Republicans, Refugees and the Hysterical Politics of Fear

It's funny how The Right castigates The Left for being all about "fweewings" when utterly shameful crap like this is going on. Fear is a "feeling" too and like many feelings not always rational.

Republicans' anti-refugee rhetoric is shameful and despicable — and probably good politics

As I write this, 26 Republican governors (and one Democrat) have said publicly that they oppose bringing Syrian refugees to their states, with most saying they'd refuse to accept them; by the time you read this, the other five Republican governors may have made similar statements. Meanwhile, every major GOP presidential candidate has come out against bringing Syrian refugees here, and Ted Cruz has introduced a bill to bar any Syrian refugees from settling in the United States.

This hurricane of xenophobia and cynical opportunism makes for a truly odious display. But sadly, it's also good politics for Republicans, at least in the short term.
Yes...politics is certainly playing a big part. Let's analyze the reality. :desk:

Before we go any farther, we should acknowledge a simple fact: If you're concerned about stopping ISIS from committing an act of terrorism in the United States, the 10,000 Syrian refugees who will be admitted after a rigorous vetting process is one of the last things you should be worried about. It's possible (though far from necessary) for a member of ISIS to get to Europe by posing as a refugee, since large numbers of Syrians are somewhat chaotically making their way to places like Greece, and once they're on European soil they can move freely between countries. But the process of getting to the United States as a refugee is completely different.

Rightwing Histrionic#1 -- we don't know who they are!!!! they could be anyone!!! they aren't vetted well!!!!!
panic.gif


The vetting process is far more extensive for a refugee coming in than it is for, say, someone with a tourist visa. It can take upwards of 2 years before they are admitted.

4 Things To Know About The Vetting Process For Syrian Refugees

Refugees are screened by several different agencies
Their first point of a refugee's contact is with the U.N. High Commission for Refugees. The UNHCR refers people to countries based on whether they have any family members there and where resettlement makes the most sense, say U.S. officials. If that's the U.S., then refugees are vetted by the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, and the Departments of State, Defense and Homeland Security. Fingerprints are taken, biographical information is collected. They are then each individually interviewed by U.S. officials trained to verify that they're bona fide refugees.

Refugees from Syria are then subject to additional screening that looks at where they came from and what caused them to flee their home, stories that are checked out. All of this occurs before a refugee is allowed to set foot in the country.

It's a lengthy process

As you might imagine, all of the vetting, from interviews to fingerprinting, takes a while. On average, officials say it's 18 to 24 months before a refugee is approved for admission to the U.S...

Histrionic #2: why should we be paying for them when we got xyz homeless people and people in poverty? (this one was a shocker to hear because it's the first time I've heard any concern from the Republicans for the welfare of homeless people and their actions in cutting programs demonizing the poor as parasites indicate quite the opposite).:crybaby:

Physical resettlement
There are nine different nonprofit groups, six of them faith-based, that help refugees settle in the U.S. Volunteers with the groups help refugees find homes, furniture, school supplies and jobs.

Oops...looks like you don't have to pay for it unless you want to, people volunteer because they feel it's the right thing to do - another faux objection.

Histrionic #3:
omg omg a refugee disappeared in Louisiana...no one knows where he is!!!!!!! We've got to stop taking Syrian refugees!!!!!
panic-smiley.gif


Reality check: umh...no...he was never missing.

Catholic Charities: One Syrian immigrant briefly settled in Baton Rouge before moving; he never went missing
Baton Rouge received one Syrian refugee over the summer, a man Catholic Charities helped for a few days before he left to meet family in another state.


Catholic Charities said Tuesday the man is the only Syrian refugee they have helped recently, and Louisiana State Police confirmed he had left Baton Rouge for Washington, D.C.


But the news of that one man set off a flood of phone calls Tuesday to the organization, especially from misinformation that made some people believe the man had gone missing, Catholic Charities Executive Director David Aguillard said.


One caller even made several threats while on the phone with Catholic Charities, especially against Syrian refugees. State Police said they are investigating the threats and take them seriously.


Now IS there a need for concern? Some, but far less than the hysteria demands.

Objections of governors and members of Congress

Some officials, including FBI Director James Comey, worry there are what Comey has called "gaps" in the vetting process. Experts say U.S. intelligence in Syria isn't very good, because the U.S. lacks much of a presence on the ground. So there's no way to compile a thorough watch list of possible terrorists from Syria against which refugees can be checked. Administration officials are briefing governors and members of Congress about the process, but lawmakers may try to pass legislation calling on the administration to suspend its refugee resettlement efforts.


