Israel refuses to to any refugees

[Coyote]

of course its a great cover for 'Islamic state' fighters , murderers . Already read that there are no kind of background checks although I wouldn't trust that anyway . 'Islamic state' has already said , months ago that they would send these invaders to the land of the Cross meaning Italy . After that these muslims invade throughout 'europe' .

Reminds me of what they said about Commies when the Jews were seeking refuge.

what we said about jews seeking refuge in the USA was NO!!!!! Your "we" does refer to the USA-----doesn't it?

Exactly. My "we" refers to the US's unwillingness to take in refugees then, as now and the same rhetoric in play.

 

[irosie91]

How do you know? Pretending to be a refugee would be a great cover to get inside and cause havoc.

It's worth the risk. Splitting families up like that and sending parents, sons and brothers to an almost certain death is simply barbaric.

Letting in grown assed men who are capable of fighting for their own country is also barbaric. And no...it is not worth the risk. Families HERE are split up every time a soldier goes to the ME and many come back in a box. Why are the refugee men exempt?

Most of our soldiers come back to their families. None of those men you are cutting from their families are likely to come back. Would you have sent the Jewish men back to Europe to fight the Nazi's?

what jewish men "back to Europe......"? the US was not grabbing up jewish familes during world war II to save them from adolf in Germany or Poland, or Italy or Holland or Hungary ...... what are you talking about????

Exactly that.

Same thing now, as then.

not at all the same--------EVERYONE was saying "NO" to jews back then -----
now there are DOZENS of muslim countries which are EAGER to EMBRACE their own-------all over the world------the USA should take the christians

 

[Coyote]

Funny...those who would send refugees back are most likely themselves the products of refugees fleeing political, religious or cultureral persecution in other lands.

Funny...those who want refugees..even healthy capable men, to come here probably will not offer them sanctuary in their own home for awhile.

I would offer a family sanctuarly.

 

[irosie91]

Funny...those who would send refugees back are most likely themselves the products of refugees fleeing political, religious or cultureral persecution in other lands.

Funny...those who want refugees..even healthy capable men, to come here probably will not offer them sanctuary in their own home for awhile.

I live in a one room apartment-----how many do you want me to take?

 

[irosie91]

of course its a great cover for 'Islamic state' fighters , murderers . Already read that there are no kind of background checks although I wouldn't trust that anyway . 'Islamic state' has already said , months ago that they would send these invaders to the land of the Cross meaning Italy . After that these muslims invade throughout 'europe' .

Reminds me of what they said about Commies when the Jews were seeking refuge.

what we said about jews seeking refuge in the USA was NO!!!!! Your "we" does refer to the USA-----doesn't it?

Exactly. My "we" refers to the US's unwillingness to take in refugees then, as now and the same rhetoric in play.

oh...... I am all for taking the Christians-----they are at most risk and do not have the MYRIAD of options that the muslims have

 

[Coyote]

It's worth the risk. Splitting families up like that and sending parents, sons and brothers to an almost certain death is simply barbaric.

Letting in grown assed men who are capable of fighting for their own country is also barbaric. And no...it is not worth the risk. Families HERE are split up every time a soldier goes to the ME and many come back in a box. Why are the refugee men exempt?

Most of our soldiers come back to their families. None of those men you are cutting from their families are likely to come back. Would you have sent the Jewish men back to Europe to fight the Nazi's?

what jewish men "back to Europe......"? the US was not grabbing up jewish familes during world war II to save them from adolf in Germany or Poland, or Italy or Holland or Hungary ...... what are you talking about????

Exactly that.

Same thing now, as then.

not at all the same--------EVERYONE was saying "NO" to jews back then -----
now there are DOZENS of muslim countries which are EAGER to EMBRACE their own-------all over the world------the USA should take the christians

Very much the same. We have one of the worst humanitarian disasters going on now on a scale we haven't seen since the Holocaust. And the US has only taken what...1800? Smaller and poorer countries - Germany, France, Sweden, Lebenon, Turkey, Jordan have taken enourmous numbers. And the rhetoric? The same, only instead of commies it's islamists.

 

[irosie91]

getting back to the OP------Israel cannot take them------Syria is still ---OFFICIALLY at war with Israel ------people living in Syria are propagandized to hate Israel and jews all of their lives

 

[Coyote]

of course its a great cover for 'Islamic state' fighters , murderers . Already read that there are no kind of background checks although I wouldn't trust that anyway . 'Islamic state' has already said , months ago that they would send these invaders to the land of the Cross meaning Italy . After that these muslims invade throughout 'europe' .

Reminds me of what they said about Commies when the Jews were seeking refuge.

what we said about jews seeking refuge in the USA was NO!!!!! Your "we" does refer to the USA-----doesn't it?

