What Exactly Is "Hysterical Fear" After Muslim Terrorist Attacks in Paris and Mali?

[ChrisL]

I keep hearing this birdie whispering in my ear that's saying,''hold your head up high, and don't continue to let the terrorists change you and your Country's values of helping those in need, your freedom, your life as it once was....don't let them scare you, if you do, the terrorists win... by terrorizing you''.

Strong screening is needed, but we should not let the terrorist's terror, make us in to pussies...if we do, then they win....

Do we really want that...???

Pussies? How? Our focus should be on helping those in our own country and making our country a better place. Unless those immigrants have something to offer, there is no logical reason for us to take them in. Being anti-immigration isn't just about fear. It's about realizing that our resources are limited, and we have people here in our own country who need help.

but we don't take in refugees because they are suppose to HELP US, we have always helped refugees since our inception........ to help THEM, to help them escape death, in many cases.

That's not always practical for us to do. Especially nowadays. Back in the old days, we needed people to help build the country, etc. There are a lot of jobless people here, a lot of homeless people people, veterans who are basically ignored, etc. Those are the people we NEED to be concerned with. We need to get our priorities straight. The economy is NOT doing well in spite of what our president and his cabinet members might tell us. That is the reason why at least 35% of the population is currently receiving some form of social service support. There are just not enough jobs (good ones) for everyone. There needs to be a balance between those working and those collecting social services or the whole system will collapse!

I have no problem with congress actually working on and passing immigration reforms that suit the Country for today's honest needs....and there should be no reason for the parties to make this political, it should be worked on together, for the best interest of the Nation.

That's NOT what is happening in this fear mongering frenzy....it is knee jerk political posturing pussy-ism that stands out the most and it's embarrassing.

This isn't about immigration reform, which is what you are concerned with.... not from my view or those viewing us.

EDIT ADDITION
BTW I have no problem with giving extra scrutiny on who we take in as refugees from Syria, and turning those away that don't meet muster, in light of the Paris attacks....and regardless of what the blogs are presumptuously reporting to get everyone in to a frenzy,

it serves no purpose for our gvt to be lackadaisical and foolish in their screenings... or to claim that they are....other than political posturing, imo.

So what fear mongering are you referring to? The things Trump has been saying about registering Muslims? I'm just wondering.

 

[mikegriffith1]

A lot of people are confusing the refugees that are being sent here with those that are flooding into Europe. Those entering Europe are not being screened before they enter. It is mass migration using whatever means available. It sometimes resembles the exodus of Cubans and Haitians, in that anything that floats is used. The Syrians coming here are mostly from refugee camps, where they have spent the last 2 - 3 years being screened and processed. While it is possible that terrorists are posing as people fleeing the violence, I think it's a lot less likely than the rhetoric from a few organizations and individuals would have you believe. There are much faster and easier ways to enter the United States, to say nothing of radicalizing people already here. The SAFE Act might catch some people IF they were to make it through the process undetected (none have so far), but it really doesn't add that much more scrutiny to the sufficient (to date) measures already in place. It just requires a unanimous approval from the heads of the FBI, DHS, and Director of National Intelligence.

One, our own FBI chief says we cannot properly screen those Syrian refugees.

Two, you are ignoring the fact that terrorists have repeatedly been recruited from among Muslim immigrants/refugees. That's because many average Muslims agree with extremist Muslims on a number of issues, and because quite a few average Muslims sympathize with ISIS and Al Qaeda.

You guys keep dancing around the incontrovertible fact that we know from recent history that the more Muslims a Christian/secular/pro-Western country has, the more likely it is that that country will suffer terrorist attacks. That is just reality. And given that reality, it is only sane and rational, and prudent, to either stop allowing Muslims to enter this country for the foreseeable future or to greatly toughen the screening process and to maintain some kind of surveillance of them for a time after they are allowed to enter.

