6 states so far say "HELL NO !" to Muslim "refugees" !

[Muhammed]

Its good to have Republicans protecting their states from Mooslims...it keeps the Christians happy

It has nothing to do with Christians moron.
If you look at the list of 190 U.S. cities for Muslim relocation, you will see that a great number of relocation affiliate centers are supported by Christian denominations.
190 US Cities To Receive Syrian Refugees

That's why they are leaving in the first place. Christians are not very welcome in Syria. They tend to get slaughtered.

 

[September]

if the manchurian muslim tries to pull some more of his sneaky tricks to bypass the people and force these "refugees" on us he could trigger....some VERY bad things....american patriots have had enough of his extrajudicial anti american antics.

Reported for voicing implied threats towards the President of the United States of America

​

 

[Rotagilla]

if the manchurian muslim tries to pull some more of his sneaky tricks to bypass the people and force these "refugees" on us he could trigger....some VERY bad things....american patriots have had enough of his extrajudicial anti american antics.

Reported for voicing implied threats towards the President of the United States of America

​

no such thing occurred

 

[Delta4Embassy]

27 states refusing refugees now.

Syrian refugees not welcome in 27 U.S. states - CNN.com

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

It doesn't matter which states say no; once those rodents are in the walls, we're screwed.

 

[Rotagilla]

It doesn't matter which states say no; once those rodents are in the walls, we're screwed.

that's exactly why the manchurian muslim is so intent on accomplishing it.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

27 states refusing refugees now.

Syrian refugees not welcome in 27 U.S. states - CNN.com

Good to see !
Legally, it may not matter but at least Odummy will see that not everyone is willing to just bend over and take it.

 

[ChrisL]

I'm really surprised my state, MA, is saying no to any Syrian immigrants unless and until they know more about the screening process being used. I'm surprised but pleased. Governor Baker says the safety of the people of Massachusetts is more important to him. Many more of our elected officials agree. Thank you, Governor Baker, for thinking of the people of Massachusetts first.

 

[gipper]

Wish my state had balls like this, but it's a blue cupcake state.

How soon will Obama start the lawsuits ?

(Reuters) - Texas, Arkansas, Indiana and Louisiana on Monday joined two other U.S. states in saying they will no longer accept Syrian refugees, contending it is too dangerous to let in people from that war-torn country following Friday's deadly Paris attack.

Republican Governors Greg Abbott of Texas, Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, Mike Pence of Indiana and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, followed the lead of Alabama and Michigan in saying their states would no longer help support the Obama administration's goal of accepting 10,000 Syrian refugees in the coming years.

"Texas cannot participate in any program that will result in Syrian refugees - any one of whom could be connected to terrorism - being resettled in Texas," Abbott said in an open letter to U.S. President Barack Obama on Monday. "Neither you nor any federal official can guarantee that Syrian refugees will not be part of any terroristic activity."

But it was unclear what authority governors had to stop admitting refugees into their states, legal experts said.

"The federal government has the power over immigration. If they admit Syrian refugees, they're here," said Deborah Anker, a professor of law at Harvard Law School who specializes in immigration issues. "People aren't going to the (state) border. The federal government is going to bring them in."

The decisions to stop accepting refugees from Syria came three days after gunmen and suicide bombers believed to be part of the Islamic State militant group killed 129 people in a series of coordinated attacks in Paris, the worst such event in France since World War Two.

A Syrian passport found near the body of one of the attackers showed that its holder passed through Greece in October, raising concern that the attackers had entered Europe amid the wave of refugees fleeing that country's four-year civil war.

The United States admitted 1,682 Syrian refugees in the federal fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, a sharp jump from the 105 admitted a year earlier. Texas, California and Michigan accepted the largest number of people fleeing the war.

Secretary of State John Kerry in September said the United States would increase the number of refugees it takes in from all nations by 15,000 per year over the next two years, bringing the total to 100,000 a year by 2017.

Some of the charitable groups that work to resettle refugees criticized the moves, saying that the governors are wrongly targeting people who are fleeing violence, not trying to spread it.

"For these governors to falsely assert that the U.S. refugee admissions program places their states at risk is utterly preposterous," the Rev. John McCullough, chief executive of the Church World Service, one of nine charitable groups that works with the U.S.'s Office of Refugee Resettlement, said in a statement.

"Refugees are the single most scrutinized and vetted individuals to travel to the United States," McCullough said "These knee-jerk reactions stoke fear and bigotry, and have no place in this great nation."

Alabama and Michigan said they would no longer accept Syrian refugees on Sunday.

Michigan's Republican governor, Rick Snyder, described his state, which has a large Arab-American population, as "welcoming" but said the risk associated with admitting Syrian refugees was too high.