Exactly. My "we" refers to the US's unwillingness to take in refugees then, as now and the same rhetoric in play.

oh...... I am all for taking the Christians-----they are at most risk and do not have the MYRIAD of options that the muslims have

They have the same options as muslims and if you have been following the news the vast majority of victims have been muslims of the wrong brand. You do realize that Christianity is by far the world's largest religion (31%) meaning there are many countries to take them and a MYRIAD of options I see no need to divide desperate people by religion though, and continue the religious divides.

 

[Coyote]

getting back to the OP------Israel cannot take them------Syria is still ---OFFICIALLY at war with Israel ------people living in Syria are propagandized to hate Israel and jews all of their lives

No, I don't really think they can either. To many conflicts already ongoing. And they are attempting to do a lot to give medical aid to Syrian's caught up in the conflict.

 

[Coyote]

Funny...those who would send refugees back are most likely themselves the products of refugees fleeing political, religious or cultureral persecution in other lands.

Funny...those who want refugees..even healthy capable men, to come here probably will not offer them sanctuary in their own home for awhile.

I live in a one room apartment-----how many do you want me to take?

Can you take a toddler?

 

[irosie91]

Letting in grown assed men who are capable of fighting for their own country is also barbaric. And no...it is not worth the risk. Families HERE are split up every time a soldier goes to the ME and many come back in a box. Why are the refugee men exempt?

Most of our soldiers come back to their families. None of those men you are cutting from their families are likely to come back. Would you have sent the Jewish men back to Europe to fight the Nazi's?

what jewish men "back to Europe......"? the US was not grabbing up jewish familes during world war II to save them from adolf in Germany or Poland, or Italy or Holland or Hungary ...... what are you talking about????

Exactly that.

Same thing now, as then.

not at all the same--------EVERYONE was saying "NO" to jews back then -----
now there are DOZENS of muslim countries which are EAGER to EMBRACE their own-------all over the world------the USA should take the christians

Very much the same. We have one of the worst humanitarian disasters going on now on a scale we haven't seen since the Holocaust. And the US has only taken what...1800? Smaller and poorer countries - Germany, France, Sweden, Lebenon, Turkey, Jordan have taken enourmous numbers. And the rhetoric? The same, only instead of commies it's islamists.

In each of those poor countries that you named-----there is going to be DISASTER-----sit tight . The REFUGEES bring with them -------the very same brutal conflict
from which they are fleeing------lots of them are just different -----gangs

 

[Jroc]

Letting in grown assed men who are capable of fighting for their own country is also barbaric. And no...it is not worth the risk. Families HERE are split up every time a soldier goes to the ME and many come back in a box. Why are the refugee men exempt?

Most of our soldiers come back to their families. None of those men you are cutting from their families are likely to come back. Would you have sent the Jewish men back to Europe to fight the Nazi's?

what jewish men "back to Europe......"? the US was not grabbing up jewish familes during world war II to save them from adolf in Germany or Poland, or Italy or Holland or Hungary ...... what are you talking about????

Exactly that.

Same thing now, as then.

not at all the same--------EVERYONE was saying "NO" to jews back then -----
now there are DOZENS of muslim countries which are EAGER to EMBRACE their own-------all over the world------the USA should take the christians

Very much the same. We have one of the worst humanitarian disasters going on now on a scale we haven't seen since the Holocaust. And the US has only taken what...1800? Smaller and poorer countries - Germany, France, Sweden, Lebenon, Turkey, Jordan have taken enourmous numbers. And the rhetoric? The same, only instead of commies it's islamists.

CAIR wants as many muslims here as possible. There are rich, empty, Arab muslim countries. They should take their brothers.We can take some of the Christians

 

[irosie91]

Funny...those who would send refugees back are most likely themselves the products of refugees fleeing political, religious or cultureral persecution in other lands.

Funny...those who want refugees..even healthy capable men, to come here probably will not offer them sanctuary in their own home for awhile.

I live in a one room apartment-----how many do you want me to take?

Can you take a toddler?

would the toddler want me? hubby says NO PETS

 

[Gracie]

Funny...those who would send refugees back are most likely themselves the products of refugees fleeing political, religious or cultureral persecution in other lands.

Funny...those who want refugees..even healthy capable men, to come here probably will not offer them sanctuary in their own home for awhile.

I would offer a family sanctuarly.

So would I. But not with a healthy capable male sucking off me and my generocity. His family would be safe. HE can stay there and FIGHT.

 

[irosie91]

Most of our soldiers come back to their families. None of those men you are cutting from their families are likely to come back. Would you have sent the Jewish men back to Europe to fight the Nazi's?

what jewish men "back to Europe......"? the US was not grabbing up jewish familes during world war II to save them from adolf in Germany or Poland, or Italy or Holland or Hungary ...... what are you talking about????

