The Obvious Question Is -- WHY??

[MikeK]

They're doing almost nothing to help them. Just allowing people into the country sets up exactly what is happening. The refugees ended up in a shanty town, with nothing but what they arrived with, unable to speak the language, unfamiliar with the customs or way of life, and no idea of where or how to find work.

And you're saying letting these people in has been a disaster. Who'd a thunk it???

When you let in thousands of people, they need housing, and assistance with everything from opening bank accounts to shopping in a supermarket.

Okay.

What were they promised? Is every one of those we've watched destroying everything in sight a legitimate asylum-seeking Syrian refugee, meaning he would have been killed if not afforded a place to escape inevitable death? How many women and children do you see? Are there no woman and child refugees? What you see are young, healthy, military-age male invaders.

Even if every one of them are (which very few of them are) legitimate Syrian refugees (seeking refuge from certain death) who told them they are entitled to bank accounts, super-market shopping, shelter, etc. Do you know how many citizen Frenchmen (and women) are homeless and destitute?

The vast majority of these young men are not Syrian. They are malcontents from all over the Middle East who have been advised by ISIS recruiters to enter Europe and take advantage of available social programs. They travel around like Gypsies to Germany, to France, to England, and wherever they can find a place to flop. They are itinerant vagrants. So far the only place in Europe where they are not permitted to invade is Poland. The Poles kick them out -- which is what the French should do.

This conflict with Middle-Eastern men (you see no women) has been going on for centuries. The conflicts have been called Crusades. And I believe what we see happening today is the first stage of the Tenth Crusade.

 

[MACAULAY]

Well, one of the possibilities is that there hasn't been a Frenchman with a set of balls, except Napoleon---and he was a Corsican---since the Normans left to go take over England in 1066.

The Muslim Barbarians will be running the place in 20 years. They would already be speaking German if America hadn't saved their chicken-shit asses twice in the last century.

 

[Dragonlady]

They're doing almost nothing to help them. Just allowing people into the country sets up exactly what is happening. The refugees ended up in a shanty town, with nothing but what they arrived with, unable to speak the language, unfamiliar with the customs or way of life, and no idea of where or how to find work.

And you're saying letting these people in has been a disaster. Who'd a thunk it???

When you let in thousands of people, they need housing, and assistance with everything from opening bank accounts to shopping in a supermarket.

Okay.

What were they promised? Is every one of those we've watched destroying everything in sight a legitimate asylum-seeking Syrian refugee, meaning he would have been killed if not afforded a place to escape inevitable death? How many women and children do you see? Are there no woman and child refugees? What you see are young, healthy, military-age male invaders.

Even if every one of them are (which very few of them are) legitimate Syrian refugees (seeking refuge from certain death) who told them they are entitled to bank accounts, super-market shopping, shelter, etc. Do you know how many citizen Frenchmen (and women) are homeless and destitute?

The vast majority of these young men are not Syrian. They are malcontents from all over the Middle East who have been advised by ISIS recruiters to enter Europe and take advantage of available social programs. They travel around like Gypsies to Germany, to France, to England, and wherever they can find a place to flop. They are itinerant vagrants. So far the only place in Europe where they are not permitted to invade is Poland. The Poles kick them out -- which is what the French should do.

This conflict with Middle-Eastern men (you see no women) has been going on for centuries. The conflicts have been called Crusades. And I believe what we see happening today is the first stage of the Tenth Crusade.

By what right do they shop in supermarkets? Where else would they get food in the West?

How well would you do if dropped off in the middle of Kabul, with nothing but the clothes on your back?

 

[MikeK]

Actually, that desire to kill instead of live with, make peace with - that's pretty much the cause of all problems.

Not all. Some, perhaps. But it's the solution to just as many if not more problems. It all depends on the nature of the problem.

Initiating violence is provocatively problematic. Responding to violence, such as seen in the videos, is perfectly reasonable. Who do these sonsabitches think they are to just walk into the French nation and behave this way? They deserve to be summarily killed.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

After a week and a half of living next door to these people, I'm starting to sympathize with the muslims.

 

[MikeK]

After a week and a half of living next door to these people, I'm starting to sympathize with the muslims.

Describe these people and tell us specifically what they do that you don't like.

 

[MikeK]

By what right do they shop in supermarkets? Where else would they get food in the West?

How well would you do if dropped off in the middle of Kabul, with nothing but the clothes on your back?

The first thing you need to consider is why they are there.

When I first heard about a Muslim refugee crisis the rhetoric was accompanied with photos of frightened women and a lot of really cute kids. The story was these are defenseless Syrians who are being oppressed by one side of the conflict or other and if they can't find a safe place to hide they will be slaughtered. I admittedly was swayed by that presentation and I would have voted in favor of affording refugee status, including basic support.

Then the migration began and all I saw were miles-long marching columns and rubber boatloads of almost exclusively strong, healthy, military-age men -- almost no women, children, or seniors. The immediate question that came to mind is why aren't these strong young men fighting, dying if need-be, to defend their families and themselves against the oppressors instead of high-tailing and looking for charitable concession in some Western nation?

What I have learned since then is very few of these so-called asylum-seeking refugees are in fact Syrian. Instead they are malcontents from all over the Middle East and Africa who have been coached by ISIS recruiters to infiltrate the West, drain its resources, establish internal colonies, obtain weapons, make bombs (they will be taught how), find their way around -- and wait.

That is exactly what these bastards are doing. These occasional terrorist attacks and riotous events, such as we've seen in France, Germany, England, and right here to some incipient extent, are relatively small examples of what we soon will be seeing if something radical isn't done about these infiltrators.

I am old enough to recall how peaceful, productive Japanese/American citizens,who had done absolutely nothing to suggest they were disloyal, were rounded up by soldiers and placed in "internment" camps immediately after the Pearl Harbor attack.

But now, having endured the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, which was just as destructive and was closer to home than Pearl Harbor, and having witnessed the violent potential of Muslims -- many of whom openly demonstrate their hatred for all "infidels," instead of taking effective defensive action to defend ourselves against this clearly dangerous foreign element, this virtual army of aggressive, violence-prone infiltrators, a substantial percentage of Americans are asking why we are not doing more to help them establish themselves as an internal threat to the security of this Nation.

They want Welfare and food-stamps for foreign invaders -- tomorrow's bombers, rapists, and rioters.