House votes to block Syrian refugees

[toxicmedia]

How come none of the conservatives in this thread will acknowledge that the Syrian refugees that are already here, have not been arrested for terrorism?

 

[jc456]

Huh? You said you wouldn't be joining, I merely asked who invited you to?

I'm not sure what this political "discussion" web site looks like through your browser. But the obvious implication on my end is that posters will participate in discussions, except for that one category where it's one on one

what do you wish to discuss one on one? Go for it, let's hear what you'd like to debate.

This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Well what is it the FBI director said, let's start simple?

Too complicated?

(Yawn)..........

I was hoping to hear some original thinking from you

so now you won't debate after you chased me down asking if I do one on one. you loser. You never had intentions, like a good ole lipturd you are.

 

[jc456]

How come none of the conservatives in this thread will acknowledge that the Syrian refugees that are already here, have not been arrested for terrorism?

uh because no one knew they were here yet. Maybe? Let's wait eh? Where are they?

 

[koshergrl]

Huh? You said you wouldn't be joining, I merely asked who invited you to?

I'm not sure what this political "discussion" web site looks like through your browser. But the obvious implication on my end is that posters will participate in discussions, except for that one category where it's one on one

what do you wish to discuss one on one? Go for it, let's hear what you'd like to debate.

This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Totally irrelevant.

The security threats HAVE been refugees, or rather, posing as refugees. There have been many of them.

No they haven't

None of the 2100 or so Syrian refugees gave been arrested for terrorism.

Read what I wrote again, because Fox News won't show it......The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

Yawn.

You're doing what you loons do...messing with the words to hide the reality.

I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat, and that there have been multiple fake refugees stopped at the border.

Don't parse words with me. All you'll do is get yourself ignored for being an irrelevant moron with nothing of note to say.

 

[Coyote]

Here's a more accurate article on the Iraqi Christians: Yes, the US Is Deporting Iraqi Christians. Here's Why.

Yes, the US Is Deporting Iraqi Christians. Here's Why.
Would-be asylum seekers admit lying to Homeland Security.
Bob Smietana
[ posted 9/22/2015 03:18PM ]

A federal immigration judge has ordered 15 Iraqi Chaldean Christians deported for immigration fraud.


The Chaldeans have been held for more than six months in detention by Homeland Security. They were arrested earlier this year for using false documents to enter the United States from Mexico, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune.


Five other Iraqi Christians will be tried for immigration fraud. Seven detainees have already been deported.


The Iraqi Christians told US officials that they were fleeing persecution at home. However, most had already been granted safe haven by Germany, Sweden and other European countries before coming to America.


“Asylum is for emergencies only,” Ginger Jacobs, a San Diego attorney, told the Union-Tribune. “There are many, many people fleeing Iraq for bona fide emergency reasons. But if somebody is able to live as a citizen in a country like Germany or the United Kingdom or Australia, then they don’t necessarily deserve an emergency remedy such as asylum.”​

It's not the Obama administration doing anything - it's up to the immigration courts to decide - just like any other immigrant that enters the country illegally and gets caught with falsified documents. It would be the same if they were Iraqi Muslims. And they're not exactly being "thrown to the lions" - the one's being deported have already been granted haven in a number of European countries. It's funny you bitch about Mexicans because they too are Christian.

The Obama admin is deporting them to Iraq and charging them with crimes that they have repeatedly said they will not charge criminal Mexicans or Iraqis with terror tied with.

Where have they "repeatedly said" they would not charge Iraqi's with terror ties?

That's not what said.

This is what you said: "they have repeatedly said they will not charge criminal Mexicans or Iraqis with terror tied with."

Stupid phone...they will not charge Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties with ILLEGALLY ENTERING THE COUNTRY OR LYING TO OBTAIN ENTRY. Our jihadist president will send Christians to their deaths for illegally entering the country, but refuses to detain or charge criminals who come here illegally....and RELEASES terrorists.

Hold on - let's examine this first.
1st: What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?
2nd: Those Iraqi Christians had already been granted assylum in Europe (which is why they did not qualify for assylum here) - how is sending them to Sweden or Germany or other European countries "sending them to thier deaths"? This is what is typically done with cases like that regardless of religion.