Exactly that.

Same thing now, as then.

not at all the same--------EVERYONE was saying "NO" to jews back then -----
now there are DOZENS of muslim countries which are EAGER to EMBRACE their own-------all over the world------the USA should take the christians

Very much the same. We have one of the worst humanitarian disasters going on now on a scale we haven't seen since the Holocaust. And the US has only taken what...1800? Smaller and poorer countries - Germany, France, Sweden, Lebenon, Turkey, Jordan have taken enourmous numbers. And the rhetoric? The same, only instead of commies it's islamists.

CAIR wants as many muslims here as possible. There are rich, empty, Arab muslim countries. They should take their brothers.We can take some of the Christians

HUGE AMOUNTS of empty land over there-----COUNTRIES can be invented

 

[Coyote]

Funny...those who would send refugees back are most likely themselves the products of refugees fleeing political, religious or cultureral persecution in other lands.

Funny...those who want refugees..even healthy capable men, to come here probably will not offer them sanctuary in their own home for awhile.

I would offer a family sanctuarly.

So would I. But not with a healthy capable male sucking off me and my generocity. His family would be safe. HE can stay there and FIGHT.

I wouldn't send anyone back to likely death unless he chose. I don't know what you mean by sucking off you but most refugee resettlement programs include finding jobs, etc.

 

[Jroc]

what jewish men "back to Europe......"? the US was not grabbing up jewish familes during world war II to save them from adolf in Germany or Poland, or Italy or Holland or Hungary ...... what are you talking about????

Exactly that.

Same thing now, as then.

not at all the same--------EVERYONE was saying "NO" to jews back then -----
now there are DOZENS of muslim countries which are EAGER to EMBRACE their own-------all over the world------the USA should take the christians

Very much the same. We have one of the worst humanitarian disasters going on now on a scale we haven't seen since the Holocaust. And the US has only taken what...1800? Smaller and poorer countries - Germany, France, Sweden, Lebenon, Turkey, Jordan have taken enourmous numbers. And the rhetoric? The same, only instead of commies it's islamists.

CAIR wants as many muslims here as possible. There are rich, empty, Arab muslim countries. They should take their brothers.We can take some of the Christians

HUGE AMOUNTS of empty land over there-----COUNTRIES can be invented

The Europeans invented most of them anyway

 

[pismoe]

of course its a great cover for 'Islamic state' fighters , murderers . Already read that there are no kind of background checks although I wouldn't trust that anyway . 'Islamic state' has already said , months ago that they would send these invaders to the land of the Cross meaning Italy . After that these muslims invade throughout 'europe' .

Reminds me of what they said about Commies when the Jews were seeking refuge.

what we said about jews seeking refuge in the USA was NO!!!!! Your "we" does refer to the USA-----doesn't it?

Exactly. My "we" refers to the US's unwillingness to take in refugees then, as now and the same rhetoric in pl hope we remain unwilling to take any invaders , muslims especially Coyote !!

 

[Coyote]

what jewish men "back to Europe......"? the US was not grabbing up jewish familes during world war II to save them from adolf in Germany or Poland, or Italy or Holland or Hungary ...... what are you talking about????

Exactly that.

Same thing now, as then.

not at all the same--------EVERYONE was saying "NO" to jews back then -----
now there are DOZENS of muslim countries which are EAGER to EMBRACE their own-------all over the world------the USA should take the christians

Very much the same. We have one of the worst humanitarian disasters going on now on a scale we haven't seen since the Holocaust. And the US has only taken what...1800? Smaller and poorer countries - Germany, France, Sweden, Lebenon, Turkey, Jordan have taken enourmous numbers. And the rhetoric? The same, only instead of commies it's islamists.

CAIR wants as many muslims here as possible. There are rich, empty, Arab muslim countries. They should take their brothers.We can take some of the Christians

HUGE AMOUNTS of empty land over there-----COUNTRIES can be invented

The lands are "empty" for a reason. They can't support huge populations. But aside from that - the Gulf states could certainly do a lot more then they've been doing, which is dumping the burden on Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Lebenon.

 

[Gracie]

Funny...those who would send refugees back are most likely themselves the products of refugees fleeing political, religious or cultureral persecution in other lands.

Funny...those who want refugees..even healthy capable men, to come here probably will not offer them sanctuary in their own home for awhile.

I would offer a family sanctuarly.

So would I. But not with a healthy capable male sucking off me and my generocity. His family would be safe. HE can stay there and FIGHT.

I wouldn't send anyone back to likely death unless he chose. I don't know what you mean by sucking off you but most refugee resettlement programs include finding jobs, etc.

They would be under my roof, eating food I supply, etc. Women, children I would help until someone helped me help them. Healthy adult males can be MEN and fight like ours do.