• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Islamic "Refugees"

Medusa said:
So don't vote any politican that will create chaos in the ME
Click to expand...

We wouldn't be "causing chaos" in the Middle East if the Middle East would get it's own **** in order and stop letting it's problems become our problems.
 
legalimmigrant said:
"But your "solution" of zero immigrants would not stop that. It might slow it down". Slowing the mayhem down is good enough for me. Domestic scum is plenty creative so why import more?

The fundamental US problem is that the country is run by idiots. When you have 450,000 visa over-stayers, open border, refugees no one wants pouring in, while nobody is enforcing immigration laws, the "idiots" label is too kind. It's treason.

On top of that, when a state attempts to help the feds catching illegals, the DC morons sue the state to stand down.

And, finally, to the average pro-immigrant idiot, that worn out phase "we are the country of immigrants" is like a holy bible - never to be debated. Like, for example, how many immigrants will one day be enough? 200 million? 500 million?

They never want to answer this question, knowing that all the other numbers - 95 million not working, 45 million on food stamps, 20 trillion of federal debt, 20% or un- and under- employed, and on and on...- are damning.
Click to expand...

The only thing we seem to agree on is that there should be an immigration policy. We should not allow anyone and everyone and should not have open borders. But we probably disagree on the details. Immigration has its pluses and minuses. I don't think over-reacting to terrible events will bring about a better immigration policy. It is something that has to be looked at as a whole as to whether or not we are a better nation due to immigration. Unlike you, I don't have a simple solution because I don"t have enough information on this complex issue.
 
legalimmigrant said:
All she has to do now is get pregnant, and she is in - undeportable. And we are out of big bucks for the medical care for her and the anchor bastard.
Click to expand...

"We"? You are not an American.
 
legalimmigrant said:
Your post proves my point that Americans are pathetically stupid. So, read slowly to catch the point.

Car crashes, swimming pools, construction accidents, medicine, police, stoves, and countless other common objects and events involve one or very few victims per event. We learned how to handle that.

Terrorists are into large numbers per occurrence because large numbers are scary and paralyzing.

How many days did it take to resume flights after 9/11?

How many days did it take for the "Boston brave" to come out from hiding and resume normal life?

If the terrorists explode 100 bombs at 100 buses all over the country all at once, how many weeks will it take for the Americans to start using mass transportation?
Click to expand...

Here's the thing, though: one event that kills twenty people might be scary, but on a statistical scale, it's almost nothing compared to several thousand individual deaths over a period of time. Sure, 911 was terrible. On the other hand, we haven't had a single plane get hijacked in fifteen years. Hence, I'm not the least bit frightened of plane hijackings.

A hundred bombs on a hundred buses going off at once would certainly be devastating. Fortunately for us, asides from a lucky hit in 2001, there isn't any evidence that radical Islamic terrorists are actually competent enough to pull off something like that. From everything I've seen, oue domestic defense is working just fine. Why should we panic over something that barely harms us, when panicking would play into their plans and cause far more harm than the actual attacks?
 
Jesse Booth said:
Here's the thing, though: one event that kills twenty people might be scary, but on a statistical scale, it's almost nothing compared to several thousand individual deaths over a period of time. Sure, 911 was terrible. On the other hand, we haven't had a single plane get hijacked in fifteen years. Hence, I'm not the least bit frightened of plane hijackings.

A hundred bombs on a hundred buses going off at once would certainly be devastating. Fortunately for us, asides from a lucky hit in 2001, there isn't any evidence that radical Islamic terrorists are actually competent enough to pull off something like that. From everything I've seen, oue domestic defense is working just fine. Why should we panic over something that barely harms us, when panicking would play into their plans and cause far more harm than the actual attacks?
Click to expand...

I am happy that the US is doing such a great job preventing acts of terrorism. Except for 9/11, Boston, San Bernardino, and Orlando.

The question I have is: why bring thousands of useless immigrants and refugees to make the task harder? To feed the addiction to feel loved?

Where does it say in the Constitution that Americans can be taxed to death to be forcibly charitable?

Why aren't Americans allowed to have a say if they want refugees in their country, state or town?

Where does it say that, while forced by their government to be charitable, Americans must borrow money from China and be exposed to the additional risks of rape and murder - over and above the domestic crime?

The best explanation I can come up with is that it is the lemming syndrome combined with the fear of being called racist, xenophobe, or islamophobe, with nothing else being a consideration.
 
legalimmigrant said:
I am happy that the US is doing such a great job preventing acts of terrorism. Except for 9/11, Boston, San Bernardino, and Orlando.

The question I have is: why bring thousands of useless immigrants and refugees to make the task harder? To feed the addiction to feel loved?

Where does it say in the Constitution that Americans can be taxed to death to be forcibly charitable?

Why aren't Americans allowed to have a say if they want refugees in their country, state or town?

Where does it say that, while forced by their government to be charitable, Americans must borrow money from China and be exposed to the additional risks of rape and murder - over and above the domestic crime?

The best explanation I can come up with is that it is the lemming syndrome combined with the fear of being called racist, xenophobe, or islamophobe, with nothing else being a consideration.
Click to expand...