 

[toxicmedia]

I'm not sure what this political "discussion" web site looks like through your browser. But the obvious implication on my end is that posters will participate in discussions, except for that one category where it's one on one

what do you wish to discuss one on one? Go for it, let's hear what you'd like to debate.

This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Totally irrelevant.

The security threats HAVE been refugees, or rather, posing as refugees. There have been many of them.

No they haven't

None of the 2100 or so Syrian refugees gave been arrested for terrorism.

Read what I wrote again, because Fox News won't show it......The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

Yawn.

You're doing what you loons do...messing with the words to hide the reality.

I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat, and that there have been multiple fake refugees stopped at the border.

Don't parse words with me. All you'll do is get yourself ignored for being an irrelevant moron with nothing of note to say.

I'm not affected by people hyper sensitive enough to put me on ignore.

The post you responded to was an answer to another poster who asked what I wanted to debate

He failed to respond to the facts I posted.

So let's try and refocus.

Tell me if I understand.....

You think the fact that the 2100 or so Syrian refugees already here, who have not been found to conduct terrorist activities, is irrelevant to whether or not accepting 20,000 more, is a security threat...do I understand?

If that's anything close to what you're saying, and you did say"I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat".......

Why should we accept any immigrants at all...if groups that have a 0% record for terrorism.

Doesn't that mean all Irish, Cambodian, or Indian refugees are a security threat that should be disallowed?

 

[koshergrl]

what do you wish to discuss one on one? Go for it, let's hear what you'd like to debate.

This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Totally irrelevant.

The security threats HAVE been refugees, or rather, posing as refugees. There have been many of them.

No they haven't

None of the 2100 or so Syrian refugees gave been arrested for terrorism.

Read what I wrote again, because Fox News won't show it......The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

Yawn.

You're doing what you loons do...messing with the words to hide the reality.

I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat, and that there have been multiple fake refugees stopped at the border.

Don't parse words with me. All you'll do is get yourself ignored for being an irrelevant moron with nothing of note to say.

I'm not affected by people hyper sensitive enough to put me on ignore.

The post you responded to was an answer to another poster who asked what I wanted to debate

He failed to respond to the facts I posted.

So let's try and refocus.

Tell me if I understand.....

You think the fact that the 2100 or so Syrian refugees already here, who have not been found to conduct terrorist activities, is irrelevant to whether or not accepting 20,000 more, is a security threat...do I understand?

If that's anything close to what you're saying, and you did say"I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat".......

Why should we accept any immigrants at all...if groups that have a 0% record for terrorism.

Doesn't that mean all Irish, Cambodian, or Indian refugees are a security threat that should be disallowed?

Only the Muslim ones.

 

[Jroc]

I'm not sure what this political "discussion" web site looks like through your browser. But the obvious implication on my end is that posters will participate in discussions, except for that one category where it's one on one

what do you wish to discuss one on one? Go for it, let's hear what you'd like to debate.

This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Totally irrelevant.

The security threats HAVE been refugees, or rather, posing as refugees. There have been many of them.

No they haven't

None of the 2100 or so Syrian refugees gave been arrested for terrorism.

Read what I wrote again, because Fox News won't show it......The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

Yawn.

You're doing what you loons do...messing with the words to hide the reality.

I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat, and that there have been multiple fake refugees stopped at the border.

Don't parse words with me. All you'll do is get yourself ignored for being an irrelevant moron with nothing of note to say.

These leftest hate conservatives more than they do the islamonazis

 

[Oldstyle]

How come none of the conservatives in this thread will acknowledge that the Syrian refugees that are already here, have not been arrested for terrorism?

I could care less about the refugees that are here now, Toxic...I'm concerned with the refugees that are coming NOW!

 

[Oldstyle]

what do you wish to discuss one on one? Go for it, let's hear what you'd like to debate.

This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Totally irrelevant.

The security threats HAVE been refugees, or rather, posing as refugees. There have been many of them.

No they haven't

None of the 2100 or so Syrian refugees gave been arrested for terrorism.

Read what I wrote again, because Fox News won't show it......The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

Yawn.