The groups most responsible for helping refugees - whether they are Burmese, Somali, or Syrian are often our religious institutions and other non-profit charities. Kudos to them, for they are struggling to keep our nation's moral compass pointed in the right direction. When all those Central American children were flooding the border, they had the courage to take them in and help them while the wingnuts picketed their bus and yelled slurs.

Christian groups break with GOP over Syrian refugees
Faith-based groups, who play a key role in resettling refugees to the United States, say they are dismayed by the wave of anti-refugee fervor set off by the Paris terrorist attacks and are urging supporters to contact elected officials on behalf of victims of the Syrian civil war.

Evangelical Christians, as well as Christians more broadly, are a core group in the Republican electoral base and are among the most passionate advocates for aiding refugees.

A push by Republican presidential candidates to ban Syrian refugees "does not reflect what we've been hearing from our constituencies, which are evangelical churches across the country," said Jenny Yang, vice president for advocacy at World Relief, an evangelical organization that helps resettle refugees. "Most of the people have been saying we want to continue to work with refugees, that what happened in Paris ... doesn’t reflect who refugees are."
Yep....the UN is very trustworthy.....:disagree:....phfffffft!!
 
Of course it's "based on outside data", and our government has not "admitted" anything close to that.

read post # 41
Maybe you should watch a few of the hearings on c-span because they did.

No, they didn't - no matter what WND claims in their headlines. A lack of Syrian governmental computer databases does not mean that "they have no outside information". You do realize that we have the largest intelligence network in the world, right?


WND is just reporting what was said at the hearings.
In a blistering cross-examination of officials responsible for the U.S. refugee resettlement program, it was revealed at a Senate hearing Thursday that more than 90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved despite very little data being available to check for security risks.
Read more at Feds admit: ‘We have no outside data’ on Syrian refugees

No, that's just WND making shit up. Seriously, read the article. At no point during testimony did any representative of the US government say "90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved".

That is not what it said.
It said 90% gets approved despite very little data being available.

That's what WND says, not what "the government" said.
 
ISIS has claimed that the next attack will be on Washington DC. Oh well. No use sitting around being afraid. Let it happen.

France just stopped the next one last night. But you go right ahead and keep believing in ISIS.
They only took down the same cell that carried out the Friday night attacks......dumb-fuck.

There are still others out there.


What will you do when some of these fuckers end an NFL game when several assholes wearing bomb vests blow themselves up?
Claim it's just a setback?
 
read post # 41
Maybe you should watch a few of the hearings on c-span because they did.

No, they didn't - no matter what WND claims in their headlines. A lack of Syrian governmental computer databases does not mean that "they have no outside information". You do realize that we have the largest intelligence network in the world, right?


WND is just reporting what was said at the hearings.
In a blistering cross-examination of officials responsible for the U.S. refugee resettlement program, it was revealed at a Senate hearing Thursday that more than 90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved despite very little data being available to check for security risks.
Read more at Feds admit: ‘We have no outside data’ on Syrian refugees

No, that's just WND making shit up. Seriously, read the article. At no point during testimony did any representative of the US government say "90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved".

That is not what it said.
It said 90% gets approved despite very little data being available.

That's what WND says, not what "the government" said.

It is what was said at the hearing.
 
Unlike refugees of the past, the ones from Syria are militant Muslims. Syria has a long history of terrorism directed against Israel and the West and a demonstratable hatred of the non-Muslim world. Yet we're expected to forget about that and welcome them inside our borders because their own government tried to kill them? Have you asked yourself why they're refugees from their own government? Maybe because they were a violent threat?


The US refused access to European Jews, most particularly East European from Axis states because they were considered "undesirables" and a conduit for infiltrators. The argument against Syrian refugees is much the same.

Their own government is Assad. Assad is not exactly a model ruler but the latest in the line of ruthless dictators with horrendous human rights abuse record, intolerance of any political dissidents. Maybe that is why his people rose up and why he is indiscriminantly slaughtering them and turning them into refugees. The other "government" at play is ISIS from which refugees are also fleeing.

Difference being exclusion of Jewish refugees was born out of bigotry and hypotheticals. There really are terrorists among Syrians.

No...not really.

Was there bigotry? You bet. Just like with the Syrians.