"Our first priority is protecting the safety of our residents," Snyder said on Sunday. "Given the terrible situation in Paris, I've directed that we put on hold our efforts to accept new refugees until the U.S. Department of Homeland Security completes a full review of security clearances and procedures."

The governors said they were ordering their state departments of health and human services to stop working with Syrian refugees.

Jindal also noted that Louisiana State Police were aware of a Syrian refugee already relocated within the state, and directed law enforcement to monitor for possible threats. Jindal is a Republican candidate for president.

(Reporting by Scott Malone in Boston; Additional reporting by Jon Herskovitz in Austin and Colleen Jenkins in Winston-Salem; Editing by Jonathan Oatis)

Six U.S. states shut doors to Syrian refugees after Paris attack

That is NOT nice!!! Those dirty racist and bigots.

America has no place for these awful states...their governors should be removed by Dear Leader and sent to the gulag.

How terribly un-PC...how awfully noninclusive....where has our diversity and multicultural wonderfulness gone???

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[ChrisL]

Why do you think their own neighbors won't take them? Because they KNOW better, that's why.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Why do you think their own neighbors won't take them? Because they KNOW better, that's why.

Things have not changed much in the Middle East in 2000 years...where there was the Roman Empire running things in the ME we now have the US Military Industrial Complex Empire [US MiCE]
running things and there are still "Families looking for a Manger"...Happy Holidays !!

 

[ChrisL]

Why do you think their own neighbors won't take them? Because they KNOW better, that's why.

Things have not changed much in the Middle East in 2000 years...where there was the Roman Empire running things in the ME we now have the US Military Industrial Complex Empire [US MiCE]
running things and there are still "Families looking for a Manger"...Happy Holidays !!

There are too many extremists to be able to trust them. The safety and welfare of American citizens comes first. Let the Arab countries take them in. Those oil rich greedy fuckers.

 

[ChrisL]

Why do you think their own neighbors won't take them? Because they KNOW better, that's why.

Things have not changed much in the Middle East in 2000 years...where there was the Roman Empire running things in the ME we now have the US Military Industrial Complex Empire [US MiCE]
running things and there are still "Families looking for a Manger"...Happy Holidays !!

We don't have jobs or resources to just keep taking people in. Those are finite things. It makes no sense to take in anymore people if you want to continue to be a "successful" country and not slowly transform into a third world shit hole.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

We don't have jobs or resources to just keep taking people in. Those are finite things.

We only have "Infinite Resources" if it comes to war and invading Iran and invading Syria...but other than that we have finite resources... Do you believe we should destroy social security so we can spend more $$ to fight more "Glorious wars For Jesus"

 

[ChrisL]

Why do you think their own neighbors won't take them? Because they KNOW better, that's why.

Things have not changed much in the Middle East in 2000 years...where there was the Roman Empire running things in the ME we now have the US Military Industrial Complex Empire [US MiCE]
running things and there are still "Families looking for a Manger"...Happy Holidays !!

Let's look at this in some terms that you and I can agree on. Dogs and cats. Although you may have empathy and sympathy for some homeless dogs and cats, you realize that you just cannot adopt them all. You might only be able to afford the dogs and cats that you currently have. Perhaps you only have one dog, but he doesn't get along with other dogs very well. Maybe these homeless dogs and cats are sick with rabies or something? You wouldn't take in all of these dogs and cats into your home because it isn't rational or practical. That doesn't mean you are cruel. It means you are realistic.

 

[ChrisL]

We don't have jobs or resources to just keep taking people in. Those are finite things.

We only have "Infinite Resources" if it comes to war and invading Iran and invading Syria...but other than that we have finite resources... Do you believe we should destroy social security so we can spend more $$ to fight more "Glorious wars For Jesus"

Well, if you have been paying attention and think you know about me, you would know I'm not a religious person, nor do I approve or support any wars.

 

[ChrisL]

We don't have jobs or resources to just keep taking people in. Those are finite things.

We only have "Infinite Resources" if it comes to war and invading Iran and invading Syria...but other than that we have finite resources... Do you believe we should destroy social security so we can spend more $$ to fight more "Glorious wars For Jesus"

We do not have "infinite" resources. I think everyone knows this except for some liberals.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

We do not have "infinite" resources. I think everyone knows this except for some liberals.

Here is your man then...not a Liberal at all ...started two wars...gave unprecedented war time tax cuts ...then he crashed the US economy ...Miss him yet?? you must be a Libra >>>

He is just "totally wrong" but he is a Dancing fool oool oool !

 

[ChrisL]

We do not have "infinite" resources. I think everyone knows this except for some liberals.

Here is your man then...not a Liberal at all ...started two wars...gave unprecedented war time tax cuts ...then he crashed the US economy ...Miss him yet?? you must be a Libra >>>

He is just "totally wrong" but he is a Dancing fool oool oool !

What does any of this have to do with my post or our current dilemma?