You're doing what you loons do...messing with the words to hide the reality.

I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat, and that there have been multiple fake refugees stopped at the border.

Don't parse words with me. All you'll do is get yourself ignored for being an irrelevant moron with nothing of note to say.

I'm not affected by people hyper sensitive enough to put me on ignore.

The post you responded to was an answer to another poster who asked what I wanted to debate

He failed to respond to the facts I posted.

So let's try and refocus.

Tell me if I understand.....

You think the fact that the 2100 or so Syrian refugees already here, who have not been found to conduct terrorist activities, is irrelevant to whether or not accepting 20,000 more, is a security threat...do I understand?

If that's anything close to what you're saying, and you did say"I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat".......

Why should we accept any immigrants at all...if groups that have a 0% record for terrorism.

Doesn't that mean all Irish, Cambodian, or Indian refugees are a security threat that should be disallowed?

Once again...the FBI Director has come out and said quite plainly that they can't do adequate background checks on refugees coming from Syria. At the same time ISIS seems to be using the refugee crisis as an opportunity to slip terrorists into Europe and America.

If the Director of the FBI comes out and says that they can't check on Irish, Cambodian or Indian refugees adequately...then I don't want them coming here either.

What part of that can't you grasp?

 

[jc456]

This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Totally irrelevant.

The security threats HAVE been refugees, or rather, posing as refugees. There have been many of them.

No they haven't

None of the 2100 or so Syrian refugees gave been arrested for terrorism.

Read what I wrote again, because Fox News won't show it......The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

Yawn.

You're doing what you loons do...messing with the words to hide the reality.

I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat, and that there have been multiple fake refugees stopped at the border.

Don't parse words with me. All you'll do is get yourself ignored for being an irrelevant moron with nothing of note to say.

I'm not affected by people hyper sensitive enough to put me on ignore.

The post you responded to was an answer to another poster who asked what I wanted to debate

He failed to respond to the facts I posted.

So let's try and refocus.

Tell me if I understand.....

You think the fact that the 2100 or so Syrian refugees already here, who have not been found to conduct terrorist activities, is irrelevant to whether or not accepting 20,000 more, is a security threat...do I understand?

If that's anything close to what you're saying, and you did say"I didn't say Syrian refugees had been arrested/charged with terrorism. I said the refugees pose a security threat".......

Why should we accept any immigrants at all...if groups that have a 0% record for terrorism.

Doesn't that mean all Irish, Cambodian, or Indian refugees are a security threat that should be disallowed?

Once again...the FBI Director has come out and said quite plainly that they can't do adequate background checks on refugees coming from Syria. At the same time ISIS seems to be using the refugee crisis as an opportunity to slip terrorists into Europe and America.

If the Director of the FBI comes out and says that they can't check on Irish, Cambodian or Indian refugees adequately...then I don't want them coming here either.

What part of that can't you grasp?

the logical part of your statement.

 

[koshergrl]

The Obama admin is deporting them to Iraq and charging them with crimes that they have repeatedly said they will not charge criminal Mexicans or Iraqis with terror tied with.

Where have they "repeatedly said" they would not charge Iraqi's with terror ties?

That's not what said.

This is what you said: "they have repeatedly said they will not charge criminal Mexicans or Iraqis with terror tied with."

Stupid phone...they will not charge Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties with ILLEGALLY ENTERING THE COUNTRY OR LYING TO OBTAIN ENTRY. Our jihadist president will send Christians to their deaths for illegally entering the country, but refuses to detain or charge criminals who come here illegally....and RELEASES terrorists.

Hold on - let's examine this first.
1st: What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?
2nd: Those Iraqi Christians had already been granted assylum in Europe (which is why they did not qualify for assylum here) - how is sending them to Sweden or Germany or other European countries "sending them to thier deaths"? This is what is typically done with cases like that regardless of religion.

Every thing you posted as a statement here is a lie. And I don't even know what that first sentence is, but it's nonsense any way you cut it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How come none of the conservatives in this thread will acknowledge that the Syrian refugees that are already here, have not been arrested for terrorism?

Your straw man impresses you.

It simply does not impress anyone else.

