Syrian refugees flood in; hundreds on monday

[eohrnberger]

:lamo Now we are reaching the next irrational argument. "If you dont let refugees live in your own house then your all talk"..... This childish argument?

Just because I'm not personally going to have a refugee living in my apartment means, what? Its a political position. I believe the US government should accept more refugees and this means more funding to our refugee resettlement program. This means more personnel etc to ensure that the job is continually being done right but in a timely manner. If they are verified and screened properly then I believe our country should open the doors for them to be properly resettled in this country. They should have the opportunity to live here, work here, etc just like any other human being. That does not mean I have to personally live with them in my apartment. Housing is part of the refugee resettlement program and is paid for by that funding (our tax $). I have no problem with them being in my community if they are resettled here in the community in which I live.

Why? Why should the US government should accept more refugees? What obligates the US to do so?

If we shouldn't be the world's policemen, then why should we be the world's nanny?

 

[TheDemSocialist]

The funders for that site are on that site. Take a look for yourself. Those groups whitewash whatever the refugees do and transfer the blame to the citizens of host countries.

1.)The funders are a wide variety of organizations from non-partisan grant organizations, government agencies, political organizations from various different ideological organizations like the US Chamber of Commerce (right wing), and yes the big scury Soro's founded Open Society Foundation.
2.) Now tell me, how is this statement: "The reality is this: The United States has resettled 784,000 refugees since September 11, 2001. 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." not factually accurate?

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Why? Why should the US government should accept more refugees? What obligates the US to do so?

If we shouldn't be the world's policemen, then why should we be the world's nanny?

A basic sense of morality.... The ability to do so.... Human decency... Human rights.....

 

[coldjoint]

1.)The funders are a wide variety of organizations from non-partisan grant organizations, government agencies, political organizations from various different ideological organizations like the US Chamber of Commerce (right wing), and yes the big scury Soro's founded Open Society Foundation.
2.) Now tell me, how is this statement: "The reality is this: The United States has resettled 784,000 refugees since September 11, 2001. 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." not factually accurate?

Now tell me how many support terror? You don't know do you?

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Now tell me how many support terror? You don't know do you?

:lamo So you got nothing. Nothing but paranoia.

Remember the two year long vetting process you constantly ignore?

 

[coldjoint]

A basic sense of morality.... The ability to do so.... Human decency... Human rights.....

Tell Islam to try just one of those things.:2wave:

 

[coldjoint]

:lamo So you got nothing. Nothing but paranoia.

Remember the two year long vetting process you constantly ignore?

Were these people paranoid?

Other Recent
"Misunderstandings
of Islam"

2016.05.25 (Afghanistan)
Eleven lives are snuffed out by a suicide bomber on foot targeting a bus carrying court employees.

2016.05.25 (Pakistan)
Religious extremists gun down an Ahmadi religious minority and injure his friend.

2016.05.23 (India)
Islamic miliatants gun down two cops at close range.

2016.05.23 (Syria)
Children are among one-hundred and sixty innocents incinerated or blown apart by ISIS suicide blasts.

2016.05.22 (Syria)
Six Assyrians are laid out by Allah-praising suicide bombers targeting a Christian restaurant.

2016.05.20 (Tanzania)
Islamic extremists hack three people at a rival mosque to death with machetes.

Islam: The Politically Incorrect Truth

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Tell Islam to try just one of those things.:2wave:

Were these people paranoid?


Islam: The Politically Incorrect Truth

Ah yes. We are now moving towards Islamophobia grounded in xenophobia and bigotry.

"The reality is this: The United States has resettled 784,000 refugees since September 11, 2001. 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."

 

[eohrnberger]

A basic sense of morality.... The ability to do so.... Human decency... Human rights.....

There's no human rights involved here, specifically, there's no human right to demand entry and residency in the US. This sounds like some other 'invented' and imagined rights in the minds of some, to which the Constitution and the Bill of Rights makes no mention.