I don't know why exactly we started accepting refugees into this nation, but it's been going on since long before our issues with terrorism started. If I had to guess, it's because the American people were alright with the idea of helping refugees in other parts of the world by bringing them here.

As for their usefulness, America actually NEEDS people from other countries for our economy to function properly. Like all first world countries, we have an aging population. Simply put, we aren't breeding fast enough to handle the added expenses of our elderly, which are loving longer than ever before. To compensate, we have migrant workers and immigrants who pick up our genitalia's slack. As they are nationalized and become more prosperous, their population growth becomes similarly regressive, and more room is available for the next generation of immigrants.

If we didn't have immigration, we would probably look something like Japan right now: stagnant gene pool and economy, with no new labor force coming in to stabilize things.

I believe that the millions of new Americans coming from overseas and from other nations are more than worth a few hundred deaths caused by psychopaths who would have found a way to come here even without being able to immigrate.
 
Jesse Booth said:
I don't know why exactly we started accepting refugees into this nation, but it's been going on since long before our issues with terrorism started. If I had to guess, it's because the American people were alright with the idea of helping refugees in other parts of the world by bringing them here.

As for their usefulness, America actually NEEDS people from other countries for our economy to function properly. Like all first world countries, we have an aging population. Simply put, we aren't breeding fast enough to handle the added expenses of our elderly, which are loving longer than ever before. To compensate, we have migrant workers and immigrants who pick up our genitalia's slack. As they are nationalized and become more prosperous, their population growth becomes similarly regressive, and more room is available for the next generation of immigrants.

If we didn't have immigration, we would probably look something like Japan right now: stagnant gene pool and economy, with no new labor force coming in to stabilize things.

I believe that the millions of new Americans coming from overseas and from other nations are more than worth a few hundred deaths caused by psychopaths who would have found a way to come here even without being able to immigrate.
Click to expand...

It was somewhere in the 16th century. I am sure the people already here had little say in it
 
Jesse Booth said:
I don't know why exactly we started accepting refugees into this nation, but it's been going on since long before our issues with terrorism started. If I had to guess, it's because the American people were alright with the idea of helping refugees in other parts of the world by bringing them here.

As for their usefulness, America actually NEEDS people from other countries for our economy to function properly. Like all first world countries, we have an aging population. Simply put, we aren't breeding fast enough to handle the added expenses of our elderly, which are loving longer than ever before. To compensate, we have migrant workers and immigrants who pick up our genitalia's slack. As they are nationalized and become more prosperous, their population growth becomes similarly regressive, and more room is available for the next generation of immigrants.

If we didn't have immigration, we would probably look something like Japan right now: stagnant gene pool and economy, with no new labor force coming in to stabilize things.

I believe that the millions of new Americans coming from overseas and from other nations are more than worth a few hundred deaths caused by psychopaths who would have found a way to come here even without being able to immigrate.
Click to expand...

We closed our borders to immigration from the 20's to the 60's. We did it then we can do it again.
 
Jesse Booth said:
I don't know why exactly we started accepting refugees into this nation, but it's been going on since long before our issues with terrorism started. If I had to guess, it's because the American people were alright with the idea of helping refugees in other parts of the world by bringing them here.

As for their usefulness, America actually NEEDS people from other countries for our economy to function properly. Like all first world countries, we have an aging population. Simply put, we aren't breeding fast enough to handle the added expenses of our elderly, which are loving longer than ever before. To compensate, we have migrant workers and immigrants who pick up our genitalia's slack. As they are nationalized and become more prosperous, their population growth becomes similarly regressive, and more room is available for the next generation of immigrants.

If we didn't have immigration, we would probably look something like Japan right now: stagnant gene pool and economy, with no new labor force coming in to stabilize things.

I believe that the millions of new Americans coming from overseas and from other nations are more than worth a few hundred deaths caused by psychopaths who would have found a way to come here even without being able to immigrate.
Click to expand...

You are right. Except that the demographics of the US has been greatly distorted by two factors: abortion and the middle class purge caused by the manufacturing job going away.

Without abortion, there would a million new US citizens added every year naturally. At this abortions rate, you are forced to replace those missing babies with the foreign imports.

With manufacturing jobs practically gone, both husband and wife have to work low paying service jobs to stay afloat. Getting pregnant again would be a financial disaster. Hence low birth rate - just as in Europe.

Finally, the bulge of the old ones will eventually die off and the SS balance sheet will go back to more normal. But the foreigners will stay and continue multiplying faster than the whites. Especially Muslims.

Good bye America. Hello Brazil.
 
katzgar said:
you haters can stop now, it is getting old
Click to expand...

you apologists can stop now, it is getting old

I have an idea before this thread runs its course..

Next time there is another massacre near you, just walk up to the door and ask the Muslim bastard doing all the shooting if he would let you in to replace the unfortunate one who is about to get a bullet.

If you do that, I will mourn your loss and blame guns. I promise.
 