 

[Coyote]

Where have they "repeatedly said" they would not charge Iraqi's with terror ties?

That's not what said.

This is what you said: "they have repeatedly said they will not charge criminal Mexicans or Iraqis with terror tied with."

Stupid phone...they will not charge Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties with ILLEGALLY ENTERING THE COUNTRY OR LYING TO OBTAIN ENTRY. Our jihadist president will send Christians to their deaths for illegally entering the country, but refuses to detain or charge criminals who come here illegally....and RELEASES terrorists.

Hold on - let's examine this first.
1st: What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?
2nd: Those Iraqi Christians had already been granted assylum in Europe (which is why they did not qualify for assylum here) - how is sending them to Sweden or Germany or other European countries "sending them to thier deaths"? This is what is typically done with cases like that regardless of religion.

Every thing you posted as a statement here is a lie. And I don't even know what that first sentence is, but it's nonsense any way you cut it.

KG - the news reports on the Iraqi Christians state that they were granted asylum elsewhere first - the way asylum is supposed to work is it is granted by the first country you reach (now obviously that's gone all topsy turvy in Europe) but it doesn't change the fact that they have safe haven in other countries.

Secondly - why can't you answer the questions I asked? You made the claim - I'm asking for specific evidence supporting that claim.

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

 

[Tilly]

Huh? You said you wouldn't be joining, I merely asked who invited you to?

I'm not sure what this political "discussion" web site looks like through your browser. But the obvious implication on my end is that posters will participate in discussions, except for that one category where it's one on one

what do you wish to discuss one on one? Go for it, let's hear what you'd like to debate.

This thread is about ISIS refugees.

My position includes:

A. None of the 2000+ Syrian refugees that are here already have been accused of terrorism.
B. The last time we admitted 2000+ Syrian refugees, there were over 7000 that applied, and only 2000+ that were approved
C. The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

What you may be unable to recognize, are dialog, and questions. This is where someone states facts, and then people discuss them.

There is all to much of people dumping off unoriginal Fox News or MSNBC talking points on this site

Totally irrelevant.

The security threats HAVE been refugees, or rather, posing as refugees. There have been many of them.

No they haven't

None of the 2100 or so Syrian refugees gave been arrested for terrorism.

Read what I wrote again, because Fox News won't show it......The security threats have not been refugees. The terrorists on 911, and Boston, all had various kinds of travel visas.

Things change and you have to think ahead.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

You think that those crossing the Southern Borders are using false documents?

Seriously?

Perhaps KG doesn't answer because it is impossible to take such idiocy seriously.

 

[Coyote]

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

You think that those crossing the Southern Borders are using false documents?

Seriously?

Perhaps KG doesn't answer because it is impossible to take such idiocy seriously.

Or, perhaps you need to reread the question - let me repeat it to you (and read it in the context of the discussion and kg's claims):

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

 

[jc456]

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

You think that those crossing the Southern Borders are using false documents?

Seriously?

Perhaps KG doesn't answer because it is impossible to take such idiocy seriously.

Or, perhaps you need to reread the question - let me repeat it to you (and read it in the context of the discussion and kg's claims):

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

well they were detained and arrested, so we'll have to wait as they process them. We'll get back to you!

 

[ChrisL]

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

You think that those crossing the Southern Borders are using false documents?

Seriously?

Perhaps KG doesn't answer because it is impossible to take such idiocy seriously.

Or, perhaps you need to reread the question - let me repeat it to you (and read it in the context of the discussion and kg's claims):

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

All of the ones who died on 9/11.

 

[dannyboys]

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

You think that those crossing the Southern Borders are using false documents?

Seriously?

Perhaps KG doesn't answer because it is impossible to take such idiocy seriously.

Or, perhaps you need to reread the question - let me repeat it to you (and read it in the context of the discussion and kg's claims):

What Mexicans or Muslims with terror ties have not been charged with falsifying documents to obtain entry?

What an ignorant question.
Answer: The Mexicans and Muslims who have not been caught with false documents. You know like the tens of thousands of illegals who simply walk across the border.
You don't think ISIS is aware how easy it is to get into the US illegally?
Wise up pal.