 

[ChrisL]

A lot of people are confusing the refugees that are being sent here with those that are flooding into Europe. Those entering Europe are not being screened before they enter. It is mass migration using whatever means available. It sometimes resembles the exodus of Cubans and Haitians, in that anything that floats is used. The Syrians coming here are mostly from refugee camps, where they have spent the last 2 - 3 years being screened and processed. While it is possible that terrorists are posing as people fleeing the violence, I think it's a lot less likely than the rhetoric from a few organizations and individuals would have you believe. There are much faster and easier ways to enter the United States, to say nothing of radicalizing people already here. The SAFE Act might catch some people IF they were to make it through the process undetected (none have so far), but it really doesn't add that much more scrutiny to the sufficient (to date) measures already in place. It just requires a unanimous approval from the heads of the FBI, DHS, and Director of National Intelligence.

One, our own FBI chief says we cannot properly screen those Syrian refugees.

Two, you are ignoring the fact that terrorists have repeatedly been recruited from among Muslim immigrants/refugees. That's because many average Muslims agree with extremist Muslims on a number of issues, and because quite a few average Muslims sympathize with ISIS and Al Qaeda.

You guys keep dancing around the incontrovertible fact that we know from recent history that the more Muslims a Christian/secular/pro-Western country has, the more likely it is that that country will suffer terrorist attacks. That is just reality. And given that reality, it is only sane and rational, and prudent, to either stop allowing Muslims to enter this country for the foreseeable future or to greatly toughen the screening process and to maintain some kind of surveillance of them for a time after they are allowed to enter.

I don't think that sounds unreasonable at all. I don't know why people are so freaked out about it. Given the circumstances, it is the smart thing to do, IMO.

 

[Redfish]

Sadly, even if the USA is hit again and americans are killed, the dem/libs will continue to pretend that radical Islamic terrorism does not exist.

Its a form of insanity that only liberals exhibit. Denial of reality if the reality does not fit their fantasy filled ideology.

Nobody is saying radical terrorists who are Islamic don't exist. We just aren't willing to blame every person who shares that religion. Islam isn't our enemy. Terrorists who use Islam for an excuse for their evil actions are the enemy. All religions have fanatics who use their religion for vile actions.
Should all Christians be blamed for killing abortion doctors? It work the same way.

No one has said that we should declare a religious war on Islam. NO ONE. But when obozo and the hildebeast refuse to use the correct words to describe the enemy, it only makes the enemy stronger.

Your point would be more valid if the "good muslims" would rise up and declare a war on the "bad muslims". Who in the muslim world besides the king of Jordan has done that?

Does anyone refuse to admit that the Westboro Baptists are pretending to be Christians?

The double standard is the issue. Are the dems afraid of losing the muslim vote? WTF

bullshit! no one needs to state that at it's base and from it's begging this 1000 years conflict is a war or religious ideologies.
to say different is denial.
btw the Westboro Baptists are from their pov just as Christian as all other Christian sects.
it's no different with the "radical Muslims."

you call the westboro idiots radicals, but you won't call Islamic terrorists radicals----------------that's the liberal hypocrisy.

 

[Redfish]

A lot of people are confusing the refugees that are being sent here with those that are flooding into Europe. Those entering Europe are not being screened before they enter. It is mass migration using whatever means available. It sometimes resembles the exodus of Cubans and Haitians, in that anything that floats is used. The Syrians coming here are mostly from refugee camps, where they have spent the last 2 - 3 years being screened and processed. While it is possible that terrorists are posing as people fleeing the violence, I think it's a lot less likely than the rhetoric from a few organizations and individuals would have you believe. There are much faster and easier ways to enter the United States, to say nothing of radicalizing people already here. The SAFE Act might catch some people IF they were to make it through the process undetected (none have so far), but it really doesn't add that much more scrutiny to the sufficient (to date) measures already in place. It just requires a unanimous approval from the heads of the FBI, DHS, and Director of National Intelligence.

One, our own FBI chief says we cannot properly screen those Syrian refugees.

Two, you are ignoring the fact that terrorists have repeatedly been recruited from among Muslim immigrants/refugees. That's because many average Muslims agree with extremist Muslims on a number of issues, and because quite a few average Muslims sympathize with ISIS and Al Qaeda.

You guys keep dancing around the incontrovertible fact that we know from recent history that the more Muslims a Christian/secular/pro-Western country has, the more likely it is that that country will suffer terrorist attacks. That is just reality. And given that reality, it is only sane and rational, and prudent, to either stop allowing Muslims to enter this country for the foreseeable future or to greatly toughen the screening process and to maintain some kind of surveillance of them for a time after they are allowed to enter.

I don't think that sounds unreasonable at all. I don't know why people are so freaked out about it. Given the circumstances, it is the smart thing to do, IMO.

lets try the M&Ms again. You have a bowl of 500 M&Ms, you know that 10 of them contain poison that will kill you. Would you just grab a handful and eat them?

 

[Redfish]

I keep hearing this birdie whispering in my ear that's saying,''hold your head up high, and don't continue to let the terrorists change you and your Country's values of helping those in need, your freedom, your life as it once was....don't let them scare you, if you do, the terrorists win... by terrorizing you''.

Strong screening is needed, but we should not let the terrorist's terror, make us in to pussies...if we do, then they win....

Do we really want that...???

Pussies? How? Our focus should be on helping those in our own country and making our country a better place. Unless those immigrants have something to offer, there is no logical reason for us to take them in. Being anti-immigration isn't just about fear. It's about realizing that our resources are limited, and we have people here in our own country who need help.

but we don't take in refugees because they are suppose to HELP US, we have always helped refugees since our inception........ to help THEM, to help them escape death, in many cases.

That's not always practical for us to do. Especially nowadays. Back in the old days, we needed people to help build the country, etc. There are a lot of jobless people here, a lot of homeless people people, veterans who are basically ignored, etc. Those are the people we NEED to be concerned with. We need to get our priorities straight. The economy is NOT doing well in spite of what our president and his cabinet members might tell us. That is the reason why at least 35% of the population is currently receiving some form of social service support. There are just not enough jobs (good ones) for everyone. There needs to be a balance between those working and those collecting social services or the whole system will collapse!

I have no problem with congress actually working on and passing immigration reforms that suit the Country for today's honest needs....and there should be no reason for the parties to make this political, it should be worked on together, for the best interest of the Nation.

That's NOT what is happening in this fear mongering frenzy....it is knee jerk political posturing pussy-ism that stands out the most and it's embarrassing.

This isn't about immigration reform, which is what you are concerned with.... not from my view or those viewing us.

EDIT ADDITION
BTW I have no problem with giving extra scrutiny on who we take in as refugees from Syria, and turning those away that don't meet muster, in light of the Paris attacks....and regardless of what the blogs are presumptuously reporting to get everyone in to a frenzy,

it serves no purpose for our gvt to be lackadaisical and foolish in their screenings... or to claim that they are....other than political posturing, imo.

So what fear mongering are you referring to? The things Trump has been saying about registering Muslims? I'm just wondering.

Trump never said that. A reporter said it. The media is lying to you-------------again.

 

[Redfish]

question for the dems and libs:

this has been asked before but in case you missed it.

Lets say that you have a bowl of 500 M&Ms. You know that 10 of them contain poison. How many of you dem/libs would just pick up a handful and eat them?

the false comparisons are flying fast and furious.

That means you would grap a handful. You realize that, right?

false, just observing the phenomena.

the analogy is valid. you idiot libs would die of M&M poisoning----------------or Islamic terrorism-------------------either way you end up dead.

Do you have any working brain cells?

 

[Redfish]

question for the dems and libs:

this has been asked before but in case you missed it.

Lets say that you have a bowl of 500 M&Ms. You know that 10 of them contain poison. How many of you dem/libs would just pick up a handful and eat them?

the false comparisons are flying fast and furious.

That means you would grap a handful. You realize that, right?

false, just observing the phenomena.

the analogy is valid. you idiot libs would die of M&M poisoning----------------or Islamic terrorism-------------------either way you end up dead.

Do you have any working brain cells?

 

[bripat9643]

A lot of people are confusing the refugees that are being sent here with those that are flooding into Europe. Those entering Europe are not being screened before they enter. It is mass migration using whatever means available. It sometimes resembles the exodus of Cubans and Haitians, in that anything that floats is used. The Syrians coming here are mostly from refugee camps, where they have spent the last 2 - 3 years being screened and processed. While it is possible that terrorists are posing as people fleeing the violence, I think it's a lot less likely than the rhetoric from a few organizations and individuals would have you believe. There are much faster and easier ways to enter the United States, to say nothing of radicalizing people already here. The SAFE Act might catch some people IF they were to make it through the process undetected (none have so far), but it really doesn't add that much more scrutiny to the sufficient (to date) measures already in place. It just requires a unanimous approval from the heads of the FBI, DHS, and Director of National Intelligence.

One, our own FBI chief says we cannot properly screen those Syrian refugees.

Two, you are ignoring the fact that terrorists have repeatedly been recruited from among Muslim immigrants/refugees. That's because many average Muslims agree with extremist Muslims on a number of issues, and because quite a few average Muslims sympathize with ISIS and Al Qaeda.

You guys keep dancing around the incontrovertible fact that we know from recent history that the more Muslims a Christian/secular/pro-Western country has, the more likely it is that that country will suffer terrorist attacks. That is just reality. And given that reality, it is only sane and rational, and prudent, to either stop allowing Muslims to enter this country for the foreseeable future or to greatly toughen the screening process and to maintain some kind of surveillance of them for a time after they are allowed to enter.

I don't think that sounds unreasonable at all. I don't know why people are so freaked out about it. Given the circumstances, it is the smart thing to do, IMO.

lets try the M&Ms again. You have a bowl of 500 M&Ms, you know that 10 of them contain poison that will kill you. Would you just grab a handful and eat them?

You don't actually expect them to concede to logic and facts, do you? If their position was logical, they would be calling anyone who opposes them racists and Nazis. They know they are on the wrong side of the argument, but they just don't care because the safety of American isn't their primary concern. Importing new Democrats is their concern.

 

[daws101]

I keep hearing this birdie whispering in my ear that's saying,''hold your head up high, and don't continue to let the terrorists change you and your Country's values of helping those in need, your freedom, your life as it once was....don't let them scare you, if you do, the terrorists win... by terrorizing you''.

Strong screening is needed, but we should not let the terrorist's terror, make us in to pussies...if we do, then they win....

Do we really want that...???

Pussies? How? Our focus should be on helping those in our own country and making our country a better place. Unless those immigrants have something to offer, there is no logical reason for us to take them in. Being anti-immigration isn't just about fear. It's about realizing that our resources are limited, and we have people here in our own country who need help.

but we don't take in refugees because they are suppose to HELP US, we have always helped refugees since our inception to help THEM, to help them escape death, in many cases.

Bullshit. Name any refugees we took in before WW II.

semantics false comparison.
it was immigration and the circumstances of what brought people here was not a consideration.

In other words, we took in no refugees.

You're spewing 100% bullshit. You turds can offer a single argument for your position that doesn't contain at lease one lie.

False !

 

[daws101]

This article was actually written by Zeeshan-ul-Hassan Usmani.This article was actually written by Zeeshan-ul-Hassan Usmani.

Here come the daily headlines of Al-Qa'eda, Taliban, ISIS, and all the lone wolf attackers out there from Pakistan to Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Nigeria, France, Belgium, USA, Canada and list goes on and on.
Projected and orchestrated by media, sometime it seems “terrorism” is the only cause of unnatural death that we face. And lives of millions of travelers suffer due to this inevitable “threat”. There were 2.84 billion commercial air passengers in 2011 alone with only 373 fatalities, so one’s chance of dying in the commercial jet is 1 in 7.6 million.
With the emotion-less and analytical brain that I got, I wanted to put things in perspective. Statistically speaking, here are few odds of dying with the causes:

• Drowning in a Bathtub: 1 in 685,000
• Fatally Slipping during a Shower: 1 in 812,232
• Being Struck by Lightning: 1 in 576,000
• Being Murdered: 1 in 18,000
• Dying from any kind of Injury: 1 in 1,820
• Dying from intentional Self-harm: 1 in 9,380
• Dying from an Assault: 1 in 16,421
• Dying from a Car Accident: 1 in 18,585
• Dying from any kind of Fall: 1 in 20,666
• Dying from Accidental Drowning: 1 in 79,065
• Dying from Exposure to Smoke, Fire, and Flames: 1 in 81,524
• Dying from Forces of Nature (earthquake, heat, cold, lightning, flood): 1 in 225,107
• Dying from Choking on Food: 1 in 370,035
• Dying in a Fireworks Accident: 1 in 1,000,000
• Dying from a Dog Bite: 1 in 700,000
• Dying from Falling off a Ladder: 1 in 2,300,000
• Dying form unintentional Alcohol Poisoning: 1 in 820,217
• Dying from a Heart Disease: 1 in 5
• Dying from a Cancer: 1 in 7
• Dying from a Stroke: 1 in 23
• Dying from Electrocution: 1 in 5,000
• Bee, Snake Venomous Sting: 1 in 100,000
• Scalded by Hot Tap Water: 1 in 5,000,000
• By Falling Coconut: 1 in 250,000,000
• By a Shark Attack: 1 in 300,000,000
• Dying of a Snake Bite: 1 in 3,500,000
• Dying from Food Poisoning: 1 in 3,000,000
• Dying from Accident at Work: 1 in 43,500
• Dying in a Road Accident: 1 in 8,000

And odds of dying in a terrorist attack while on-board is 1 in 25,000,000 (25 million) and the overall average of dying in any kind of terrorist attack worldwide is 1 in 9,300,000 (9.3 million).
So in contrast, you are 14 times more likely to die in your bathtub than in a terrorist attack, 11 times more likely to die by slipping during a shower, 16 times by lightning, 517 times more likely to be murdered (there is on average one murder every 60 seconds worldwide), 991 times by self-injury, 500 times in a car accident (3,000 people die every day in road accidents worldwide), 450 times by falling, 118 times by accidental drowning, 41 times in natural disasters (earthquake, flood etc.), 25 times by choking on food, 13 times by a dog bite, 4 times by falling off a ladder, 1.8 million times by a heart disease, 1860 times by electrocution, 93 times by bee sting, and 3 times more likely to die by a snake bite or food poisoning.
If not convinced, here is another interesting set of statistics:

• Odds of being an astronaut: 1 in 13,200,000
• Odds of winning an Olympic Gold Medal: 1 in 662,000
• Odds of becoming a President: 1 in 10,000,000
• Odds of sighting a UFO today: 1 in 3,000,000
• Odds of dating a Supermodel: 1 in 88,000

So, you have twice the chances of becoming an astronaut then flying in a plane doomed to crash due to a terrorist plot, almost the same chances of becoming a president than dying in a terrorist attack (isn’t it ironic?), three times more likely to sight a UFO today, 14 times more likely to win a gold medal in the Olympics, and 106 times more chances of dating Kim Kardashian.
If you think this “dating” would never come, then stop fearing about terrorism and start enjoying your life.
This article was actually written by Zeeshan ul Hassan Usmani. I've just shared this.


Odds of Dying in a Terrorist Attack

Wow, you think only being 14 times more likely to die in a bathtub, then in terrorist attack is a good stat?

Sounds outrageously high to me.

So, are you more likely to die by a terrorist attack while attending an indoor concert in Paris or......

Dying in a bathtub while attending an indoor concert in Paris?

more hysterical rationalizing

No, comparing apples to apples.

I know that's hard for dingbats to understand

hysteria is why you make that false comparison

No, I showed you the proper use of statistics.

Good god.

You wish.

 

[daws101]

question for the dems and libs:

this has been asked before but in case you missed it.

Lets say that you have a bowl of 500 M&Ms. You know that 10 of them contain poison. How many of you dem/libs would just pick up a handful and eat them?

the false comparisons are flying fast and furious.

That means you would grap a handful. You realize that, right?

false, just observing the phenomena.

the analogy is valid. you idiot libs would die of M&M poisoning----------------or Islamic terrorism-------------------either way you end up dead.

Do you have any working brain cells?

False you might end up dead .
The odds are much higher that you will die in a car accident.
Odd that you chicken shits don't go batshit over that.

 

[Pop23]

Wow, you think only being 14 times more likely to die in a bathtub, then in terrorist attack is a good stat?

Sounds outrageously high to me.

So, are you more likely to die by a terrorist attack while attending an indoor concert in Paris or......

Dying in a bathtub while attending an indoor concert in Paris?

more hysterical rationalizing

No, comparing apples to apples.

I know that's hard for dingbats to understand

hysteria is why you make that false comparison

No, I showed you the proper use of statistics.

Good god.

You wish.

Facts are facts. And those are mine. Delusion is delusion, those belong to the delusioned. That is you.

 

[Pop23]

question for the dems and libs:

this has been asked before but in case you missed it.

Lets say that you have a bowl of 500 M&Ms. You know that 10 of them contain poison. How many of you dem/libs would just pick up a handful and eat them?

the false comparisons are flying fast and furious.

That means you would grap a handful. You realize that, right?

false, just observing the phenomena.

the analogy is valid. you idiot libs would die of M&M poisoning----------------or Islamic terrorism-------------------either way you end up dead.

Do you have any working brain cells?

False you might end up dead .
The odds are much higher that you will die in a car accident.
Odd that you chicken shits don't go batshit over that.

Not in a Paris concert hall.

 

[daws101]

Sadly, even if the USA is hit again and americans are killed, the dem/libs will continue to pretend that radical Islamic terrorism does not exist.

Its a form of insanity that only liberals exhibit. Denial of reality if the reality does not fit their fantasy filled ideology.

Nobody is saying radical terrorists who are Islamic don't exist. We just aren't willing to blame every person who shares that religion. Islam isn't our enemy. Terrorists who use Islam for an excuse for their evil actions are the enemy. All religions have fanatics who use their religion for vile actions.
Should all Christians be blamed for killing abortion doctors? It work the same way.

No one has said that we should declare a religious war on Islam. NO ONE. But when obozo and the hildebeast refuse to use the correct words to describe the enemy, it only makes the enemy stronger.

Your point would be more valid if the "good muslims" would rise up and declare a war on the "bad muslims". Who in the muslim world besides the king of Jordan has done that?

Does anyone refuse to admit that the Westboro Baptists are pretending to be Christians?

The double standard is the issue. Are the dems afraid of losing the muslim vote? WTF

bullshit! no one needs to state that at it's base and from it's begging this 1000 years conflict is a war or religious ideologies.
to say different is denial.
btw the Westboro Baptists are from their pov just as Christian as all other Christian sects.
it's no different with the "radical Muslims."

you call the westboro idiots radicals, but you won't call Islamic terrorists radicals----------------that's the liberal hypocrisy.

really ?who is you?
Why would I need to state the obvious?

 

[daws101]

A lot of people are confusing the refugees that are being sent here with those that are flooding into Europe. Those entering Europe are not being screened before they enter. It is mass migration using whatever means available. It sometimes resembles the exodus of Cubans and Haitians, in that anything that floats is used. The Syrians coming here are mostly from refugee camps, where they have spent the last 2 - 3 years being screened and processed. While it is possible that terrorists are posing as people fleeing the violence, I think it's a lot less likely than the rhetoric from a few organizations and individuals would have you believe. There are much faster and easier ways to enter the United States, to say nothing of radicalizing people already here. The SAFE Act might catch some people IF they were to make it through the process undetected (none have so far), but it really doesn't add that much more scrutiny to the sufficient (to date) measures already in place. It just requires a unanimous approval from the heads of the FBI, DHS, and Director of National Intelligence.

One, our own FBI chief says we cannot properly screen those Syrian refugees.

Two, you are ignoring the fact that terrorists have repeatedly been recruited from among Muslim immigrants/refugees. That's because many average Muslims agree with extremist Muslims on a number of issues, and because quite a few average Muslims sympathize with ISIS and Al Qaeda.

You guys keep dancing around the incontrovertible fact that we know from recent history that the more Muslims a Christian/secular/pro-Western country has, the more likely it is that that country will suffer terrorist attacks. That is just reality. And given that reality, it is only sane and rational, and prudent, to either stop allowing Muslims to enter this country for the foreseeable future or to greatly toughen the screening process and to maintain some kind of surveillance of them for a time after they are allowed to enter.

I don't think that sounds unreasonable at all. I don't know why people are so freaked out about it. Given the circumstances, it is the smart thing to do, IMO.

lets try the M&Ms again. You have a bowl of 500 M&Ms, you know that 10 of them contain poison that will kill you. Would you just grab a handful and eat them?