I don't see how any sort of morality is in play here. The US is not the cause for immigrants to flee their home lands, nor should we be the solution either, especially not if the resultant immigrant population refuses to assimilate and create essentially another enclave such as Molenbeek. We'd be effectively sowing the seeds for our own Paris attack, as well as all the other troubles that this refugee influx has caused and probably will cause. All we have to do is look at the situation in the EU.

It's been said that many of these immigrants would much rather stay in their homelands, provided there was security. So what sense does it make to move them 1/2 way around the world? An option offered is temporary camps in the region, in secure areas until their home lands set sorted out one way or another.

That knocks down 3 out of your 4.

Why would the US cut back on Vet benefits at the same time increasing immigrant expenditures?
Seems to me that the vets have already put their part in, and deserve what they've earned.

How $1.4 billion in budget cuts will impact Veterans

 

[coldjoint]

Ah yes. We are now moving towards Islamophobia grounded in xenophobia and bigotry.

"The reality is this: The United States has resettled 784,000 refugees since September 11, 2001. 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."

It is not Islamophobia it is Islamorealism. And Islam is a bigoted intolerant religion. It does not belong in any free society that values equality.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

There's no human rights involved here,

Ensuring people are safe from harm (war) and have a decent standard of living has a lot to do with human rights......

This sounds like some other 'invented' and imagined rights in the minds of some, to which the Constitution and the Bill of Rights makes no mention.

Not every political argument is grounded in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Never said it was a "Constitutional right".

I don't see how any sort of morality is in play here.

:doh You dont see how ensuring that a resettling refugees of war plays into morality!? You ****ing kidding me?

The US is not the cause for immigrants to flee their home lands,

Ummm.... In some cases we are... The war in Iraq, come to mind?

nor should we be the solution either,

End all be all solution? No. We should definitely help though.

especially not if the resultant immigrant population refuses to assimilate and create essentially another enclave such as Molenbeek.

1.)In our refugee process there are cultural orientation classes that they must go through
2.)Again with the irrelevant comparisons of two completely different countries refugee processes

We'd be effectively sowing the seeds for our own Paris attack, as well as all the other troubles that this refugee influx has caused and probably will cause. All we have to do is look at the situation in the EU.

Oh god :doh
1.)You keep on comparing two completely different refugee screening/resettlement programs.
2.)The reality is this: The United States has resettled 784,000 refugees since September 11, 2001. 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."
3.)Your argument is grounded in fear mongering with little to no basis

It's been said that many of these immigrants would much rather stay in their homelands, provided there was security.

Uhhh yea... IF THERE WAS SECURITY.

So what sense does it make to move them 1/2 way around the world?

Security. Safety.

An option offered is temporary camps in the region, in secure areas until their home lands set sorted out one way or another. That knocks down 3 out of your 4.

Yea. Those camps are **** holes and also offer little to no safety. This isnt a ****ing camping trip.

"In the overcrowded camps and spontaneously erected collective centres dotting the border region, aid groups struggle to maintain basic standards of hygiene and safety. “On average, 125 people have to share one toilet,” Ahmad explained. “And women often don’t dare to use them at all, for fear of sexual violence.” He added that the provision of medical care was “not yet catastrophic” but close to breaking point." Human rights groups sound alarm over safe zones for Syrian refugees | World news | The Guardian

"“I spent years in a refugee camp in Ethiopia, and there I watched two young boys, perhaps twelve years old, fighting so viciously over rations that one kicked the other to death. He had not intended to kill his foe, of course, but we were young and very weak.”(1) This quote from a refugee highlights the realities of living in a refugee camp, where there is not enough food in the camps. Chronic malnutrition makes refugees fragile and more susceptible to a variety of diseases and illnesses. Most refugee camps do not have sufficient food to provide to their populations, and refugees are frequently dependent entirely on humanitarian aid." Food, Water, Sanitation, and Housing in Refugee Camps

"People are living in temperatures between 4C and 5C," she said. "These are the temperatures we use to preserve meat and cheese in our fridges. It's utterly inhumane."
She continued: "People ask me about the camps. How can I talk about the smell of urine and feces because of the poor sanitary conditions?" 'Utterly inhumane': Canadian nurse describes conditions in Syrian refugee camp | CTV News

"UNHCR warned against the alarming rate of child mortality in the camp, where an average of 10 children under the age of five die every day. According to international Medical Corps, refugees in Dollo Ado are at risk of malnutrition and poor hygiene due to the overcrowding... Basic hygiene is also of great concern in the camp, where 90% of the water is unfit for human consumption." World Refugee Day 2014: Living Conditions in the Largest Refugee Camps

Why would the US cut back on Vet benefits at the same time increasing immigrant expenditures?
Seems to me that the vets have already put their part in, and deserve what they've earned.

They dont have to be mutually exclusive......

 

[TheDemSocialist]

It is not Islamophobia it is Islamorealism. And Islam is a bigoted intolerant religion. It does not belong in any free society that values equality.

Ah yes. We have got to the real reason of why you're against refugee resettlement. Its not because of factual information or any of the **** you tried to pull. Its because you're a bigot.

 

[eohrnberger]

Ensuring people are safe from harm (war) and have a decent standard of living has a lot to do with human rights......


Not every political argument is grounded in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Never said it was a "Constitutional right".



:doh You dont see how ensuring that a resettling refugees of war plays into morality!? You ****ing kidding me?


Ummm.... In some cases we are... The war in Iraq, come to mind?


End all be all solution? No. We should definitely help though.


1.)In our refugee process there are cultural orientation classes that they must go through
2.)Again with the irrelevant comparisons of two completely different countries refugee processes



Oh god :doh
1.)You keep on comparing two completely different refugee screening/resettlement programs.
2.)The reality is this: The United States has resettled 784,000 refugees since September 11, 2001. 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."
3.)Your argument is grounded in fear mongering with little to no basis


Uhhh yea... IF THERE WAS SECURITY.


Security. Safety.


Yea. Those camps are **** holes and also offer little to no safety. This isnt a ****ing camping trip.

"In the overcrowded camps and spontaneously erected collective centres dotting the border region, aid groups struggle to maintain basic standards of hygiene and safety. “On average, 125 people have to share one toilet,” Ahmad explained. “And women often don’t dare to use them at all, for fear of sexual violence.” He added that the provision of medical care was “not yet catastrophic” but close to breaking point." Human rights groups sound alarm over safe zones for Syrian refugees | World news | The Guardian

"“I spent years in a refugee camp in Ethiopia, and there I watched two young boys, perhaps twelve years old, fighting so viciously over rations that one kicked the other to death. He had not intended to kill his foe, of course, but we were young and very weak.”(1) This quote from a refugee highlights the realities of living in a refugee camp, where there is not enough food in the camps. Chronic malnutrition makes refugees fragile and more susceptible to a variety of diseases and illnesses. Most refugee camps do not have sufficient food to provide to their populations, and refugees are frequently dependent entirely on humanitarian aid." Food, Water, Sanitation, and Housing in Refugee Camps

"People are living in temperatures between 4C and 5C," she said. "These are the temperatures we use to preserve meat and cheese in our fridges. It's utterly inhumane."
She continued: "People ask me about the camps. How can I talk about the smell of urine and feces because of the poor sanitary conditions?" 'Utterly inhumane': Canadian nurse describes conditions in Syrian refugee camp | CTV News

"UNHCR warned against the alarming rate of child mortality in the camp, where an average of 10 children under the age of five die every day. According to international Medical Corps, refugees in Dollo Ado are at risk of malnutrition and poor hygiene due to the overcrowding... Basic hygiene is also of great concern in the camp, where 90% of the water is unfit for human consumption." World Refugee Day 2014: Living Conditions in the Largest Refugee Camps



They dont have to be mutually exclusive......

You know, you and I aren't going to see eye to eye on this topic. I propose that we both quite while we are both ahead. What say you?

 

[coldjoint]

Ah yes. We have got to the real reason of why you're against refugee resettlement. Its not because of factual information or any of the **** you tried to pull. Its because you're a bigot.

Again? I base my opinion on factual information like top security officials and the head of the FBI saying terorists have infiltrated the refugees. And on the fact that the brand of Islam in the ME is hateful and violent(along with what is taught in host countries). But bigot or hater is the standard reply, so congratulations your gullibility is appreciated by every terrorist on earth.

 

[JANFU]

You are absolutely correct....and I have asking the same question. As I see it, they want to come over here and force Sharia Law on us, like in Europe!

There will be blood, me thinks.

Force Sharia Law on you- How ffn many do you think are coming over- more hate and fear mongering. Nothing else is expected.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

You know, you and I aren't going to see eye to eye on this topic. I propose that we both quite while we are both ahead. What say you?

Whatever :roll:

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Again? I base my opinion on factual information like top security officials and the head of the FBI saying terorists have infiltrated the refugees.

Ummm... Where in gods name did you cite anything of the such?

And on the fact that the brand of Islam in the ME is hateful and violent(along with what is taught in host countries). But bigot or hater is the standard reply, so congratulations your gullibility is appreciated by every terrorist on earth.

Remember... We have accepted hundreds of thousands of those scurry Muslims into the US from the middle east since 9/11..... How many of them tried to commit terrorist attacks?

 

[coldjoint]

Ummm... Where in gods name did you cite anything of the such?



Remember... We have accepted hundreds of thousands of those scurry Muslims into the US from the middle east since 9/11..... How many of them tried to commit terrorist attacks?

1 would be enough.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

1 would be enough.

Your first post here in this thread: "We will probably find out. If something happens before November you can't count on a President Trump."
--No citation of anything that can be considered factual information cited by top security officials or the head of the FBI

Your first post in response to me: "Do you trust the UN who has countries like Saudi Arabia on their Human rights committees? I don't.

The largest voting block in the UN is the OIC. They could care less how many terrorists we import.

And the first bolded sentence. Where do they the intensive biographic bull**** from, let alone any biometrics? The ME just does not have records like that."
--No citation of factual information from top security official or head of the FBI officials

 

[matchlight]

As many as your fearful little mind can count!

The question is valid. These people are coming from a nation which is riddled with Muslim jihadists, and there is no way to be sure none of them is a jihadist. Why are you so eager to deride concerns about the potential threat to this country this influx of foreigners represents?

Once again, I would like to recommend a fine book by Andy McCarthy. Its title is "The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America."

 

[MrT]

The question is valid. These people are coming from a nation which is riddled with Muslim jihadists, and there is no way to be sure none of them is a jihadist. Why are you so eager to deride concerns about the potential threat to this country this influx of foreigners represents?

Once again, I would like to recommend a fine book by Andy McCarthy. Its title is "The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America."

A new McCarthy for a new generation of fear mongering, huh?

And I deride the fear because it is irrational. We are talking about tens of thousands of asylum seekers that are subjected to the most rigorous inspection and review process available. And we are risking turning away thousands of seekers out of the fear that one of them might be able to infiltrate the nation and pull off a terrorist attack even though individuals born and raised within the United States are perfectly capable of pulling off these same attacks.

Put it this way - Do you support additional gun restrictions even though the vast majority of gun owners are non-violent? Even though the chances of being killed by gun in a America are several thousands of percent higher than your chances of being killed by a terrorist in America?

 

[katzgar]

You are absolutely correct....and I have asking the same question. As I see it, they want to come over here and force Sharia Law on us, like in Europe!

There will be blood, me thinks.

when you use actual facts you will be way less paranoid.

 

[matchlight]

A new McCarthy for a new generation of fear mongering, huh?

Senator Joe McCarthy of Wisconsin was a very brave, patriotic American, and I take it as a compliment to be compared to him. We now know, from an analysis of part of the million or more pages of documents that have been published since his death, that he was mostly right about the Communist infiltration of this country's government. The commies' successors, unschooled, unpatriotic dimwits who ironically call themselves "liberals," are no more loyal to the United States than the specimens--quite a few of them Communist agents actively working against this country's interests--that Joe McCarthy raised questions about.

And I deride the fear because it is irrational. We are talking about tens of thousands of asylum seekers that are subjected to the most rigorous inspection and review process available.

The FBI has said that your "most rigorous inspection and review process available" is not good enough to detect Islamic jihadists who may be among the aliens being admitted to our territory. I suppose that fact does not bother people who don't have much more time for America than the jihadists do.

And we are risking turning away thousands of seekers out of the fear that one of them might be able to infiltrate the nation and pull off a terrorist attack even though individuals born and raised within the United States are perfectly capable of pulling off these same attacks.

That's right. I see no reason to increase the risk even further. I would not admit a single alien from certain nations--and Syria is one of them. The Christians and others there who are in danger should be relocated to the large areas of Syria that are now secure.

Put it this way - Do you support additional gun restrictions even though the vast majority of gun owners are non-violent? Even though the chances of being killed by gun in a America are several thousands of percent higher than your chances of being killed by a terrorist in America?

That analogy is too puerile and simple-minded to rate any further comment.

 

[MrT]

Senator Joe McCarthy of Wisconsin was a very brave, patriotic American, and I take it as a compliment to be compared to him. We now know, from an analysis of part of the million or more pages of documents that have been published since his death, that he was mostly right about the Communist infiltration of this country's government. The commies' successors, unschooled, unpatriotic dimwits who ironically call themselves "liberals," are no more loyal to the United States than the specimens--quite a few of them Communist agents actively working against this country's interests--that Joe McCarthy raised questions about.

First off, I was comparing Senator McCarthy to the McCarthy from your book - not to you. Second, the notion that McCarthy's witch hunt had any significant benefit or served any purpose beyond bullying individuals for their political beliefs is really quite absurd. Even if the commie threat was real (and it was) and even if there were secret commies in areas of the country (and there were), McCarthy and his "secret list" did almost nothing to actually help improve our security.

The FBI has said that your "most rigorous inspection and review process available" is not good enough to detect Islamic jihadists who may be among the aliens being admitted to our territory. I suppose that fact does not bother people who don't have much more time for America than the jihadists do.

Please stop it with the back-handed implication that I don't care about my country or the security of its citizens. That pisses me off. I want my country to use the wealth and power available to the world's most powerful nation to help improve itself both morally and economically by making use of doctors, mechanics, engineers, mothers, and children that are fleeing this war torn nation and giving them a new home and a new life.

That's right. I see no reason to increase the risk even further. I would not admit a single alien from certain nations--and Syria is one of them. The Christians and others there who are in danger should be relocated to the large areas of Syria that are now secure.

The notion that large areas of Syria are now secure assumes that those are areas where these people who are explicitly trying to flee the entire country would still want to live there. And that takes a particular type of moral high-ground to be able to claim that you are doing a good thing by forcing these refugees to return to the country, from which they fled, but that it's OK because you put them in a "secure" part of the country.

And if you can't see a reason to increase the (absolutely negligible) risk even further, then let me show you here, here, and here.

That analogy is too puerile and simple-minded to rate any further comment.

Truly? You really don't see a link between punishing all gun owners because a few of them absolutely will misuse the weapon and punishing all refugees because a few of them might misuse the opportunity provided?

 

[RetiredUSN]

I want to see them integrated into affluent neighborhoods first.

I want to see rich politicians come out from behind their gated communities and live among these refuges before they go committing work a day people like myself to their social engineering practices.

Like I said in another post, let's begin this fiasco by demanding that about 700 of them be placed on Martha's Vineyard, and then sprinkle about another 5,000 or so, in Hyannis on Cape Cod.