting their asses. It's just they're fewer and far between, comparatively.

Why just them exactly; given Christianity isn't 'native religion to England', and you were in favor of banning the individuals parents or grandparents on basis that they were Muslim.
Also I notice you didn't define the set of values which you think should be mandatory for being in England.

[The Realm of Lordaeron]

Iran tended to be a more secular society before the Revolution. So i think that's OK. Indians from the Indian subcontinent are actually mostly Hindu, i haven't heard of any Hindu terrorist attacks lately, so they're fine.

Filipinos aren't all Muslim, most of them are Catholic.

Palestinian American? Not many of them.

Those that have higher income than Average Americans tend to come from places like Japan, China and India where education is very valued. Not exactly the immigrant from Pakistan, Iraq or Saudi Arabia that tend to have problems flying airplanes. Not that all of them are like that, but it's not like we can't find good immigrants from elsewhere.

My point is that there are millions of potentially successful immigrants from every country in the world. We should accept anyone who wishes to come in and contribute to society, and we should by no means reject somebody for what their grandchild has a less-than-miniscule chance of doing.

Oh, and I should note that, overall, immigrants (legal ones, I assume) have a lower crime rate than native-born Americans.

the NY times quoting an organization 'which advocates more liberal immigration laws.' Not surprising.

Regardless, it's not like we HAVE to accept these people. There are plenty of other people who will immigrate here from Japan, South Korea, Australia or Europe, New Zealand, even.