Zero births = zero new generation crime!
 
legalimmigrant said:
you apologists can stop now, it is getting old

I have an idea before this thread runs its course..

Next time there is another massacre near you, just walk up to the door and ask the Muslim bastard doing all the shooting if he would let you in to replace the unfortunate one who is about to get a bullet.

If you do that, I will mourn your loss and blame guns. I promise.
Click to expand...


zero christians=zero crime by christians
 
I was not making any such statement. I was simply making a suggestion of a more effective way of eliminating crime, by not having children however accomplished, that makes as much sense as yours.
 
bluesmoke said:
I was not making any such statement. I was simply making a suggestion of a more effective way of eliminating crime, by not having children however accomplished, that makes as much sense as yours.
Click to expand...

Nobody makes as much sense as I do. Watch this.

We need children. We don't need immigrants. Not anymore, anyway.

Especially the kind no other country wants - the rejects.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Oh boy! Would not surprise me if this comes out as another BS story from Judicial Watch...

But to answer your question: "“The United States has resettled 784,000 refugees since September 11, 2001,” Newland wrote in a recent op-ed. “In those 14 years, exactly three resettled refugees have been arrested for planning terrorist activities—and it is worth noting two were not planning an attack in the United States and the plans of the third were barely credible.” This Chart Is The Perfect Rebuttal To Governors Who Won't Take In Syrian Refugees | ThinkProgress
Click to expand...

Is terrorism the only threat that refugees pose to their adoptive countries?

Leftists love to frame the refugee debate only around terrorism, knowing full well that its usually the children of refugees/immigrants who become terrorists .

What about other forms of crime that comes with migrating refugees? What about the fact that around 80% of them receive welfare and food stamps in their new countries?

Is there any benefit that we receive from this immigration? Besides new voters for the DNC?
 
legalimmigrant said:
You are right. Except that the demographics of the US has been greatly distorted by two factors: abortion and the middle class purge caused by the manufacturing job going away.

Without abortion, there would a million new US citizens added every year naturally. At this abortions rate, you are forced to replace those missing babies with the foreign imports.

With manufacturing jobs practically gone, both husband and wife have to work low paying service jobs to stay afloat. Getting pregnant again would be a financial disaster. Hence low birth rate - just as in Europe.

Finally, the bulge of the old ones will eventually die off and the SS balance sheet will go back to more normal. But the foreigners will stay and continue multiplying faster than the whites. Especially Muslims.

Good bye America. Hello Brazil.
Click to expand...

With how expensive many basic commodities are now (housing, a vehicle, medical costs) we can't lower our manufacturing costs enough to bring back the jobs we've lost to other countries without switching to automation. Our economy is past the point of no return in that regard, and we have to deal with the hand we've got. We still have a bounty of natural resources we can use, but America's manufacturing days are pretty much done.

As such, outlawing abortion would not only saddle countless families with children they can't afford, it would drive many women to procure dangerous abortions by unsanitary and dangerous means.

I'm not going to lie, I'm not sure what our way forward is. I don't know what our nation's future is. But I know that back is no longer a viable option.
 
truthatallcost said:
Is terrorism the only threat that refugees pose to their adoptive countries?

Leftists love to frame the refugee debate only around terrorism, knowing full well that its usually the children of refugees/immigrants who become terrorists .

What about other forms of crime that comes with migrating refugees? What about the fact that around 80% of them receive welfare and food stamps in their new countries?

Is there any benefit that we receive from this immigration? Besides new voters for the DNC?
Click to expand...

Link, please. Particularly about the bolded part and the 80% number.
 
Nobody makes as much sense as you do is all ego. You have a vanity for attention with the "watch this".

The only difference between our statements is that mine is to a greater degree of asinine to make a point. They're both still weighed on the same scale of extreme stupidity.
 
The federal programs available to them include:

∙ Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) formerly known as AFDC
∙ Medicaid
∙ Food Stamps
∙ Public Housing
∙ Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
∙ Social Security Disability Insurance
∙ Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD) (direct services only)
∙ Child Care and Development Fund
∙ Independent Living Program
∙ Job Opportunities for Low Income Individuals (JOLI)
∙ Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
∙ Postsecondary Education Loans and Grants
∙ Refugee Assistance Programs
∙ Title IV Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Payments (if parents are ⌠qualified immigrants – refugees, asylees, etc)
∙ Title XX Social Services Block Grant
Click to expand...

Membership in a U.S.-registered Islamic terrorist group is not a bar to entry on the program as long as the refugee was not a “direct participant” in “terrorist” activity.
Click to expand...
ha!

Welfare use is staggering among refugees. Welfare usage is never counted by officials as part of the cost of the program. Yet, when it is included, the total cost of the refugee program soars to at least 10-20 billion a year.

As some Americans are pushed off of time-limited welfare programs many refugees are going on to life-time cash assistance programs. For instance, 12.7% of refugees are on SSI – a lifetime entitlement to a monthly check / Medicaid for elderly or disabled. This rate of usage is at least 4 times higher than the rate of usage for SSI among the native-born population and is reportedly rising from these already very high levels.

https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/refugee-resettlement-fact-sheets/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom