quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
so this article is some insight into the Boston Bombing and how it came to be, his explanation of the reasons for it.. You cant fight something when you don't know its source.. this is a start, of sorts.. How does one brother (Anzor -the father) fail miserably in his new country when another brother (the fathers brother- Ruslan) is the picture of success in his new country? Mexicans come to the US with less help and prospects, some illegally so even less prospects & more likely to be taken advantage of, yet do they turn to terrorism here? I don't know of any cases of that (crime yes some do that, but not terrorism that I know of).. why the difference? If a country accepts refugees such as the Tsarnaevs, should they be given more support in the form of English class, teaching them the basics, and teaching them how to "fish"/earn a decent living in their new country? or would that even make a difference?
I found what he said here interesting- "although I was stunned to hear police say that Tamerlan and his brother were the bombers, it fit with the profile of terrorists I'd encountered in my work. The failed suicide bombers I'd interviewed in Afghan prisons were mostly young men with no prospects." There are plenty of Americans that also fit that "young men with no prospects" profile also, is that part of the explanation of school shooters, other mass killers, and gang bangers..? This is not simply about the US.. don't most countries have some young men with no prospects also? are some of them a risk to their country too?
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304477704579254482254699674
and then I read this article- "58-year-old avionics technician who worked at the airport for Hawker Beechcraft, was arrested Friday on charges including providing support to al-Qaida and attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction." he had a job, I expect earning a decent living, why did this guy become a homegrown terrorist wannabe? did he still consider himself a loser with no better prospects so angry at the world? or for some other reason?
http://news.yahoo.com/undercover-stings-used-fight-domestic-terrorism-230404894.html
Thoughts?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
so this article is some insight into the Boston Bombing and how it came to be, his explanation of the reasons for it.. You cant fight something when you don't know its source.. this is a start, of sorts.. How does one brother (Anzor -the father) fail miserably in his new country when another brother (the fathers brother- Ruslan) is the picture of success in his new country? Mexicans come to the US with less help and prospects, some illegally so even less prospects & more likely to be taken advantage of, yet do they turn to terrorism here? I don't know of any cases of that (crime yes some do that, but not terrorism that I know of).. why the difference? If a country accepts refugees such as the Tsarnaevs, should they be given more support in the form of English class, teaching them the basics, and teaching them how to "fish"/earn a decent living in their new country? or would that even make a difference?
I found what he said here interesting- "although I was stunned to hear police say that Tamerlan and his brother were the bombers, it fit with the profile of terrorists I'd encountered in my work. The failed suicide bombers I'd interviewed in Afghan prisons were mostly young men with no prospects." There are plenty of Americans that also fit that "young men with no prospects" profile also, is that part of the explanation of school shooters, other mass killers, and gang bangers..? This is not simply about the US.. don't most countries have some young men with no prospects also? are some of them a risk to their country too?
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304477704579254482254699674
and then I read this article- "58-year-old avionics technician who worked at the airport for Hawker Beechcraft, was arrested Friday on charges including providing support to al-Qaida and attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction." he had a job, I expect earning a decent living, why did this guy become a homegrown terrorist wannabe? did he still consider himself a loser with no better prospects so angry at the world? or for some other reason?
http://news.yahoo.com/undercover-stings-used-fight-domestic-terrorism-230404894.html
Thoughts?

Thank God the first mass waves of immigrants didn't resort to terrorism or lives of crime when they got here. The situation for immigrants was not good. They were not treated well. They were not treated fairly. But, most of them busted their asses and made lives for themselves, their families, and for later generations.

While it's terrible to mistreat any immigrant, it doesn't make it okay to resort to terrorism or violence in response. Even the majority of illegal immigrants are here to work and build their lives instead of becoming criminals. They have to hide (because of their illegal presence) in the shadows and can't live life as freely as a legal immigrant. Yet, they don't resort to terrorism. Many do commit crimes, and our jails are housing many. The majority, however, aren't like that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
so this article is some insight into the Boston Bombing and how it came to be, his explanation of the reasons for it.. You cant fight something when you don't know its source.. this is a start, of sorts.. How does one brother (Anzor -the father) fail miserably in his new country when another brother (the fathers brother- Ruslan) is the picture of success in his new country? Mexicans come to the US with less help and prospects, some illegally so even less prospects & more likely to be taken advantage of, yet do they turn to terrorism here? I don't know of any cases of that (crime yes some do that, but not terrorism that I know of).. why the difference? If a country accepts refugees such as the Tsarnaevs, should they be given more support in the form of English class, teaching them the basics, and teaching them how to "fish"/earn a decent living in their new country? or would that even make a difference?
I found what he said here interesting- "although I was stunned to hear police say that Tamerlan and his brother were the bombers, it fit with the profile of terrorists I'd encountered in my work. The failed suicide bombers I'd interviewed in Afghan prisons were mostly young men with no prospects." There are plenty of Americans that also fit that "young men with no prospects" profile also, is that part of the explanation of school shooters, other mass killers, and gang bangers..? This is not simply about the US.. don't most countries have some young men with no prospects also? are some of them a risk to their country too?
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304477704579254482254699674
and then I read this article- "58-year-old avionics technician who worked at the airport for Hawker Beechcraft, was arrested Friday on charges including providing support to al-Qaida and attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction." he had a job, I expect earning a decent living, why did this guy become a homegrown terrorist wannabe? did he still consider himself a loser with no better prospects so angry at the world? or for some other reason?
http://news.yahoo.com/undercover-stings-used-fight-domestic-terrorism-230404894.html
Thoughts?

Thank God the first mass waves of immigrants didn't resort to terrorism or lives of crime when they got here. The situation for immigrants was not good. They were not treated well. They were not treated fairly. But, most of them busted their asses and made lives for themselves, their families, and for later generations.
While it's terrible to mistreat any immigrant, it doesn't make it okay to resort to terrorism or violence in response. Even the majority of illegal immigrants are here to work and build their lives instead of becoming criminals. They have to hide (because of their illegal presence) in the shadows and can't live life as freely as a legal immigrant. Yet, they don't resort to terrorism. Many do commit crimes, and our jails are housing many. The majority, however, aren't like that.

Regardless of their situation they are responsible for their actions.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
so this article is some insight into the Boston Bombing and how it came to be, his explanation of the reasons for it.. You cant fight something when you don't know its source.. this is a start, of sorts.. How does one brother (Anzor -the father) fail miserably in his new country when another brother (the fathers brother- Ruslan) is the picture of success in his new country? Mexicans come to the US with less help and prospects, some illegally so even less prospects & more likely to be taken advantage of, yet do they turn to terrorism here? I don't know of any cases of that (crime yes some do that, but not terrorism that I know of).. why the difference? If a country accepts refugees such as the Tsarnaevs, should they be given more support in the form of English class, teaching them the basics, and teaching them how to "fish"/earn a decent living in their new country? or would that even make a difference?
I found what he said here interesting- "although I was stunned to hear police say that Tamerlan and his brother were the bombers, it fit with the profile of terrorists I'd encountered in my work. The failed suicide bombers I'd interviewed in Afghan prisons were mostly young men with no prospects." There are plenty of Americans that also fit that "young men with no prospects" profile also, is that part of the explanation of school shooters, other mass killers, and gang bangers..? This is not simply about the US.. don't most countries have some young men with no prospects also? are some of them a risk to their country too?
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304477704579254482254699674
and then I read this article- "58-year-old avionics technician who worked at the airport for Hawker Beechcraft, was arrested Friday on charges including providing support to al-Qaida and attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction." he had a job, I expect earning a decent living, why did this guy become a homegrown terrorist wannabe? did he still consider himself a loser with no better prospects so angry at the world? or for some other reason?
http://news.yahoo.com/undercover-stings-used-fight-domestic-terrorism-230404894.html
Thoughts?

Thank God the first mass waves of immigrants didn't resort to terrorism or lives of crime when they got here. The situation for immigrants was not good. They were not treated well. They were not treated fairly. But, most of them busted their asses and made lives for themselves, their families, and for later generations.
While it's terrible to mistreat any immigrant, it doesn't make it okay to resort to terrorism or violence in response. Even the majority of illegal immigrants are here to work and build their lives instead of becoming criminals. They have to hide (because of their illegal presence) in the shadows and can't live life as freely as a legal immigrant. Yet, they don't resort to terrorism. Many do commit crimes, and our jails are housing many. The majority, however, aren't like that.

Regardless of their situation they are responsible for their actions.

Totally agree, Bama.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I was just boiling your statement down to it's basic meaning.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I was just boiling your statement down to it's basic meaning.

Not the first time I've been accused of talking too much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I was just boiling your statement down to it's basic meaning.

Not the first time I've been accused of talking too much.

Sorry it sounded that way the background you gave was needed.
I condensed for the dense.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Thank God the first mass waves of immigrants didn't resort to terrorism or lives of crime when they got here. The situation for immigrants was not good. They were not treated well. They were not treated fairly. But, most of them busted their asses and made lives for themselves, their families, and for later generations.

While it's terrible to mistreat any immigrant, it doesn't make it okay to resort to terrorism or violence in response. Even the majority of illegal immigrants are here to work and build their lives instead of becoming criminals. They have to hide (because of their illegal presence) in the shadows and can't live life as freely as a legal immigrant. Yet, they don't resort to terrorism. Many do commit crimes, and our jails are housing many. The majority, however, aren't like that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Thank God the first mass waves of immigrants didn't resort to terrorism or lives of crime when they got here. The situation for immigrants was not good. They were not treated well. They were not treated fairly. But, most of them busted their asses and made lives for themselves, their families, and for later generations.

While it's terrible to mistreat any immigrant, it doesn't make it okay to resort to terrorism or violence in response. Even the majority of illegal immigrants are here to work and build their lives instead of becoming criminals. They have to hide (because of their illegal presence) in the shadows and can't live life as freely as a legal immigrant. Yet, they don't resort to terrorism. Many do commit crimes, and our jails are housing many. The majority, however, aren't like that.

many immigrants don't resort to that now, as I said, Mexicans have a hard time (some worse than others) imo but they don't do that (at least so far).. so is it that they work harder and see a road at the end of the tunnel? or is it that the immigrants like the Tsarnaevs simply expected too much, expected it to be easy and that the roads were paved with gold?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Could it be that some immigrants come here before the law can catch them in their native countries?

quote:

Thank God the first mass waves of immigrants didn't resort to terrorism or lives of crime when they got here. The situation for immigrants was not good. They were not treated well. They were not treated fairly. But, most of them busted their asses and made lives for themselves, their families, and for later generations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Could it be that some immigrants come here before the law can catch them in their native countries?

isn't that what INS is supposed to screen for? if there is a warrant out for them there in their native country, I certainly would expect them to be rejected during the visa process (which I expect refugees must go thru)..

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Could it be that some immigrants come here before the law can catch them in their native countries?

isn't that what INS is supposed to screen for? if there is a warrant out for them there in their native country, I certainly would expect them to be rejected during the visa process (which I expect refugees must go thru)..

Depends on how early they leave. If the cops haven't issued a warrant or if the locals don't co-operate INS doesn't know.
Many of the criminal immigrants are illegals and haven't been screened.

quote:

it isn't about the US as I expect many other countries have immigrants that don't seem to lead productive lives and feeling like they have no prospects..

quote:

ORIGINAL: FellowSlave

quote:

it isn't about the US as I expect many other countries have immigrants that don't seem to lead productive lives and feeling like they have no prospects..

The immigrants are generally productive, they do not have much choices. Tsarnajevs were athletes and generally in good standing (unlucky though, the US secret services destroyed them) . I do not see how they can be examples of system abuse.

quote:

I never said anything about them being examples of system abuse..