Could there have been infiltrators amongst them? Yes, there could have and probably were a few. There were brave journalists who smuggled themselves into Nazi Germany. What makes you think the reverse wouldn't happen? There didn't exist the instant media and electronic communications then that we have now. But I'm sure the fear then was just as real as the fear now and just as "valid".

Bigotry is irrational hatred of people or groups. Hating Syrian refugees almost certainly including infiltrators isn't irrational, just prudent. Don't think anyone credible hates all the Syrians just because they're Syrian, know I don't, and I wish we could welcome them with open arms. But there are confirmed ISIS terrorists among them. Only way to ensure they don't get in is exclude them all. Sucks, but that's wartime reality.
 
No, they didn't - no matter what WND claims in their headlines. A lack of Syrian governmental computer databases does not mean that "they have no outside information". You do realize that we have the largest intelligence network in the world, right?


WND is just reporting what was said at the hearings.
In a blistering cross-examination of officials responsible for the U.S. refugee resettlement program, it was revealed at a Senate hearing Thursday that more than 90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved despite very little data being available to check for security risks.
Read more at Feds admit: ‘We have no outside data’ on Syrian refugees

No, that's just WND making shit up. Seriously, read the article. At no point during testimony did any representative of the US government say "90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved".

That is not what it said.
It said 90% gets approved despite very little data being available.

That's what WND says, not what "the government" said.

It is what was said at the hearing.

Not according to your own link. Do you have a quote?
 
Unlike refugees of the past, the ones from Syria are militant Muslims. Syria has a long history of terrorism directed against Israel and the West and a demonstratable hatred of the non-Muslim world. Yet we're expected to forget about that and welcome them inside our borders because their own government tried to kill them? Have you asked yourself why they're refugees from their own government? Maybe because they were a violent threat?


The US refused access to European Jews, most particularly East European from Axis states because they were considered "undesirables" and a conduit for infiltrators. The argument against Syrian refugees is much the same.

Their own government is Assad. Assad is not exactly a model ruler but the latest in the line of ruthless dictators with horrendous human rights abuse record, intolerance of any political dissidents. Maybe that is why his people rose up and why he is indiscriminantly slaughtering them and turning them into refugees. The other "government" at play is ISIS from which refugees are also fleeing.

Difference being exclusion of Jewish refugees was born out of bigotry and hypotheticals. There really are terrorists among Syrians.

No...not really.

Was there bigotry? You bet. Just like with the Syrians.

Could there have been infiltrators amongst them? Yes, there could have and probably were a few. There were brave journalists who smuggled themselves into Nazi Germany. What makes you think the reverse wouldn't happen? There didn't exist the instant media and electronic communications then that we have now. But I'm sure the fear then was just as real as the fear now and just as "valid".

Bigotry is irrational hatred of people or groups. Hating Syrian refugees almost certainly including infiltrators isn't irrational, just prudent. Don't think anyone credible hates all the Syrians just because they're Syrian, know I don't, and I wish we could welcome them with open arms. But there are confirmed ISIS terrorists among them. Only way to ensure they don't get in is exclude them all. Sucks, but that's wartime reality.

:lol:

Hatred is never "rational". You sound like Goebbels talking about Jews.
 
Liberals defend this stupidity with the same arguments they always use.

We're all bigots and we are a bunch of Chicken-Littles.

I've learned that it's better to be safe than sorry.

Other arrangements need to be made for this Syrians. They don't have to come here. They can move in with their other Sunni brothers in the Middle-East.....not come all the way over here and suffer through massive culture shock.

The only reason they're coming here is because the Democrats want them here so they can increase the population of their states with brown people. Then when the next census is done....they're counted.....and Blue States will have even more electoral college votes....thanks to the massive influx of refugees from countries that hate our fucken guts.
 
The vetting process is not based on the answers they give.

It's not based on outside data either, admitted by our own government, which it should be.

Of course it's "based on outside data", and our government has not "admitted" anything close to that.

read post # 41
Maybe you should watch a few of the hearings on c-span because they did.

No, they didn't - no matter what WND claims in their headlines. A lack of Syrian governmental computer databases does not mean that "they have no outside information". You do realize that we have the largest intelligence network in the world, right?


The same intelligence network that said there was WMD's in Iraq?
U.S. Intelligence on WMDs in Iraq

from your link.

"One senator, Bob Graham of Florida, then chairman of the intelligence committee, has said that reading the full, classified 2002 NIE led him to vote against the war resolution. He had urged his colleagues to read the entire 92-page classified report prior to the vote. Graham said in a National Public Radio interview in June 2007 that he found the report to be "pocked with dissent, conditions, [and] minority opinions on a variety of critical issues."
 
WND is just reporting what was said at the hearings.
In a blistering cross-examination of officials responsible for the U.S. refugee resettlement program, it was revealed at a Senate hearing Thursday that more than 90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved despite very little data being available to check for security risks.
Read more at Feds admit: ‘We have no outside data’ on Syrian refugees

No, that's just WND making shit up. Seriously, read the article. At no point during testimony did any representative of the US government say "90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved".

That is not what it said.
It said 90% gets approved despite very little data being available.

That's what WND says, not what "the government" said.

It is what was said at the hearing.

Not according to your own link. Do you have a quote?

You are the one who is misreading what is being said.
It is not "90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved".[/QUOTE]

It's "90% who are getting approved are not based on real outside data".
 
Unlike refugees of the past, the ones from Syria are militant Muslims. Syria has a long history of terrorism directed against Israel and the West and a demonstratable hatred of the non-Muslim world. Yet we're expected to forget about that and welcome them inside our borders because their own government tried to kill them? Have you asked yourself why they're refugees from their own government? Maybe because they were a violent threat?


The US refused access to European Jews, most particularly East European from Axis states because they were considered "undesirables" and a conduit for infiltrators. The argument against Syrian refugees is much the same.

Their own government is Assad. Assad is not exactly a model ruler but the latest in the line of ruthless dictators with horrendous human rights abuse record, intolerance of any political dissidents. Maybe that is why his people rose up and why he is indiscriminantly slaughtering them and turning them into refugees. The other "government" at play is ISIS from which refugees are also fleeing.

Alas, there was never an "Arab Spring". That was just a cover for Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey to depose Assad and install the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

Assad rightly pointed out from the beginning that those countries with the aid of America and other foolish western countries were funding and giving weaponry to mercenaries/terrorists errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rebels.

The money and the weapons were being smuggled into Syria by the MB. Foreign fighters came into the country in droves.

Heck, ISIS main military man is Omar al Shishani is Chechen.
 
Liberals defend this stupidity with the same arguments they always use.

We're all bigots and we are a bunch of Chicken-Littles.

I've learned that it's better to be safe than sorry.

Other arrangements need to be made for this Syrians. They don't have to come here. They can move in with their other Sunni brothers in the Middle-East.....not come all the way over here and suffer through massive culture shock.

The only reason they're coming here is because the Democrats want them here so they can increase the population of their states with brown people. Then when the next census is done....they're counted.....and Blue States will have even more electoral college votes....thanks to the massive influx of refugees from countries that hate our fucken guts.

You're a thousand times more likely to die by being hit by a car in a random accident than you are to be killed by Muslim extremists in the US.

Better never leave your house - after all, it's better to be safe than sorry.
 
It's funny how The Right castigates The Left for being all about "fweewings" when utterly shameful crap like this is going on. Fear is a "feeling" too and like many feelings not always rational.

Republicans' anti-refugee rhetoric is shameful and despicable — and probably good politics

As I write this, 26 Republican governors (and one Democrat) have said publicly that they oppose bringing Syrian refugees to their states, with most saying they'd refuse to accept them; by the time you read this, the other five Republican governors may have made similar statements. Meanwhile, every major GOP presidential candidate has come out against bringing Syrian refugees here, and Ted Cruz has introduced a bill to bar any Syrian refugees from settling in the United States.

This hurricane of xenophobia and cynical opportunism makes for a truly odious display. But sadly, it's also good politics for Republicans, at least in the short term.
Yes...politics is certainly playing a big part. Let's analyze the reality. :desk:

Before we go any farther, we should acknowledge a simple fact: If you're concerned about stopping ISIS from committing an act of terrorism in the United States, the 10,000 Syrian refugees who will be admitted after a rigorous vetting process is one of the last things you should be worried about. It's possible (though far from necessary) for a member of ISIS to get to Europe by posing as a refugee, since large numbers of Syrians are somewhat chaotically making their way to places like Greece, and once they're on European soil they can move freely between countries. But the process of getting to the United States as a refugee is completely different.

Rightwing Histrionic#1 -- we don't know who they are!!!! they could be anyone!!! they aren't vetted well!!!!!
panic.gif


The vetting process is far more extensive for a refugee coming in than it is for, say, someone with a tourist visa. It can take upwards of 2 years before they are admitted.

4 Things To Know About The Vetting Process For Syrian Refugees

Refugees are screened by several different agencies
Their first point of a refugee's contact is with the U.N. High Commission for Refugees. The UNHCR refers people to countries based on whether they have any family members there and where resettlement makes the most sense, say U.S. officials. If that's the U.S., then refugees are vetted by the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, and the Departments of State, Defense and Homeland Security. Fingerprints are taken, biographical information is collected. They are then each individually interviewed by U.S. officials trained to verify that they're bona fide refugees.

Refugees from Syria are then subject to additional screening that looks at where they came from and what caused them to flee their home, stories that are checked out. All of this occurs before a refugee is allowed to set foot in the country.

It's a lengthy process

As you might imagine, all of the vetting, from interviews to fingerprinting, takes a while. On average, officials say it's 18 to 24 months before a refugee is approved for admission to the U.S...

Histrionic #2: why should we be paying for them when we got xyz homeless people and people in poverty? (this one was a shocker to hear because it's the first time I've heard any concern from the Republicans for the welfare of homeless people and their actions in cutting programs demonizing the poor as parasites indicate quite the opposite).:crybaby:

Physical resettlement
There are nine different nonprofit groups, six of them faith-based, that help refugees settle in the U.S. Volunteers with the groups help refugees find homes, furniture, school supplies and jobs.

Oops...looks like you don't have to pay for it unless you want to, people volunteer because they feel it's the right thing to do - another faux objection.

Histrionic #3:
omg omg a refugee disappeared in Louisiana...no one knows where he is!!!!!!! We've got to stop taking Syrian refugees!!!!!
panic-smiley.gif


Reality check: umh...no...he was never missing.

Catholic Charities: One Syrian immigrant briefly settled in Baton Rouge before moving; he never went missing
Baton Rouge received one Syrian refugee over the summer, a man Catholic Charities helped for a few days before he left to meet family in another state.


Catholic Charities said Tuesday the man is the only Syrian refugee they have helped recently, and Louisiana State Police confirmed he had left Baton Rouge for Washington, D.C.


But the news of that one man set off a flood of phone calls Tuesday to the organization, especially from misinformation that made some people believe the man had gone missing, Catholic Charities Executive Director David Aguillard said.


One caller even made several threats while on the phone with Catholic Charities, especially against Syrian refugees. State Police said they are investigating the threats and take them seriously.


Now IS there a need for concern? Some, but far less than the hysteria demands.

Objections of governors and members of Congress

Some officials, including FBI Director James Comey, worry there are what Comey has called "gaps" in the vetting process. Experts say U.S. intelligence in Syria isn't very good, because the U.S. lacks much of a presence on the ground. So there's no way to compile a thorough watch list of possible terrorists from Syria against which refugees can be checked. Administration officials are briefing governors and members of Congress about the process, but lawmakers may try to pass legislation calling on the administration to suspend its refugee resettlement efforts.


The groups most responsible for helping refugees - whether they are Burmese, Somali, or Syrian are often our religious institutions and other non-profit charities. Kudos to them, for they are struggling to keep our nation's moral compass pointed in the right direction. When all those Central American children were flooding the border, they had the courage to take them in and help them while the wingnuts picketed their bus and yelled slurs.

Christian groups break with GOP over Syrian refugees
Faith-based groups, who play a key role in resettling refugees to the United States, say they are dismayed by the wave of anti-refugee fervor set off by the Paris terrorist attacks and are urging supporters to contact elected officials on behalf of victims of the Syrian civil war.

Evangelical Christians, as well as Christians more broadly, are a core group in the Republican electoral base and are among the most passionate advocates for aiding refugees.

A push by Republican presidential candidates to ban Syrian refugees "does not reflect what we've been hearing from our constituencies, which are evangelical churches across the country," said Jenny Yang, vice president for advocacy at World Relief, an evangelical organization that helps resettle refugees. "Most of the people have been saying we want to continue to work with refugees, that what happened in Paris ... doesn’t reflect who refugees are."

The Islamophobic GOP hypocrites are expressing their so-called Christian values - proving that America is NOT really a Christian nation. Apparently irrational fear overrides what little Christian kindness they have.
 
No, that's just WND making shit up. Seriously, read the article. At no point during testimony did any representative of the US government say "90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved".

That is not what it said.
It said 90% gets approved despite very little data being available.

That's what WND says, not what "the government" said.

It is what was said at the hearing.

Not according to your own link. Do you have a quote?