You don't actually expect them to concede to logic and facts, do you? If their position was logical, they would be calling anyone who opposes them racists and Nazis. They know they are on the wrong side of the argument, but they just don't care because the safety of American isn't their primary concern. Importing new Democrats is their concern.

The safety of America has already been compromised both from the Inside and out you act as if this has never happened before.
Again proving you have no grasp of logic and history.

 

[daws101]

more hysterical rationalizing

No, comparing apples to apples.

I know that's hard for dingbats to understand

hysteria is why you make that false comparison

No, I showed you the proper use of statistics.

Good god.

You wish.

Facts are facts. And those are mine. Delusion is delusion, those belong to the delusioned. That is you.

False you've either intentionally or ignorantly missunderstood the facts and trying to justify your paranoia

 

[daws101]

the false comparisons are flying fast and furious.

That means you would grap a handful. You realize that, right?

false, just observing the phenomena.

the analogy is valid. you idiot libs would die of M&M poisoning----------------or Islamic terrorism-------------------either way you end up dead.

Do you have any working brain cells?

False you might end up dead .
The odds are much higher that you will die in a car accident.
Odd that you chicken shits don't go batshit over that.

Not in a Paris concert hall.

False .
You forget I've made my living working in concert hall, theatres, and outdoor venues.
The odds of people dying in those places and situations from a number of causes is extremely high.

 

[Yarddog]

Sadly, even if the USA is hit again and americans are killed, the dem/libs will continue to pretend that radical Islamic terrorism does not exist.

Its a form of insanity that only liberals exhibit. Denial of reality if the reality does not fit their fantasy filled ideology.

If Americans became vigilant in protecting the country, it would interfere with their control in changing the demographics of the country and they lose control of that discourse they have been controlling for so long.... that contains many things, but at its root has to blame America for everything. Its their Hysterical Fear of this that keeps them from seeing reality

 

[bripat9643]

A lot of people are confusing the refugees that are being sent here with those that are flooding into Europe. Those entering Europe are not being screened before they enter. It is mass migration using whatever means available. It sometimes resembles the exodus of Cubans and Haitians, in that anything that floats is used. The Syrians coming here are mostly from refugee camps, where they have spent the last 2 - 3 years being screened and processed. While it is possible that terrorists are posing as people fleeing the violence, I think it's a lot less likely than the rhetoric from a few organizations and individuals would have you believe. There are much faster and easier ways to enter the United States, to say nothing of radicalizing people already here. The SAFE Act might catch some people IF they were to make it through the process undetected (none have so far), but it really doesn't add that much more scrutiny to the sufficient (to date) measures already in place. It just requires a unanimous approval from the heads of the FBI, DHS, and Director of National Intelligence.

One, our own FBI chief says we cannot properly screen those Syrian refugees.

Two, you are ignoring the fact that terrorists have repeatedly been recruited from among Muslim immigrants/refugees. That's because many average Muslims agree with extremist Muslims on a number of issues, and because quite a few average Muslims sympathize with ISIS and Al Qaeda.

You guys keep dancing around the incontrovertible fact that we know from recent history that the more Muslims a Christian/secular/pro-Western country has, the more likely it is that that country will suffer terrorist attacks. That is just reality. And given that reality, it is only sane and rational, and prudent, to either stop allowing Muslims to enter this country for the foreseeable future or to greatly toughen the screening process and to maintain some kind of surveillance of them for a time after they are allowed to enter.

I don't think that sounds unreasonable at all. I don't know why people are so freaked out about it. Given the circumstances, it is the smart thing to do, IMO.

lets try the M&Ms again. You have a bowl of 500 M&Ms, you know that 10 of them contain poison that will kill you. Would you just grab a handful and eat them?

You don't actually expect them to concede to logic and facts, do you? If their position was logical, they would be calling anyone who opposes them racists and Nazis. They know they are on the wrong side of the argument, but they just don't care because the safety of American isn't their primary concern. Importing new Democrats is their concern.

The safety of America has already been compromised both from the Inside and out you act as if this has never happened before.
Again proving you have no grasp of logic and history.

Dimocraps are the ones who compromise it. Now you want to compromise it again.