You are the one who is misreading what is being said.
It is not "90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved".

It's "90% who are getting approved are not based on real outside data".

I'm not misreading anything. Did you find that quote yet?
 
That is not what it said.
It said 90% gets approved despite very little data being available.

That's what WND says, not what "the government" said.

It is what was said at the hearing.

Not according to your own link. Do you have a quote?

You are the one who is misreading what is being said.
It is not "90 percent of Syrians who apply for refugee status get approved".

It's "90% who are getting approved are not based on real outside data".

I'm not misreading anything. Did you find that quote yet?

Yes you are.
 
ISIS has claimed that the next attack will be on Washington DC. Oh well. No use sitting around being afraid. Let it happen.

France just stopped the next one last night. But you go right ahead and keep believing in ISIS.
They only took down the same cell that carried out the Friday night attacks......dumb-fuck.

There are still others out there.


What will you do when some of these fuckers end an NFL game when several assholes wearing bomb vests blow themselves up?
Claim it's just a setback?

They were planning another attack. Every pro game I've been to since 911 had metal detectors and searches. Limited carry in too. They might get some folks in the parking lots. But not to worry, the fuckers have plenty of soft targets elsewhere in America to attack. A dedicated group of suicide bombers can can cause much damage, but each can only do one show.......
 
Liberals defend this stupidity with the same arguments they always use.

We're all bigots and we are a bunch of Chicken-Littles.

I've learned that it's better to be safe than sorry.

Other arrangements need to be made for this Syrians. They don't have to come here. They can move in with their other Sunni brothers in the Middle-East.....not come all the way over here and suffer through massive culture shock.

The only reason they're coming here is because the Democrats want them here so they can increase the population of their states with brown people. Then when the next census is done....they're counted.....and Blue States will have even more electoral college votes....thanks to the massive influx of refugees from countries that hate our fucken guts.

You're a thousand times more likely to die by being hit by a car in a random accident than you are to be killed by Muslim extremists in the US.

Better never leave your house - after all, it's better to be safe than sorry.
Not a very good rationalization.
Death isn't the worst effect of terrorism in America.....or didn't you know that already?

I've been in harm's way often enough to know what fear of constant attack can do to our way of life. Extra security, being inconvenienced constantly because of having to worry about some dumb-fuck wanting to kill us. If we have any attacks like the ones in Paris, the economy practically comes to a halt. Remember what happened after 9/11? The entire aviation industry stopped. No planes could fly.

I really have issues with what are normally rational people poo pooing this shit off like it's inconsequential, but hearing their wails when somebody blows away a bunch of school kids....or some friggen thug gets smoked by a cop trying to do his job.

I just can't grasp the stupidity of that fact.
 
Why do we want people who bomb, maim, kill, terrorize, rape, injure in this country?

We don't. So let's let the people who want to get away from the the bombers and maimers and killers either die or be forced into service for the bombers, maimers and killers. That work for you?

I can see a lot of helpless people being turned away from safety and just saying, "يمارس الجنس مع ذلك انا ذاهب الى الوراء و الانضمام"

Translation: "Fuck them, I'm just going to go back and join ISIS!"
 
Last edited:
The problem with your speel here is that it is not only Republican governors that are opposed to allowing the refugees in, there are also Democrat governors who are opposed. Perhaps you might attempt a little honesty here. It's the American people who are opposed to Obama's policies, Stupid. Obama is handing Donald Trump the 2016 Presidential election.

Only one of them is a Democrat. Nice try though.

Out of 57! Day-yum!
 
ISIS has claimed that the next attack will be on Washington DC. Oh well. No use sitting around being afraid. Let it happen.

France just stopped the next one last night. But you go right ahead and keep believing in ISIS.
They only took down the same cell that carried out the Friday night attacks......dumb-fuck.

There are still others out there.


What will you do when some of these fuckers end an NFL game when several assholes wearing bomb vests blow themselves up?
Claim it's just a setback?

They were planning another attack. Every pro game I've been to since 911 had metal detectors and searches. Limited carry in too. They might get some folks in the parking lots. But not to worry, the fuckers have plenty of soft targets elsewhere in America to attack. A dedicated group of suicide bombers can can cause much damage, but each can only do one show.......
I'd prefer that do that in their own country.....not this one.

Or do you think we shouldn't miss out on the constant threat of terrorism?

Maybe you think we deserve this?

I have a softball bat for anyone who believes that stupid shit.
 

Forum List

Back
Top